best airbox/filter set up?

[SteveMoon]

Here's the set-up on my Alfetta racer. I designed the intake system myself and had a machinist friend of mine make them. He does excellent work (makes all the items for my hobby company: ultra hobby products).

The tubes are 3.5" long, have a 5 degree taper, and the ends are threaded and the nurled cap screws on so a filter, screen, or both can be put in place. I have been very happy with the system. Especially the way it looks and sounds.

I do offer them for sale thru my website at: www.egpworld.com/ultrahobby. Note: I am still trying to get my web guy to correct the spelling; he knows less than nothing about cars.

Thanks, Steve

[joeaustronic]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Azzurri GTV Wow, do you have any more pics?

[mhunger]

Where did you get those horns? they look to be of nice quality!

[Tifosi]

Might not be the source he used, but there's quite a few varities that can be found here if you look through thier spec/size sheets.

[mhunger]

Thanks for the info. Now I have to find a cold air box that costs less than $300!

[RossoGTV4Me]

Reviving a old thread as I am doing some research to make a decision for a racing intake.

"I've found that height above the stacks is pretty important".
This has been mentioned to me before and a experienced racer related that I should use my Shankle sport Carb conversion kit on my exisitng Spica intake(instead of the euro intake manifold) due to the extra inch the plates that fit between the Spica intake and the carburetors. He said that the intake flow benefits and as a result will transalte into more horsepower.
Anyone have experience with this? Any thoughts on using the Shankle conversion vs. euro intake?

I would like to know the diffrences of using the GTA style curvedf trumpets vs. a TWM style intake horns http://www.twminduction.com/AirHorn/...williams_1.jpg

It would seem to me that the trumpets may offer more low end torque and better low end throttle response then the open trumpets, but I am not sure. Would be interesting to see on a dyno as well.

I had plan on using a GTA style box over the curved trumpets.


I look forward to hearing your thoughts?

Quote:

Originally Posted by snj5 Beautiful airboxes and engine bays. Although not on an Alfa, I've found that height above the stacks is pretty important. There's a guy (www.durable1.com) who makes a simialar rounded low profile intake for DCNFs that he could make for Alfas. Here's a comparison between the stock DCNF air horn and the 'short stack'. The difference on the dyno was about 8-9 hp in the top end. This gives a lot more effective room over the inlet for better flow. I've often heard that about .75 inch is needed at a minimum - any one have experience with this? thanks

[Gary Williams]

When I was buying the air horns for the engine shown above, I found the people at TWM to be very helpful. It's worth a call to ask them for their advice.

[RossoGTV4Me]

Thanks Gary,

Appreciate your insight. Do you still have the setup shown above? Are you running a airbox with it? Curious how you like it?

[snj5]

wow - it is amazing to see this thread revived; If not mentioned before I'll add some more experiences.

In filtered applications, air filters of the same size become MORE efficient (less resistant to flow with the same filtration size) as the vacuum signal is more steady, or another way to look at it is summated. In combination with the large effect (I have found) of cooler outside air over ambient under-hood air, it seems that there is more to be gained from ducting the intakes as a group to a large single filter away from the under-hood air.
I am still expeimenting a bit, but also management of air velocity PRIOR to the intake air horn also would seen to play a part. I.e., consideration to the character of the flow path with respect to smoothness, length, bends and progressive cross-sectional area to deliver max air at max speed to the plenum containing the air horn bellmouth. We're not talking but maybe 5 - 10 hp here, but it is 5-10 hp and probably affects engine response (which may feel like more).

While I do not know as much about DCOEs past just the 40s, there is an interesting characteristic to the Weber down draft DCNF series I did not expect --- I do not know if applies to the DCOE: for all DCNFs, the entry bell mouth IS THE SAME; both the 40 and 44 DCNF carb have the same inlet bell bouth and carb body casting. The difference is in butterfly size. Where am I going with this? I believe for our cars normally using 40mm carbs, the length of runner (velocity) becomes more important to maintain low rpm velocity if we go to larger (44 or 45) Webers. To turn it around, while the flow at high rpm will definitely be improved, the loss of streetable low rpm response will be exagerrated in larger carbs with shorter air horns. So if you are planning on going to 44 or 45mm carbs, I would not look as much at a short intake stack (unless a full up racer), but would go for a longer one as shown above (but vented to cool air).

[Gary Williams]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RossoGTV4Me Thanks Gary, Appreciate your insight. Do you still have the setup shown above? Are you running a airbox with it? Curious how you like it?

[italiansedanman]

Okay, I have a very basic question that I think I know the answer to, but I cant find anything via the search function;

Does the later 105 canister air cleaner offer more breathing and filtration than the early 105 cross-over style? Using my massive powers of deduction I cant imagine that the good people at Alfa Romeo made the change for nothing, but given the option - what would I use?

Like many people, I run a very original series 1 1750 GTV and I'm not interested in wringing every last inch of performance out of it, but seeing I have a later canister here I thought I might give it a try. If its worth my while that is...