Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com
 
Gen5DIY
Go Back   Camaro5 Chevy Camaro Forum / Camaro ZL1, SS and V6 Forums - Camaro5.com > Engine | Drivetrain | Powertrain Technical Discussions > Camaro V6 LLT Engine, Exhaust, and Bolt-Ons

Camaro V6 LLT Engine, Exhaust, and Bolt-Ons Bolt-Ons | Intakes | Exhaust

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-17-2009, 02:05 PM   #1
tjd24
Thank you Oshawa/St.Cats!
 
tjd24's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 2LT RS 2G1FC1EV4A9103434
Join Date: May 2009
Location: NW NJ
Posts: 3,445
Vararam Ram Air V

What's everyone's thoughts on the Vararam Ram Air V - see link: http://www.vararam.com/g8.html

They claim +35HP - link gives some spec details & the price is $369 for the G8 GXP version which has an LS3 engine - their sales email response indicated they've used this for their Camaro offerings though not yet posted on their website. They're completing the v6 LLT version now.

I've posted same to the LS3 / L99 Engine and Powertrain Discussions - I'd just make sure Vararam has fully tested the Camaro LS3 / L99 before assuming its "plug & play" on yours. Sales email for questions = sales@vararam.com. Here's a link to a Motor Trend article on the G8 GXP and its verison of the LS3 http://www.motortrend.com/features/a...ook/index.html.

As for the V6 LLT version - I am waiting on specs and install instructions to be sent to me before I order. Also asked questions on how the unit deals with water splashes getting into the intake which is an issue with open filter CAIs. This unit appears to have some protection but asked anyway.

If any member has experiece with Vararam from other models please chime in...
__________________
http://www.hubgarage.com/mygarage/tjd24 http://ny5thgen.com/TJD_RS.htm
#3434 Born 4-15-2009, Delivered 5-22-2009 BBOMG 2/3/4 & booked for #5
tjd24 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2009, 02:51 PM   #2
Xanthos
Almost-Original Postwhore
 
Xanthos's Avatar
 
Drives: Stick
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 12,658
Not sure if the HP claims are correct, but their CFM ratings are certainly not. Mathematically, even if you were ram air pressurizing the air box @ 155 mph, the straight pipe leading from the air box to the throttle body would have to be a huge **5 INCH** diameter in order to flow 1900 CFM. The filter may flow that much, but the intake itself certainly won't. Since that looks to be a 3 inch pipe, we're talking more like 600 CFM max. However, 600 CFM would be more than enough for a 3.6L engine, and the ram air would certainly reduce pumping loses.
- Xanthos
__________________
Xanthos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2009, 03:10 PM   #3
trudawg660

 
Drives: 2006 Dodge Charger / 2SS IOM
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 1,642
i have been looking for a dyno with this but i cant find one to actually prove this, sounds like a lot of hot air at the moment.
trudawg660 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2009, 03:28 PM   #4
Kyle2k
LVL 50 Troll Stomper
 
Kyle2k's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Grand Forks, ND
Posts: 3,249
Quote:
Originally Posted by XanthosV6 View Post
Not sure if the HP claims are correct, but their CFM ratings are certainly not. Mathematically, even if you were ram air pressurizing the air box @ 155 mph, the straight pipe leading from the air box to the throttle body would have to be a huge **5 INCH** diameter in order to flow 1900 CFM. The filter may flow that much, but the intake itself certainly won't. Since that looks to be a 3 inch pipe, we're talking more like 600 CFM max. However, 600 CFM would be more than enough for a 3.6L engine, and the ram air would certainly reduce pumping loses.
- Xanthos
It's not all about diameter though is it? Moreso surface area right?
__________________
Kyle2k is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2009, 03:58 PM   #5
Xanthos
Almost-Original Postwhore
 
Xanthos's Avatar
 
Drives: Stick
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 12,658
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle2k View Post
It's not all about diameter though is it? Moreso surface area right?
After the air flows across the surface area of the filter, it must be recompressed to flow through the pipe and into the throttle body. No matter how much air will flow through the filter/air box, it will ALWAYS be limited by how much air can flow through that pipe.
- Xanthos
__________________
Xanthos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2009, 04:04 PM   #6
Kyle2k
LVL 50 Troll Stomper
 
Kyle2k's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 Camaro
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Grand Forks, ND
Posts: 3,249
Quote:
Originally Posted by XanthosV6 View Post
After the air flows across the surface area of the filter, it must be recompressed to flow through the pipe and into the throttle body. No matter how much air will flow through the filter/air box, it will ALWAYS be limited by how much air can flow through that pipe.
- Xanthos
By that standard the TB is always going to limit you then anyway- so as long as the rest of the intake can flow more- why does it matter?
__________________
Kyle2k is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2009, 04:07 PM   #7
Xanthos
Almost-Original Postwhore
 
Xanthos's Avatar
 
Drives: Stick
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 12,658
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle2k View Post
By that standard the TB is always going to limit you then anyway- so as long as the rest of the intake can flow more- why does it matter?
The point I was trying to make is that if they're fabricating CFM ratings to make their product look better, maybe they're fabricating horsepower ratings as well.

I've always been interested in making a ram-air system. But I think I'll be making/designing my own.
- Xanthos

P.S. - And by that token, you'd have to have a 5 inch (~120 mm) throttle body in order to flow that much air.
__________________
Xanthos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2009, 05:36 PM   #8
patriotpa
Account Suspended
 
Drives: 02 Silverado, 09 Vue, 10 1SS
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Tired of apologizing when we should be kickin' butt!
Posts: 1,967
So if the CAI pipe is > the throttle body it won't make any more power than a tube = throttle body. Correct?
patriotpa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-17-2009, 06:28 PM   #9
The_Blur
Moderator, USN
 
The_Blur's Avatar
 
Drives: 6.2L of AWESOME! 2011 L99 2SS
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: NAS Pensacola
Posts: 14,178
Send a message via AIM to The_Blur
Ram air is not possible on the Camaro without significant modification to the hood and front end. The hood latch is directly between the faux air inlet on the SS and the intake. Moving this would require the installation of hood pins and the removal of a large amount of body work.

I also doubt the accuracy of the numbers.
The_Blur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2009, 10:22 AM   #10
MontyCarlo

 
MontyCarlo's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 2LT/RS auto IBM
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 1,259
Quote:
Originally Posted by patriotpa View Post
So if the CAI pipe is > the throttle body it won't make any more power than a tube = throttle body. Correct?
No. Everything along the air's path costs you some power. It's not just the most restrictive point that counts. You lose some in the filter no matter what, some in the pipe no matter what, some in the throttle body no matter what... it's just that if there's one part that causes a much bigger loss than the others, then improving the good parts won't benefit you much anymore.
__________________
FAQs:
1. No, I do not have any strong opinions about the Monte Carlo.
2. Yes, I know what my name looks like.
3. Yes, but the medication helps immensely.

2LT/RS IBM/gray #21,895 ordered April 21st, delivered July 3rd
MontyCarlo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2009, 02:07 PM   #11
Xanthos
Almost-Original Postwhore
 
Xanthos's Avatar
 
Drives: Stick
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 12,658
Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyCarlo View Post
No. Everything along the air's path costs you some power. It's not just the most restrictive point that counts. You lose some in the filter no matter what, some in the pipe no matter what, some in the throttle body no matter what... it's just that if there's one part that causes a much bigger loss than the others, then improving the good parts won't benefit you much anymore.
While this is somewhat true, its mostly true due to the pressure drop (a less restrictive filter will get you closer to the ideal 1 ATM of pressure) not due to maximum flow - your intake will never be able to flow more CFM than the most restrictive point.

Period.

End of story.

That said, filters, intake length, etc all factor into the final pressure drop of the system - i.e. they slow down the incoming air, reducing the net CFM. Improving the total flow at the filter will improve the overall efficiency (i.e. reduce pumping loss) of the system. So having a good intake is still worth it, but you'll never fit more than ~525 CFM through a 60mm throttle body, for example.
- Xanthos

P.S. - This is another major reason that I prefer short ram intakes to longer cold air intakes. Less pumping loss = crisper throttle response and better top end power. Your low-mid range power is affected more by exhaust/tuning anyway.
__________________
Xanthos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2009, 02:47 PM   #12
MontyCarlo

 
MontyCarlo's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 2LT/RS auto IBM
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 1,259
Perhaps Bernoulli's Principle is failing me, but there should be no such thing as "maximum flow" for any given point. Apply a bigger pressure differential across something, and there will always be more flow through it, with the flow rate varying with the square root of the pressure and air density differentials.

...unless by "maximum flow" you mean "the flow that would result if every single psi of the pressure differential between the intake point and the engine's minimum operating pressure were expended shoving air through this one restrictive feature," which now that I think about it would be a pretty useful number to have and would be a more practical use of the term "maximum flow" than what I was talking about.

In that case, it would be "you'll never fit more than ~525 CFM through a 60mm throttle body with natural aspiration" or "...with a boost of xx psi or less."

Sorry if that was pointless, but I'm a mechanical engineer who analyzes fluid flow & thermodynamics, I'm kind of bored, and you got picky.
__________________
FAQs:
1. No, I do not have any strong opinions about the Monte Carlo.
2. Yes, I know what my name looks like.
3. Yes, but the medication helps immensely.

2LT/RS IBM/gray #21,895 ordered April 21st, delivered July 3rd
MontyCarlo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2009, 02:56 PM   #13
Xanthos
Almost-Original Postwhore
 
Xanthos's Avatar
 
Drives: Stick
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 12,658
Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyCarlo View Post
Perhaps Bernoulli's Principle is failing me, but there should be no such thing as "maximum flow" for any given point. Apply a bigger pressure differential across something, and there will always be more flow through it, with the flow rate varying with the square root of the pressure and air density differentials.

...unless by "maximum flow" you mean "the flow that would result if every single psi of the pressure differential between the intake point and the engine's minimum operating pressure were expended shoving air through this one restrictive feature," which now that I think about it would be a pretty useful number to have and would be a more practical use of the term "maximum flow" than what I was talking about.

In that case, it would be "you'll never fit more than ~525 CFM through a 60mm throttle body with natural aspiration" or "...with a boost of xx psi or less."

Sorry if that was pointless, but I'm a mechanical engineer who analyzes fluid flow & thermodynamics, I'm kind of bored, and you got picky.
Yes. I was discussing intake only, and so everything was using N/A theory. In a N/A situation, your maximum pressure (and thus maximum air velocity) will be 14.7 PSI. In a boosted situation, it would be 14.7 PSI + boost pressure, which would increase CFM accordingly. Either way, your intake will always be limited by that one point (which, more times than not, will be the throttle body).
- Xanthos

P.S. - On a related note, I studied engineering physics for 2.5 years before I decided recently to change my major.
__________________
Xanthos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2009, 03:18 PM   #14
Hemlawk
AwesomeBillDawesonville
 
Hemlawk's Avatar
 
Drives: CGM 2SS/RS =)
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Jersey Shore
Posts: 2,073
Xanthos, you let that little kid in your sig drive your Camaro?



__________________

Order placed on 1/13/11 - Purchased 2/22/11 2SS/RS CGM
Hemlawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2009, 03:29 PM   #15
Xanthos
Almost-Original Postwhore
 
Xanthos's Avatar
 
Drives: Stick
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 12,658
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hemlawk View Post
Xanthos, you let that little kid in your sig drive your Camaro?



Um... well, first off, thats me - second off, thats not my camaro (as if I would order red!) - third off, I unfortunately never got to drive it.

I'm waiting till 2011 to order.
- Xanthos
__________________
Xanthos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2009, 03:35 PM   #16
MontyCarlo

 
MontyCarlo's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 2LT/RS auto IBM
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 1,259
What did you switch your major to? You're not in a BA field now are you?!?
__________________
FAQs:
1. No, I do not have any strong opinions about the Monte Carlo.
2. Yes, I know what my name looks like.
3. Yes, but the medication helps immensely.

2LT/RS IBM/gray #21,895 ordered April 21st, delivered July 3rd
MontyCarlo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2009, 03:41 PM   #17
Xanthos
Almost-Original Postwhore
 
Xanthos's Avatar
 
Drives: Stick
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 12,658
Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyCarlo View Post
What did you switch your major to? You're not in a BA field now are you?!?
Heh - Nursing.
- Xanthos
__________________
Xanthos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2009, 03:47 PM   #18
MontyCarlo

 
MontyCarlo's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 2LT/RS auto IBM
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 1,259
That's quite a change. Medical stuff's cool, and I minored in biomedical engineering, but personally I couldn't handle a field where the problems you need to solve as uncertain as they are in actual medical care. Give me cold aluminum any day.
__________________
FAQs:
1. No, I do not have any strong opinions about the Monte Carlo.
2. Yes, I know what my name looks like.
3. Yes, but the medication helps immensely.

2LT/RS IBM/gray #21,895 ordered April 21st, delivered July 3rd
MontyCarlo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2009, 03:50 PM   #19
Hemlawk
AwesomeBillDawesonville
 
Hemlawk's Avatar
 
Drives: CGM 2SS/RS =)
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Jersey Shore
Posts: 2,073
Nurses make a good living. But I couldn't deal with that sh!t. Btw Xanthos, I was just bustin your chops.
__________________

Order placed on 1/13/11 - Purchased 2/22/11 2SS/RS CGM
Hemlawk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2009, 03:52 PM   #20
Xanthos
Almost-Original Postwhore
 
Xanthos's Avatar
 
Drives: Stick
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 12,658
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hemlawk View Post
Nurses make a good living. But I couldn't deal with that sh!t. Btw Xanthos, I was just bustin your chops.
I know.

Nursing is just a precurser to what I want to do - I'd like the be a paramedic, but the positions are very competitive here. So, I'll get my RN and my EMT certs, and work as a nurse till I can get a paramedic position.

I enjoyed the engineering thing, but I want to feel like I'm helping people (in a more tangible way) and medical stuff has always come easily to me.
- Xanthos
__________________
Xanthos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2009, 04:09 PM   #21
patriotpa
Account Suspended
 
Drives: 02 Silverado, 09 Vue, 10 1SS
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Tired of apologizing when we should be kickin' butt!
Posts: 1,967
So if I understand this correctly, the best of all NA options using the stock MAF would be to shove the shortest, widest funnel possible on the front of the MAF. The problem is making this thing not look like shit.
patriotpa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2009, 04:26 PM   #22
Xanthos
Almost-Original Postwhore
 
Xanthos's Avatar
 
Drives: Stick
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 12,658
Quote:
Originally Posted by patriotpa View Post
So if I understand this correctly, the best of all NA options using the stock MAF would be to shove the shortest, widest funnel possible on the front of the MAF. The problem is making this thing not look like shit.
Heh! Well, there are other ways to do it, but thats what I find works best.

I'll be making an intake that has a single 3 inch y-pipe coming off the throttle body, splitting into two three inch pipes. Those pipes will travel sideways along the radiator, and have a cone filter on each end.

The MAF sensor will be mounted in that single pipe, right in front of the throttle body. I'm going to try and position the cone filters a little higher than the throttle body, to get a bit of gravitation potential.

Basically, I'm going to try to minimize resistance to flow, and yet still have the filters close enough to the throttle body to have a quick throttle response. I'm shooting for getting the filters no more than 10-12 inches on either side of the throttle body.

I'll be using Spectre's modular intake pieces. The 3 inch chromed plastic ones, painted with a semi-gloss black ceramic brake caliper paint.

I may or may not also make some heat shields to go over half the cone filter and block them from drawing air directly off the radiator. Being as close to the radiator as they will be, I don't want them sucking in that ultra hot air.
- Xanthos
__________________
Xanthos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2009, 04:27 PM   #23
MontyCarlo

 
MontyCarlo's Avatar
 
Drives: 2010 2LT/RS auto IBM
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 1,259
Quote:
Originally Posted by patriotpa View Post
So if I understand this correctly, the best of all NA options using the stock MAF would be to shove the shortest, widest funnel possible on the front of the MAF. The problem is making this thing not look like shit.
Hm, I think there would be such a thing as "too short," where your funnel is no longer sloped enough to really be a funnel. But short is generally good, wide is generally good, and matching the funnel's edges up with the edges of the car's openings so air can't slip around the outside of the funnel easily would also be good. Oh, and avoid corners & bends in the tube as much as possible.
__________________
FAQs:
1. No, I do not have any strong opinions about the Monte Carlo.
2. Yes, I know what my name looks like.
3. Yes, but the medication helps immensely.

2LT/RS IBM/gray #21,895 ordered April 21st, delivered July 3rd
MontyCarlo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2009, 04:30 PM   #24
Xanthos
Almost-Original Postwhore
 
Xanthos's Avatar
 
Drives: Stick
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 12,658
Quote:
Originally Posted by MontyCarlo View Post
Hm, I think there would be such a thing as "too short," where your funnel is no longer sloped enough to really be a funnel. But short is generally good, wide is generally good, and matching the funnel's edges up with the edges of the car's openings so air can't slip around the outside of the funnel easily would also be good. Oh, and avoid corners & bends in the tube as much as possible.
Generally good advice!

However, bends will pretty much be a necessity with this cars engine compartment layout - I've had my hands in it and there's really no way to mount a cone filter (maybe if you made a custom box for a flat filter though) directly in front of the throttle body. ESPECIALLY not if you want to have the MAF sensor in there still - heh! You'll have to put it off to the side somewhere.
- Xanthos
__________________
Xanthos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-18-2009, 04:34 PM   #25
JSOC_MQ1
 
Drives: 2010 IBM 2SS
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Missouri
Posts: 116
So ... are you (XanthosV6) saying that potentially this Vararam (fake) Ram Air could produce as much HP as say the LMR, Fastlane, or other CAI's?

Sorry, I just looking for clarification on this subject.

P.S. According to Vararam
"(The V-8 system) We are completing the final tweaks on the final pre production unit , wile our testers continue to run up test miles with the prototype development systems we provided them.

We are checking for vehicle variation now between the V-8 cars."
JSOC_MQ1 is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Vararam Ram Air V tjd24 Camaro V8 LS3 / L99 Engine, Exhaust, and Bolt-Ons 58 08-22-2009 05:55 PM
RAM AIR TRANS AM FOR SALE. KITT3K Autos For Sale / Wanted 9 05-28-2009 10:39 AM
Ram air kits ? danraz98 Camaro V8 LS3 / L99 Engine, Exhaust, and Bolt-Ons 8 05-24-2009 01:10 PM
A FAKE SCOOP??!! ARE YOU KIDDING ME??!! MotorCityAgent 5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions 222 03-01-2009 07:17 AM
ram air style hood? tsg1391 Cosmetics and Lighting Modification Discussions 1 10-23-2008 04:43 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.