SGT Daddy Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 Again, as in the other thread, I'll ask, what is your definition of "proven"? Just saying that it's proven, doesn't mean anything. Some actual numbers would mean something. If anything, there is more scientific evidence that shows you probably made your car slower if anything, not faster. The very fact that you think the car "pulls harder THAN (not then) before" makes me think it's all in your head. Your louvers don't make your car pull any harder, or look any harder for that matter . 1) the numbers are temp related drop and nothing more. 2) You are probably right with this(pulling) as for looking "harder" that was not part of the thinking behind this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SGT Daddy Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 This was all fun and games when you were REDUCING the efficiency of your TMIC but now that you are acting like a douchebag by making COMPLETELY BASELESS and FALSE claims we are going to have to smack you down for real. It was already apparent that you not only did not read the article, if you did, you certainly did not understand it. AT ALL. Preventing the correct air pressures so that you are no longer drawing the same amount of air though your TMIC than you were before? Guess what, we dont need to drive your car OR test it to tell that is the case. WE READ THE ARTICLE. 1) They are designed to lower the under-hood temp and nothing more. the information on this was posted on the other thread. linking to the companies home page. You are right. They do what they are supposed to which is exactly contradictory to what the factory engineers did. Well done on being right. DGAF. I dont like how they WORK. If they would have made us faster it would have done it long before you. 2) If the factory engineers were that all knowing there would not be an aftermarket making cars better for decades. Lets see the logs and dynos from YOUR LGT. No? Didn't think so. What we pointed out is that you ruined the functionality of your TMIC. 3) Never had the car on a dyno. For ruining the functionality that is debatable. You are the fool making false performance gain claims. 4) False performance claims. I only said they were used to reduce under hood temp. They are not designed to add HP/TQ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SGT Daddy Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 http://www.hoodlouvers.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mega Users LieutenantDan Posted June 22, 2012 Mega Users Share Posted June 22, 2012 We get it already! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOneDoubleN Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 1) the numbers are temp related drop and nothing more. How thick is your skull? The 10 degree (or whatever you claimed in your other thread) drop in ambient temp under the hood is NEGATED by the loss of the pressure gradient you caused over the TMIC, which is now running much, MUCH hotter now that no air is being DRAWN OVER IT, and therefore your intake charge is hotter, reducing oxygen density, reducing the amount of fuel you can burn, REDUCING POWER. If the numbers are "temp related drop and nothing more", then you truly have no numbers which SCIENTIFICALLY SUPPORT YOUR CLAIMS. As LA LGT said, you obviously either didn't read the article, or failed to understand it. Baseless fact claiming is not appreciated on these forums if you haven't been able to grasp that yet.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOneDoubleN Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 4) False performance claims. I only said they were used to reduce under hood temp. They are not designed to add HP/TQ. Then I guess your car doesn't "pull harder" after all. If they aren't designed to add HP/TQ, what is the PERFORMANCE BENEFIT? Reducing temperatures does improve power, if you're reducing them correctly. If you're raising your intake charge 20 degrees to lower your under hood temp 10 degrees, you're losing performance, aren't you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SGT Daddy Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 How thick is your skull? The 10 degree (or whatever you claimed in your other thread) drop in ambient temp under the hood is NEGATED by the loss of the pressure gradient you caused over the TMIC, which is now running much, MUCH hotter now that no air is being DRAWN OVER IT, and therefore your intake charge is hotter, reducing oxygen density, reducing the amount of fuel you can burn, REDUCING POWER. If the numbers are "temp related drop and nothing more", then you truly have no numbers which SCIENTIFICALLY SUPPORT YOUR CLAIMS. As LA LGT said, you obviously either didn't read the article, or failed to understand it. Baseless fact claiming is not appreciated on these forums if you haven't been able to grasp that yet.... Pretty thick... So if I increased the temp of the inlet charge do to reducing the effectiveness of my TMIC buy putting louvers on then following this it would also reduce fuel efficiency as well since the engine is no longer working the way it should. This is a questions Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOneDoubleN Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 Pretty thick... So if I increased the temp of the inlet charge do to reducing the effectiveness of my TMIC buy putting louvers on then following this it would also reduce fuel efficiency as well since the engine is no longer working the way it should. This is a questions YES! Finally, you said something that is factually correct! Naow yu juhst ned tu werk on yur spehleng Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SGT Daddy Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 YES! Finally, you said something that is factually correct! Naow yu juhst ned tu werk on yur spehleng That too. Look two in a row. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOneDoubleN Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 There just may be hope for you yet Too much eye rolling is giving me a headache, along with this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SGT Daddy Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 There just may be hope for you yet Too much eye rolling is giving me a headache, along with this thread. http://www.magnatuning.ro/en/product/433/Subaru-Impreza-98-00-J-Style-Small-Hood-Vents http://www.rs25.com/forums/f145/t149005-turbocharged-money-pit.html Don't worry take two of these with a large glass of water and call me in the morning. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheOneDoubleN Posted June 22, 2012 Share Posted June 22, 2012 http://www.magnatuning.ro/en/product/433/Subaru-Impreza-98-00-J-Style-Small-Hood-Vents http://www.rs25.com/forums/f145/t149005-turbocharged-money-pit.html Don't worry take two of these with a large glass of water and call me in the morning. I retract my previous statement, apparently you're hopeless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SGT Daddy Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 Only to some Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MooKz Posted June 23, 2012 Share Posted June 23, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I Donated Too laff79 Posted June 23, 2012 I Donated Too Share Posted June 23, 2012 this thread and the louver thread should be merged for stupidity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lgt07 Posted September 16, 2012 Share Posted September 16, 2012 That STi scoop actually looks pretty mean. As far as the whole scoop and vent issue is concerned, you're all wrong, remove the hood completely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDon427 Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 What hood is that in the first post? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G3nX09 Posted September 17, 2012 Author Share Posted September 17, 2012 It a Hood scoop added to the stock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDon427 Posted September 17, 2012 Share Posted September 17, 2012 Ok, then which hood scoop is that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lgt07 Posted September 18, 2012 Share Posted September 18, 2012 Lol, as the thread states, it's a modified STi scoop and judging by the angle I would guess an 02-05. http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r18/SlammedSti/05sti2.jpg http://legacygt.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=118582&d=1337566356 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDon427 Posted September 18, 2012 Share Posted September 18, 2012 Thank you, sir. Much appreciated. Any more angles of that car? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Haight 05LGT Posted September 18, 2012 Share Posted September 18, 2012 Is that a Nissan GT-R that I see? Forget the scoop! Look! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDon427 Posted September 18, 2012 Share Posted September 18, 2012 Lol, as the thread states, it's a modified STi scoop and judging by the angle I would guess an 02-05. http://i140.photobucket.com/albums/r18/SlammedSti/05sti2.jpg http://legacygt.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=118582&d=1337566356 From what I recall, the '04-'05 STi had the humongous scoop and I think the WRX had a smaller scoop. In '06-'07 the STi and WRX had the same scoop and wasn't as obnoxious as prior year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ir2005 Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 From what I recall, the '04-'05 STi had the humongous scoop and I think the WRX had a smaller scoop. In '06-'07 the STi and WRX had the same scoop and wasn't as obnoxious as prior year. isnt that hood scoop an overlay? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDon427 Posted September 25, 2012 Share Posted September 25, 2012 I'm asking as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.