Varioram. Is it a true performance enhancer or not ??? Be the judge
#16
Instructor
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah, VarioRam all the way!
With the airbox cover drilled and hogged out, I live for the "howl" at ~5200
RPM!
Now if only my magnesium intake had "varioram" cast-in like in "face-ache"s avitar, that would complete the whole experience.
With the airbox cover drilled and hogged out, I live for the "howl" at ~5200
RPM!
Now if only my magnesium intake had "varioram" cast-in like in "face-ache"s avitar, that would complete the whole experience.
#17
I'm with Chris and Steve re: racing applications. There is little or no advantage simply because at large throttle openings and higher rpms (where racers spend most of their time) the vram replicates the intake path of the plastic manifold.
Having said all this, I'm certainly glad I dumb-lucked my way into a 95 car back in 98. No infuriating OBD-II. And adding VRAM is certainly doable and it's easy enough to delete the basket handle
#18
Nordschleife Master
for my daily street/hwy driving, the Vram represented better driveability for my purposes. I don't track my car. Everyone has different needs, for my needs, the Vram was the better choice.
#19
Rennlist Member
Whatever the product, color, technology, or option it appears that if you got it it's great, and if you don't got it, it obviously sucks.
Dismissing the importance of torque below 4000 rpm makes absolutely no sense to me. I live for torque and will take it however I can get it. I won't even get into the "mine is better" discussion. I'm sure the avg joe would happily take either VR or nonVR.
However, last time I checked, acceleration was a function of weight and torque and the flat torque curve starts below 4000 rpm. I try to keep an open mind, but for the life of me I can't see why more torque won't lead to faster acceleration assuming weight is the same.
Dismissing the importance of torque below 4000 rpm makes absolutely no sense to me. I live for torque and will take it however I can get it. I won't even get into the "mine is better" discussion. I'm sure the avg joe would happily take either VR or nonVR.
However, last time I checked, acceleration was a function of weight and torque and the flat torque curve starts below 4000 rpm. I try to keep an open mind, but for the life of me I can't see why more torque won't lead to faster acceleration assuming weight is the same.