12-02-2015, 07:02 PM | #1 |
Drives: '01 Camaro SS 'Vert; '02 Camaro RS Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: IL
Posts: 363
|
Why did GM Bend the Air Intake Path?
I would really love to hear from GM's engineers, why they did not replicate the straight in air path from the 4th Gen Camaro in the 6th Gen and instead bend the airway? Seems like a bad choice. It's the first thing I think of when I see the 6th Gen's engine bay...
__________________
|
12-02-2015, 07:12 PM | #2 |
Drives: 2017 SS 1LE, 2017 Volt, 2013 Pilot Join Date: May 2014
Location: Colorado
Posts: 4,274
|
Not concerned.
__________________
2017 SS 1LE | HBM | Vortech V3-Si supercharger (620RWHP and 575ft lbs) | PDR | Black Bowties | Illuminated Front Black Bowtie | Illuminated Door Sills | Smoked Tails | vented seats mod
|
12-02-2015, 07:22 PM | #3 |
Drives: 2015 SS 1LE Red Hot, 1970 Chevelle Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Chino, CA
Posts: 6,989
|
The 4th generation pulled air over the radiator to its air box. I'm sure this set up offers cooler air to the engine.
__________________
|
12-02-2015, 07:30 PM | #4 |
Drives: 2013 Camaro convertible 2SS/RS Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Southern NH
Posts: 1,077
|
Cooler air = more power. You will get to much hot air coming straight on from radiator, especially when running hard.
|
12-02-2015, 07:32 PM | #5 |
Romans10:9-13
Drives: /\yes, this is me/\ Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Vermilion, Ohio
Posts: 4,435
|
The 5th gen was the same way.
Vararam used to make an aftermarket intake like this called a "ram air" intake.
__________________
|
12-02-2015, 07:42 PM | #6 |
Drives: 2016 1SS Yellow Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: CA
Posts: 629
|
A straighter route would have reduced the path and helped get the air inside faster, however it would have been hotter. A slightly larger path helps in cooling the air before it reaches the intake manifold... So I think its a trade off... am i right ?
|
12-02-2015, 08:39 PM | #7 | |
Drives: 2017 Camaro 1SS M6 Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Indy
Posts: 2,460
|
Quote:
1. To maximize heat exchanger effectiveness up front - putting an airbox up front would mean they may need to compromise on the cooling package. 2. The area they put it allows for a large air filter / airbox (with presumably low dP vs. flow) I suspect the flow vs. dP curve for the 6th gen setup looks more favorable than the 4th gen camaro setup, where all air comes through a relatively small slit under the lid. I have no data to back up this statement though! |
|
12-02-2015, 10:41 PM | #8 |
GM repeat offender...
Drives: 16 2SS Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Grandview, Texas
Posts: 1,474
|
The 4th Gen was a "bottom feeder". It got most of its air from UNDER the car. I dont really see that mode of induction feasible in this new setup; however, I am with you in that seeing an indirect, side-mount intake system like this just feels somehow "wrong" to me. Lol. Old habits, I guess.
__________________
'16 2SS, Summit White. A8. MRC. NPP.
Ordered:09/03/15. Received 12/22/15 INCOMING: ‘22 ZL1, Satin Steel. A10. PDR. Ordered: 03/02/22. |
12-03-2015, 07:56 AM | #9 | |
In The Circle
Drives: 2010 Camaro 2SSRS IOM M6 Join Date: May 2009
Location: Abbotsford BC Canada
Posts: 11,292
|
Quote:
__________________
|
|
12-03-2015, 08:15 AM | #10 |
Banned
Drives: 2017 Camaro 2SS 6MT Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Posts: 4,372
|
Starting with the TPI 305 and 350 engines in the mid 1980s, GM used a straight air intake tube because, frankly, there was enough room under the hood on the 3rd and 4th gen F-body platform to do so. If you look at the 5th and 6th gens, there is no way you can run a straight tube.
If you recall, the engine sat way back in that chassis. The back of the engine was under the dashboard: |
12-03-2015, 08:22 AM | #11 |
Drives: 1981 silver corvette,Hyper Blue 2SS Join Date: May 2015
Location: Ohio
Posts: 625
|
engines are just fancy air pumps. doesn't matter where the air comes from, the only loss in power would be if the tube feeding the engine flexed/collapsed (restricting air flow) turbulent vs smooth air doesn't make a whole lot of difference, it all becomes turbulent once it hits the filter; and "ram-air" doesn't actually compress the air at all
|
12-03-2015, 09:00 AM | #12 | |
マスタング = 遅い
Drives: 2017 Chevrolet Camaro SS 1LE Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Florida
Posts: 7,061
|
Quote:
|
|
12-03-2015, 10:07 AM | #13 |
Planning stages...
Drives: 1995 Z28,2014 Ford Focus ST Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 160
|
LT1 4th gens had a long curved path from the airbox. It was horribly compromised, though, unlike the 6th gen car. The coolest place to pull air from is probably the fender or underneath which is why OEMs like to do this. That air doesn't care whether it has to make a sub 90* corner to go through the throttle body. I bet you could pull more than 600hp through that intake before it became a restriction.
EDIT: Should have said two sub 90* corners. |
12-03-2015, 11:42 AM | #14 |
Drives: 2011 Silver Ice 1SS Camaro Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Shelby Twp, MI
Posts: 85
|
I believe European pedestrian regulations come into play as well. Bringing the air intake over the tie bar/front end module would not leave enough crush space under the hood to absorb the energy from the pedestrian test.
|
|
|
Post Reply
|
|
|