Paul - great photo. Seems like it would not be that hard to fabricate. Okay folks, here's a cheap concept photochop of how I would weld a mirror image snorkel onto the stock box, if I can find an inexpensive used stock snout. As before, Mondials have oil cooler fans already so flow 'steal' is less of a concern coming off of the same already huge side scoop. Any ideas or comments? I think it just might work. thanks rt Image Unavailable, Please Login
Russ, I think ya got a winner there. If done right, and a fresh coat or "Wrinkle" on it, it would damn near look stock. While you are at it, maybe spray a bit of silver or some reflective color o the underside, just past the rounded edge to perhaps cut heat soak. Could be onto another HP or Two! Shame they come out at angles (the Snouts) as it would be easier to simply section a pair in the middle. Ya lucked out on the oil cooler fan. Kermit Usual sales disclaimer, Yada Yada, no relationship in any way or form. No renumeration etc. I JUST POST TO HELP!
The double snorkel idea is kind of neat. I love the way it looks. I'm kind of wondering if it is really necessary though. I don't know if our little 3 liters really need that much volume. My gut feeling is that it sure can't hurt, but won't give the results like cleaning out the air box (I'm still a little unsure of the short stacks). I have contacted Pierce Manifolds and they did say that the space above the stacks should be a minimum of 1 to 1.5 inches. I think I measured mine and came out to about 32mm (1-1/4"). Unfortunately, any type of "ram air effect" would not be seen on a dyno. Also, from what I understand, there is more to ram air than to provide a scoop for incoming air. I've heard that the induction/engine needs to be designed for this. If someone does the dual intake, couldn't part of the intake on the drivers side be diverted to the oil cooler? This would be like the pass side with the small hose that blows on the catalytic converters. Henry
Pierce does make "short" stacks for Weber side draft carburetors (45 DCOE) so they are indeed used on other applications. Short stacks are not "voo doo" engineering. They have a set for the Weber carbs on my 240Z that are less than an 3/4" tall. Stack length affects the tune. The longer the stack the more bottom end. -No hard core scientific numbers to back this up, just the experience of thousands of race engine builders over the last 90 years-
That's right Hank, all these discussions/debates over the amount of HP gain by the short stacks fail to consider that in a dyno environment the car is stationery and the only "air" driven into the scoop is from, maybe a fan. I bet when the car is going at speed, which in real world condition, it is, there should be even MORE air driven into the motor and hence, perhaps more HP gain?? I don't know, I do not consider myself an expert when it comes to this stuff. When I need technical info, I just ask Handa or Spasso BTW, is Paul Sloan bashing MY car in his posts not having a consistent baseline? Or the motor being ruined by Kermit? MY car? the yellow car?? (sorry I am lazy - this thread is long and I tend to just skip over all of Paul's posts, yeah yeah yeah it is all Kermit's fault..... I guess I have to say that the car has been running quite well since Kermit worked out all the initial bugs after the rebuilt (btw, it was KERMIT, not Nick who worked out the bugs, Nick was just the Accounts Receivable department . To be honest, the rebuild has been done over 2 years and I don't think I did as much as changed a spark plug on it (all the NW people can attest to that). As far as the HP not to expectation, well, Nick and Kermit were overly optimistic (but it was Nick who did all the bragging to sell me the HP), but I am happy with the performance given that it is STILL a ****box 308. As to Paul's "threat" in posting old emails of mine, they were written at a time when Nick and Kermit were fighting and I was trying to get my car back (and done). But since, Kermit has kept up his end and addressed all the problems I had so thank him for that. I am not going to talk about Paul's head and what happened. I don't know and I am sorry that he is not happy. I can only state my experience with Kermit, which has been positive. He is definitely not a "crook" like Paul paints him to be. So there
Where the heck have you been Stew? Hibernation for the winter? Glad to have you back. I still love your GTO front end. Henry
I have asked permission (FC admin) to respond to Mr. Chungs rather amusing post and the permission was granted. I had dropped the subject but I find the cheerleading by Mr. Chong to be a little disgusting. 2 years ago I worked diligently with Nick and Kermit to get them to put their issues aside and get Mr.Chongs car completed. If fact I received the following e-mail from Mr. Chong thanking me for my help in getting his car done. -----Original Message----- From: Stewart Chung [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, March 28, 2003 1:47 PM To: Paul Sloan Subject: Kermit and Nick "Thanks for doing this Paul. And yes, I will refrain from any email unless it is absolutely necessary. And keep me in the loop with emails. Unfortunately I am on active duty (I am in the US Navy) so I have emails but no cell phone access." As for OLD E-Mails from Stewart: Mr. Chungs most recent e-mail to me was on March 6th 2005 (9 days ago) in response to a question of whether he was OK after I heard his car ended up in a ditch off the freeway where he stated and I quote: "Paul - Did I get short-changed by Kermit and Nick? Probably. Does it bother me? Not really. Should it bother me? Maybe..." (Mr. Chong e-mail to Sloan 3-06-05) Yet now only a few days later he comes to his buddy (who probably shortchanged him) defense and states something quite different. (See todays FC post) Then Mr. Chong adds in his post about Nick selling him high expectations for HP " As far as the HP not to expectation, well, Nick and Kermit were overly optimistic (but it was Nick who did all the bragging to sell me the HP), " Mr. Chong FC post today But yet in another e-mail (below) to me a few days ago Mr. Chong states that he had no expectations about additional HP. "So the money spent was not so much to gain more HP but just to have an engine that runs. So my expectation was different than most of you guys who want more HP out of Kermit and Nick's work." (Mr. Chong e-mail to Sloan 3-06-05) I also today received PM from Spasso (excerpt below): "A little advice. Maybe Kermit actually ruined your heads but shouldn't you be going after the person you wrote the checks too? __________________ Spasso "It often takes more courage to change one's opinion than to stick to it."-(Lichtenburg)" So there is no misunderstanding Spasso; ALL CHECKS ($4,916.00) WERE MADE PAYABLE TO DURABLE 1 OR MATT MORGAN. 2 of 6 checks ARE ATTACHED the rest are available if you want more factual evidence. So thank you I will happily take your advice and go after the person I wrote the checks too! Isn't that interesting the guy who did the damage and got the checks is the same. (Don't you just hate FACTS?) If no one has noticed there is a group of Seattle area Ferrari owners (Spasso, Handa and now Chong) who have gone to extreme's to attack me and defend their buddy. The post my Mr. Chong is such a blatant yet embarrassing attempt to discredit my claims and actions and yet it has backfired. Could you imagine these guys on the stand in court? I would win on just there statements alone. I have decided to wait till Tim the stick (FC user who volunteered to check whether the damage done is excusable) inspects the heads before I post more about this. I do expect to the Seattle boys muster some great defenses then (The heads have already been inspected by Extreme Cylinder Heads on the east coast of FL). Wouldn't it be nice if Ferrari owners stuck together when they get screwed. Now let the attacks begin! Paul Image Unavailable, Please Login
I understand and support people's efforts to clear their names. I am sorry this thread is going to be screwed again. When F List became less relevant, I left. I hope the same doesn't happen here. I hope Rob takes this piece and reallocates it to the short stack mess in the general section. Philip
Stewart- I guess you didn't know what you were thinking, but now you've been corrected. All's OK now I'm not positive, but I think Stewart knows best what happened to Stewart. Philip- I know how you feel. I left Ferrarilist for the same reasons (I wonder if it is me?) Why do people have to be labeled "cheerleaders" or "unscientific"? I was actually accused of being a penny short for my 2 cents (opinion). Paul- Please in the future address everyone correctly: It is Dave Handa not Hana It is Stewart Chung not Chong My nickname is Hanknum not Hankum. Rob- Please help.
Back to our topic The 3 liter LeMans car even with 2 valves had a two inlet airbox and an out put around 300 hp. Perhaps as our engines approach 300 hp through modification, we should look at getting more air to the 'plenum'. On it's best day, the stock 308 engine was a 250 hp motor (maybe, but in reality closer to 230) so the airbox was not as much an issue. For some great no-kiddin' dyno of various stock and modified 308 engines, go to the dyno section at www.carobu.com Wish I could find a photo of the velocity stacks used on the 308 LeMans engine. Attached is a photo of a competition airbox. Note the large airbox on the racing V-6 that Paul posted giving a lot of room around the trumpets. In any event, a dual inlet would open up more cool air at the filter element. best rt Image Unavailable, Please Login
Hey Sloan: You just don't get it do you?? All your months of bashing Kermit and instigating bad feelings about him, the ONLY, I repeat, ONLY person who has come forward regarding a negative issue with Kermit is YOU. I do, however, see various people posting here who had good experience with Kermit and his products (and seem to be scratching their heads wondering what the hell YOUR problem is...) I know you are pissed and you vowed to put him out of business, it is NOT working pal. Grow up and move on. Life is short. "Chong"
off topic stuff aside, i applaud you guys for the thoughts and efforts. BUT........ in all the work i did on pontiacs with thier quote " RAM AIR" heads, cold air induction at the base of the windshields ( ie the shaker /snorkle) i really dont think our little engines will gain THAT much to make it worth all the time and effort to put in a ram air / cold air induction. i mean between traffic and 45 mph speed limits, where are you going to use this in daily street driving?? track use is different, but few of us track our cars exclusively. the occasional blast does happen, but is it worth all this work for a sub 250hp 20 + year old car? i say just drive them and enjoy them, or be like ATLANTAMAN and mod the whole car to the nth degree!! ill stand back and watch .
Being a hotrodder I think you can answer your own question of "why". Because the design is flawed. It sucks horse power and these cars need all they can get. These cars already have cold air induction so it's not a radical departure from stock, at least mine isn't. At low speeds the engine may not benefit from "ram air" but will still benefit from cooler air drawn from outside the engine bay, denser charge etc................................ It's a cheap modification for extra (unscientifically supported) horse power. An extra 10 HP is big deal on an anemic 308 as you well know.
OK, is the flame part of this over? Paul not happy with Kermit. Nick not happy with Kermit. Appears to be some substance behind that. Several users happy with Kermit. Appears to be some substance behind that. Kermit can't make commercial posts, but Kermit can still participate as a user. Each and every user can make their own judgments based on the above information. Anything else or any continuation of the flame war needs to go offline!
Only slightly off topic - When i was golfing a bit, (badly but fun), i recal hearing an old pro's response to coming up on slower players. Upon meeting, he said, "Gentlemen, could we endeavor to pick up the pace of play?" To badly paraphrase him, Gentlemenc could we endeavour to pick up the Ferrari spirit a bit? VIVA ENZO
So, have we run out of steam on this thread? Anymore info to share? This was one of the best (I think) in a while despite the "tangents". Thanks to all who shared their technical info.
I am rejetting to 135 mains and changing the air correction jets from 200's to 190's. I am waiting for the A/C's to arrive in the mail. I called the dyno place and they want 145.00 to rerun my car. Nearly double what it cost last time. I don't want to run on another dyno either.
As a fellow 308 owner, I have followed this thread long enough without opening my big mouth and adding my .02 worth. Would someone just do a truly scientific dyno comparison on these various modifications so the opinions can go away and we can deal with fact? I'm talking about equal temperatures, equal atmospheric pressures, equal everything and altering just one item at a time. Start with a totally stock 308 with baselined stock numbers; the timing set to factory spec's, etc. All this seat-of-the-pants stuff is totally subjective, and while it makes interesting bar-room banter, it doesn't tell me anything about meaningful modifications to an otherwise well-engineered factory Ferrari, done by presumably professional motoristi(?) for a particular market and specific emission requirements. Oh, and please no more snivelling! Thank you!
Dana, You might try checking with Alex at Carb Conn (or check their website) to see when the next car club dyno event is and contact the person who is charge of the event. Maybe they would let you run your car at the end of the day, just like I let the Viper guy run his car at the end of our event. Gary
SURE Cameron, whatever you say ( ) You wanna PAY for all the dyno time, parts and equipment needed for such an exhaustive examination? The reality is that we must sometimes compromise on this, as time and costs must come into play. So, yes, conjecture and opinion must be considered...to each their own on said opinions. If you want that, do it and please report back...otherwise, I would suggest you take your own advice....
Well said Dave. Yes, dyno time takes $ and is hell on the tires. I used to work for Dinan (BMW tuner) and had access to the dyno (bolted directly to the hub, wheels removed) and never used it. What the hell was I thinking Dyno runs can vary from day to day as well as from run to run. I have not rejetted anything, but am now considering going with 135 mains. The airbox is still stock but will be either "cleaned up" or going to individual filters. I do still have my cats on but am running straight through from there with the exception of Ansa tip resonators (no muffler). I also have an Electromotive ignition. I'm still not completely sold on the short stacks. What do you guys think about the 135's? Should I consider any other changes? Thanks Henry
And I thought this thread was done. $145 is ridiculous. In Virginia it's $50-$75 for 3 pulls. OBTW - 190's are on the way! Tomorrow will be putting on the LM-1 A/F meter and looking for effects, and finally ATTACKING my low end mixture. Will try to compare long and short stacks, paper vs K&N filter elements. Free Fun Fact: According to Carobu Engineering, 34mm venturis are good up to 320 hp+ on their dynos. For sale: 8 RARE 308 GT/4 LM spec 36mm venturis for Weber 40 DCNFs. Found another picture of a racing 308 airbox, this one from 08020, the 308GT/4 LM car. best to all rt Image Unavailable, Please Login
I spoke with Alex just the other day and that is the price he quoted. He said I would get more runs for that amount and I said doubted I would need that many. He didn't sound very willing to let me confirm this last adjustment for less than 145.00. Alex is booked for the next three weeks with various clubs coming in. Did we let the Viper run on our discount?
