Jump to content

Vara-Ram Velocity Stack


Recommended Posts

Well..First and foremost....... You WILL NOT gain ANY HP with a ported TB........... Unless your cfm from the TB is the bottle neck in your set-up... In otherwords... if your engine only can consume 800 cfm a WOT having 1000 cfm available makes no difference. Imagine this... You have a glass ...the glass can only hold a maximum of 12 oz of water.....What happens when you try and pour 14 oz water.. it overflows and thus you wasted you water..Same concept. So... Yes in theory ..more fuel more air more power..but When you can't feed it anymore there will be no gains. I believe the Stack will only gain tq until a certain point(from the velocity) once thats done you will not have the volume a high RPM to make the same HP...... Think this.......... You have a single plane intake on a standard chevy that is 10" hight(think like super victor, or holley dominator) these are good for about 7000-8000 RPM.... take the same set-up shorten the runners..(ie... performer or torquer intake) now you have created a bottle neck.. you will gain TQ from the added velocity... but the intake will not have the high rpm nuts the engine needs to make the same hp and more TQ.

 

Hope this clears things up for you guys!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That graph is screwed up. The red graph begins at about 3900 rpm while the blue graph begins at 3500 rpm. Both color graphs begin with a spike which could be indicative of a shift point. It looks to me that the parts were tested under very differing conditions, even different gear. I'd be ashamed to release such a flawed graph.

 

post-11148-1178237067_thumb.jpg

this might not be a credible dyno sheet, but its what they use for their advertisement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
Well..First and foremost....... You WILL NOT gain ANY HP with a ported TB........... Unless your cfm from the TB is the bottle neck in your set-up... In otherwords... if your engine only can consume 800 cfm a WOT having 1000 cfm available makes no difference. Imagine this... You have a glass ...the glass can only hold a maximum of 12 oz of water.....What happens when you try and pour 14 oz water.. it overflows and thus you wasted you water..Same concept. So... Yes in theory ..more fuel more air more power..but When you can't feed it anymore there will be no gains. I believe the Stack will only gain tq until a certain point(from the velocity) once thats done you will not have the volume a high RPM to make the same HP...... Think this.......... You have a single plane intake on a standard chevy that is 10" hight(think like super victor, or holley dominator) these are good for about 7000-8000 RPM.... take the same set-up shorten the runners..(ie... performer or torquer intake) now you have created a bottle neck.. you will gain TQ from the added velocity... but the intake will not have the high rpm nuts the engine needs to make the same hp and more TQ.

 

Hope this clears things up for you guys!

 

:wtf: Ehhhhh, no, it's not the same concept at all, that's not how it works. Ported throttle bodies improve flow by removing casting restrictions that A: Improve low RPM cylinder filling and B: Increase the overall CFM at WOT.

 

To improve both high RPM flow and low/mid RPM flow, you have to increase the volumetric efficiency of the TB port. You do this by removing sharp edges, creating gradual transitions, thus reducing turbulence. In some areas of the induction system, turbulence can be helpfull, like in tumble port heads to help with fuel mixture and to eliminate blow-through to the exhaust port, but in a throttle body, turbulence needed is very minimal at this point.

Ported TB gains have been between 7-10 through the entire RPM band on LS1 applications.

 

You are also wrong about runner length changes and why they move the power band, but that's another discussion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well..First and foremost....... You WILL NOT gain ANY HP with a ported TB........... Unless your cfm from the TB is the bottle neck in your set-up... In otherwords... if your engine only can consume 800 cfm a WOT having 1000 cfm available makes no difference. Imagine this... You have a glass ...the glass can only hold a maximum of 12 oz of water.....What happens when you try and pour 14 oz water.. it overflows and thus you wasted you water..Same concept. So... Yes in theory ..more fuel more air more power..but When you can't feed it anymore there will be no gains. I believe the Stack will only gain tq until a certain point(from the velocity) once thats done you will not have the volume a high RPM to make the same HP...... Think this.......... You have a single plane intake on a standard chevy that is 10" hight(think like super victor, or holley dominator) these are good for about 7000-8000 RPM.... take the same set-up shorten the runners..(ie... performer or torquer intake) now you have created a bottle neck.. you will gain TQ from the added velocity... but the intake will not have the high rpm nuts the engine needs to make the same hp and more TQ.

 

Hope this clears things up for you guys!

i been around ls1,ls2 and ls1gto for years and you my friend get teh retard award for this week.

 

as far as the graph posted here the a/f tells the story not a stack

 

 

ss_bnoon is on the right track, you dont need to change the size of the opening to improve CFM rating just teh design or in this case casting flash

Link to comment
Share on other sites

well if you really think about it does exactly what it says it does-"velocity stacks", by reducing the diameter of the throttle body it increase the air speed(velocity) there for filling your cyclinders with air much faster.

 

 

I don't think that that can work. What you're thinking of is Bernoulli's princiapl which says that as the speed of a moving fluid (also true of air) increases, the pressure within the fluid decreases.

 

So yes it is going faster, but I don't think it is going any more efficiantly because the presure drops. Kind of like a low-flow shower head, yeah its hitting you with more froce, but less water.

 

When it all comes down to it, it's still a smaller diameter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah lol its was only like 30 something dollars and if it worked i would feel awesome. but i dunno if any body already had one i figured i get the scoop on it

 

Yeah they are not worth the time or money its supose to create a better air to gas mix .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think that that can work. What you're thinking of is Bernoulli's princiapl which says that as the speed of a moving fluid (also true of air) increases, the pressure within the fluid decreases.

 

So yes it is going faster, but I don't think it is going any more efficiantly because the presure drops. Kind of like a low-flow shower head, yeah its hitting you with more froce, but less water.

 

When it all comes down to it, it's still a smaller diameter.

..................im going to let you figure this out on your own :yellow_loser:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...