What are the best intake systems?

And none of those links apply to the setup your running in your mazda3 =/. So even if ram air was possible at highway speeds (which even your links point out you have be going pretty darn fast before the benefits occur (over 100mph+ generally). They also require some sort of direct air inlet.

You don't have that. Your airfilter is isolated from exterior air sources. At most its getting air deflection, which means the velocity has already been heavily effected before it even reaches the filter...additionally you've got two air sources conflicting with one other, basically canceling each other out.

I don't disagree that your short ram isn't giving you power, I disagree with the marketing claims that you will see any benefit (other then lower IAT temps) at any speed the mazda3 is capable of.

Two of your links are marketing devices (selling a product)....the scientific explanation is for speeds beyond the 3 is capable of, and the other examples are due to lower ambient air temps, not a ram air effect.

Remember 10F lower temp air = 1% less hp.

The mustang guy's link as disproven in one of the links I gave you.
 
Last edited:
Fair enough, I can accept that the headlight obstructs a vast majority of any gains a ramming effect would have (at least when not using the Auto-EXE front bumper, which has inlet ducts coinciding with the intake system). Would it then be fair to say that removing the driver's side headlight (for track use only of course) would remedy the interference? And please keep in mind that although this car is a daily driver, the real gains I'm looking for are in conjunction with road racing, so power gains at high speed are one of my primary goals. And as for the secondary inlet cancelling out the primary, the internal design of the air box routes that second inlet's air in a circular motion around the inside edge of the box, creating a spiraling effect; this swirling of air is ideal for mixing of air and fuel and this application can be seen in some of the throttle body spacers available (they have internally machined grooves to accomplish this); this is only a claim made by Auto-EXE, but I don't see why they would go to the trouble of adding such an awkward extension to the airbox without a sound principle behind it.

Don't get me wrong, I've read all the arguments against Ram-air and they raise some valid objections, but I"ve found just as many for it's use as well. This means a test is in order, my father just bought himself a 3s 5-door and I'm going to get him the Injen CAI for X-mas, but before I do, I'm going to dyno my car 1st with the stock intake, then with the Injen unit and finally with the Auto-EXE setup; once standstill numbers are recieved, I'll use a G-Tech meter (sorry, can't afford a wind tunnel :) ) and run the same tests on our local drag strip. When finished, I'll scan in the data from the dyno testing, the official timeslips from the track, and the G-tech data and post it in a new thread. I'm going out on a limb, since I already bought the Auto-EXE unit, and I'll be a little more than upset if it doesn't measure up, but I'll accept the numbers, whatever they may reveal. Plus I think there are alot of drivers out there who would be interested to see the results.
 
NIM said:
Fair enough, I can accept that the headlight obstructs a vast majority of any gains a ramming effect would have (at least when not using the Auto-EXE front bumper, which has inlet ducts coinciding with the intake system). Would it then be fair to say that removing the driver's side headlight (for track use only of course) would remedy the interference? And please keep in mind that although this car is a daily driver, the real gains I'm looking for are in conjunction with road racing, so power gains at high speed are one of my primary goals. And as for the secondary inlet cancelling out the primary, the internal design of the air box routes that second inlet's air in a circular motion around the inside edge of the box, creating a spiraling effect; this swirling of air is ideal for mixing of air and fuel and this application can be seen in some of the throttle body spacers available (they have internally machined grooves to accomplish this); this is only a claim made by Auto-EXE, but I don't see why they would go to the trouble of adding such an awkward extension to the airbox without a sound principle behind it.

Don't get me wrong, I've read all the arguments against Ram-air and they raise some valid objections, but I"ve found just as many for it's use as well. This means a test is in order, my father just bought himself a 3s 5-door and I'm going to get him the Injen CAI for X-mas, but before I do, I'm going to dyno my car 1st with the stock intake, then with the Injen unit and finally with the Auto-EXE setup; once standstill numbers are recieved, I'll use a G-Tech meter (sorry, can't afford a wind tunnel :) ) and run the same tests on our local drag strip. When finished, I'll scan in the data from the dyno testing, the official timeslips from the track, and the G-tech data and post it in a new thread. I'm going out on a limb, since I already bought the Auto-EXE unit, and I'll be a little more than upset if it doesn't measure up, but I'll accept the numbers, whatever they may reveal. Plus I think there are alot of drivers out there who would be interested to see the results.
I am VERY interested in the results..
Seeing is beleiving!
 
wait now do i want aem or injen. i found an AEM for 230 form eautoworks.com but i also saw an injen, which gives the best performance and sound?
 
was it do to the ram air, or the generall cooling effect the wind tunnel would have on the engin in general. not disputing his claim, just seems hard to account for unless you were testing with heat sensors in place in various places of the engine as well as measuring the airflow thru the raim air hood itself. i know cumming engine has a dyno with wind tunnel, buddy of mine works there but would be highly doubtful that i could get my hands on it, plus will proalby be to big since its geared more towards rigs.
 
Back