I've seen the Banks, and I like it ok, (that, and the intercooler are the only things I would ever consider putting on my trucks from banks...), and I see the one in the DTR store, which style is better? Any other suggestions would be appreciated.


TIA...


mad

http://store.dieseltruckresource.com/poinma0doram.html

http://store.bankspower.com/Categori...9-82712d1c3c80

 

It's not really a big improvement for the money. All you get out of it is better driveability and that is about it unless you are making major horsies. Save your money and buy something else. Just my .02 which ain't worth much.

 

I installed the GDP Intake Horn, the DTR Store sells it. I was looking for better air flow over the stock air horn which I hoped would be accomplished by this product. I can tell you that It is a very nice, functional, good-looking product. It is powdercoated inside and outside, the workmanship is meticulous, lots of ports for add-ons, it came with new gaskets, excellent instructions. I am very satisfied with it. While Richard did not dyno his product, similar products have been dyno'd and have shown gains. From the drivers seat it has provided more drivability, I noticed better throttle response, my EGT's were lowered significantly both empty and towing.

CD

 

I like the Glacier Diesel Power part. Clean, relatively inexpensive, and has plenty of ports.

 

the glacier diesel horn is good, I like the CFM+ horn as well.

http://www.cfmplus.com/index.html

 

[QUOTE=DevilzTower;1828270]the glacier diesel horn is good, I like the CFM+ horn as well.

x2 on the cfm+!!!!!

 

Anyone have the Hellman one?? If so how did it fit and look?? From his site they look good, nice and simple, but I have'nt seen one in person.

 

I have the CFM+. It did lower EGT's, especially when I was towing my Jeep.
Can't say if it helps MPG, it hasn't hurt it though.

 

On a naturally aspirated engine you want to increase the "flow" because the air is being drawn into the engine. This improves the performance. On a turbocharged engine there is static pressure between the intake and the turbocharger. We are pushing air into the engine rather than it being drawn in. The intakes don't flow any better. What you are looking for is to increase the plenum area or storage capacity between the turbo and the engine. The more cooler air we can push in the better they run. If you have them flow better you can actually create backpressure by putting more air in than the engine can use. This can back up the whole system. An intake plenum shouldn't increase the flow, it should increase the storage of available air to be pushed in. That is what we have done with our intake. We have black or polished available. They are also on special this month.

http://www.bd-power.com/enewsletter/xflow/X-Flow.html

 

I also have the cfm+. Dropped egts 50-150* and looks good with the afe intake and all the black abs plastic. Lightweight and doesen't have the mounting bolts going through the airstream. I like the gdp one and the hellmann one too.

 

Hey, Pat, what kinda deal? PM me, please... Black one for an 04.5...

 

I'm not sure I'm understanding this...could you perhaps explain better?

What I understand you to be saying here, is that more holding volume is more beneficial rather than free-er flowing components...such that the more volume of air that an intake could hold, the better it would perform? Taking this thought even farther, would it be beneficial to plump in a 5 gallon air tank between the intercooler and the engine's intake?

Thanks, Eric

 

X2!!

 

I'm having a hard time following this explanation as well. I believe I follow the intent of the explanation, Kantdrive wants to minimize the backpressure from the intake side of the engine to reduce the drive pressure on the exhaust side, but I can't see this pressure being anything of signficance. Espicially considering how small an increase in total volume that cant be made on the intake side of the engine with the intake horn. I could understand if we were talking about an intercooler upgrade, but not the horn.

I would believe getting as much air into the engine with the lowest air pressure and highest flow rates to decrease backpressure would be paramount. If building up backpressure is a concern since the air can't be used, just remap the fuel and injection events and you can use all the air you can stuff into the engine and let her rip.

If we were to have a large capacity of air after the turbo but before the intake manifold, such as a large plenum, the only possible change I could see that making would be to increase turbo lag, not sure of any real benefit there. It may decrease the intake's charge temp. but dumping it into a large plenum and then trying to extract underpressure would just create turbulent flow.

Granted the BD horn is a significant upgrade over the stock horn, no argument there, just looking for clarification from your side.

Just my .02, Thanks for listening.

 

The idea is increasing the available volume over the flow. Basically by changing the storage capacity you are allowing the turbo to work hard and cut down on the back pressure being created. It doesn't eliminate it, but allows for a larger volume of air to be available without increasing the backpressure. If you made an intake that just flowed better without increasing the storage area then you are going to create more backpressure. You can also create too large of a storage area which would result in tremendous turbo lag. Ideally you would want the turbo and fueling matched perfectly, but that doesn't happen. This creates a cushion to maximize the efficiency of what is there.