Notices
928 Forum 1978-1995
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by: 928 Specialists

85-86 intake runner tubes

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 03-10-2012, 11:32 PM
  #46  
mark kibort
Rennlist Member
 
mark kibort's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: saratoga, ca
Posts: 29,952
Received 165 Likes on 64 Posts
Default

look! Im talking about challenging claims of "feel" of idle speed changing, smoother idle, and less throttle pressure at given normal road speeds. Put it this way, if you get a higher idle speed with the rings, then if i put some large obstruction in the tubes, i should be able to get a lower idle speed, right. if i had an S3 intake, i would take something that could semi , very partially, block the runners and show that it would have no effec on idle speed. Ken has some great stuff. this "invention" will help at WOT, but how much is left to be determined.
Dont get upset with me for challenging something that has still not been given logical reasons for doing what it is claimed to do.
Old 03-10-2012, 11:49 PM
  #47  
mark kibort
Rennlist Member
 
mark kibort's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: saratoga, ca
Posts: 29,952
Received 165 Likes on 64 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Mike Frye
Interesting. I wonder how that would look on an ad for something you're selling?

And yet you call Ken a 'snake oil salesman'. You're a complicated guy Mark. But I'm afraid you've lost all the credibility you once had with me.

And for the record, Ken didn't say the rings added any HP. He even said they didn't affect the top of the arc at all. What is claimed (and noticed by those of us using them) is that driveability is improved. The idle is smoother and therefore can be lowered. The low end grunt is more noticeable. There is a very noticeable pull that used to happen higher in the RPM range that is lowered with the use of the torque rings.
.
Look, as i said, i LOVE Ken's stuff. this however, is so uncharacteristic. its so hard to test and the claims are a little outragous. as i said, dont bag on me for challenging the claims as precieved as they can get. IF i was to test them, i would rig up ways to show that at cruise , the gas pedal was in a lower position but having more power, becuase it was holding the same MPH, (claim 1). more low end grunt? also would show up on the dyno, but part throttle , almost impossible to feel or repeat (claim 2) lower idle becuase it is smoother? I think he said the idle went up, with the rings. (also hard to proove) (claim 3). I dont buy any of it. again, the flow theory would dictate that at idle, with all the air that idles the car coming through a pin hole . A PIN HOLE! and then split among 8 1.6" diameter passages. This very small amount of air, the air required to power a 5hp lawnmower, is going to be effected by the rings covering a little dip in the intake tract, is a HUGE stretch for flow theory and pefromance enhancement.

Now, i suggested a little test on a stock intake. since the idle goes up with the rings, it seems logical that the idle should go down if you create even more "flow issues" at that junction point. stuff a corner of rag in there, and see if idle drops. it wont . why , because at idle the air molecules are very very few. remember we are operating at a pretty large vacumm at idle.

yes, i challenge things that dont make a lot of sence. even our government backs a theory that clean air fliters give you better gas mileage. couldnt be further from the truth. the arguments are the same i see here. but very few really understand how engines and air flow work!

sorry, ive lost your confidence. Again, separate how much we like Ken and all his great iventions, and look at this one at face value. all im asking for is some proof here and we have seen none. forget about the chips, which im sure do their job and are fantastic. Im only talking about the rings here.



Quick Reply: 85-86 intake runner tubes



All times are GMT -3. The time now is 02:59 PM.