1995 vs. 1996+ 355 engine bay

I like the -95 better too, looks more natural and clean. I know eric355 on this forum made an attempt to convert the single MAF system to a dual MAF by combining the signals, not sure if succeed though...
There is a thread about it somewhere.

 

The 1995 does produce 5 more horsepower than later models because of the intake/airbox design. Because of emissions laws changing in 1996, it had to be redesigned. If reducing temperature is you main concern, I recommend adding a challenge grill and removing your catalytic converters. Hyperlows or straight pipes are the way to go.

 

Its clean, simple, and fully functional.

 

The intake system on the 1995 is clearly more functional and better performing. Apparently Ferrari had issues with OBDII compliance running dual "everything" on the Motronic sensors and ECU's.

My question, is why would you think the 1995 has superior heat management than the later cars? What differs in that regard?

 

Look, the heat differential between the OBDI and OBDII 355 cars cannot in any way be measured; it can be observed in purely subjective terms.

The 355 engine/engine compartment run pretty toasty. Plain and simple. The best way to deal with the 355's heat is to add heat shielding to protect vital components: protect the alternator, the axle boots, perhaps the tail lights, etc., etc.

Advocating for a Challenge Grille or for different catalytic converters is sort of sidestepping the issue and adding conjecture. People love to talk about how great the Challenge Grille is in providing for additional heat release. If it does anything at all, it's negligible. And sure, we don't like the stock catalytic converters, but they aren't the things that pose the main heat issue. The exhaust manifolds are the primary culprit: they not only have to be well heat shielded; the vital components susceptible to the heat need to have heat protection additional to the heat protection that came on the car from the factory.

 

The heat on both cars is absolutely the same.I have tested both cars many many times!
The Airboxes are in the same Position as the engine,exhaust and other things.
The only very good differense on the 2,7 is that every bank works for itself compare the 5,2 how shares the Air,petrol,electrik.

 

If you want the 5.2 engine bay to look better, add what may be the best looking carbon airbox made
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

I agree the 1995 intake looks a lot better than later 355s ............

Excessive heat could be something different ..... I would make sure the injectors are atomising properly. If they are not, the injectors could be sending dropplets into the combustion chamber that are not capable of getting fully oxidised. These hydrocarbons will go and burn in the exhaust, raising exhaust temps more than they should be. I am a big proponent if clean balanced injectors, as that will 'prevent' a host of ill running issues.

 

Hey Johan, are you doubting I will ... ???
I am very slow on this one but it will come very soon ...

 

Hi eric: no doubts, just wanted to see if I could lure you out to reveal anything new ;-) Really looking forward to see the result...

 

J your nuts. And everything on your car makes me jealous.

 

I kind of like the look of the 5.2 intake system better. It looks more interesting to me. And some nice curves to compliment the curves of the car.

Having said that, I'd be more than thrilled to have the OBD1 system instead of the OBD II

 

hehe... it has ended up with a few extras. Keeps me from thinking about selling it, so it's probably saved me money in the long run.

 

+1.

Those of us with the 5.2 cars would greatly benefit esthetically by the use of the famous Gothspeed "block-off" plug which allows the removal of the unsightly resonator box (near the MAF sensor) which serves NO purpose. In addition, to better looks, you get improved intake sound and slightly better cooling (as the area is less blocked).

I have one and I love it.

It is available through Ricambi.

 

I have a 5.2 and I don't feel I "greatly benefit esthetically" from the block-off plug. It's matter of opinion-nothing more, nothing less. I'm still kind of undecided.

Saying the resonator box "serves NO purpose" and then saying removing and installing the plug improves the intake sound does not make sense. IF the box served no purpose (does nothing), then by definition, the intake sound cannot improve, get worse or change in any way. You certainly could be of the opinion it sounds better removed (I was not able to tell a difference) but then you can't say it serves no purpose (it would seem the purpose is to reduce intake sound/noise and based on what you wrote, it works-for better or for worse).

 

Ah, 1995 and the pleasures of Motronic 2.7... Bellisimo!

 

The little box dampens noise for the bureaucrats .......... the Resonator Delete Cap however .... gives ones 5.2 355 'super powers' far beyond those of unequipped such examples ........ ................

 

My 95
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login
Image Unavailable, Please Login

 

First, can't you realize when someone is being a little "tongue-in-cheek"?

As Oz stated, the ONLY purpose the resonator box serves to to decrease intake noise. Moreover, while I have no quantitative data, I would guess that it actually is problematic, in that it: (i) slows the velocity of the intake air charge by allowing a portion to be vented off to the resonator box, rather than a "straight shot" through the intake plumbing (hence the decrease in intake noise) and (ii) serves to increase the temperature of the intake air charge by providing an additional surface to absorb heat from the exhaust system which is then transferred to the intake air charge.

Thus, to put it simply, it's just a big, ugly, useless plastic box. If you would like to leave yours' in place, then be my guest. As for me, I am glad to be rid of it.

 

No, can't always realize when someone is being "tongue-in-cheek." Especially through "electronic" communications with someone I don't know. I thought most people are aware, these days, that emails, text messages, forum posts can lead to misinterpretation. Perhaps not.

As I stated earlier I could not tell a difference in sound with the box in place or a Goth plug. I also said that I did not do a quick back-to-back sound test either which would be more useful.

Your theories are not bad and may be accurate although I don't know how much the box could slow air velocity. Once it's full of air it can't vent-off anymore air. But... I'm not an expert at fluid dynamics (if that's even the correct terminology).

Thanks for permission to leave the big, ugly box on if I want (that's sarcasm ;-)

 

Actually I strongly believe that the Resonator delete has absolut no effect on the Engine.
Its only esthaetic matter. the Sound its changing not even a bit,I have tried it a lot of times during the developing of my Air intake System.
With one Sport Exhaust the noise is so loud that nobody can understand anything of air resonance, the Engine takes always the air that he needs(or trying),if less or more air he will show it at once.
And if with resonator delete the engine performs better then why NOBODY has deleted the resonators in an 2,7M engine??? maybe because he can not see them so he doesnt bother at all for more performance!