| Author |
Message |
    
Blake
| | Posted on Sunday, February 02, 2003 - 12:07 am: | 
|
Still waiting...  |
Rick_A
| | Posted on Sunday, February 02, 2003 - 11:57 am: |
|
All I see is a lot of weight, strain on the charging system, and a big waste of money for a negligible increase in performance. It can be used effectively for a whole matter of seconds...how frikkin' useless. Looks to me like a whole lot of useless ballast on a bike.
I've also heard and can accept that the RWHP gains provided by the ram air intakes on UJM crotchrockets at 160 mph are around 10%
You heard wrong. From what I've read about Honda and Kawasaki ram air intakes in magazine articles explaining the systems it's more like 2-3% at top speed. 15% power gain from ram-air...yeah right!
Aftermarket ram-air boxes, ducting, and filters can net much bigger gains...but closer to 10%...and that's mostly due to less restriction...not the ram air effect itself.
Look it up.
Blake, I never thought you'd be backing this kind snake oil product.
Look at it in terms of practicality and it's a piece of trash. |
Blake
| | Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 02:09 am: |
|
Rick,
I don't much like the product myself and am not "backing it." But the concept and the advertised performance enhancement is 100% valid. That's all the discussion was about, whether or not the concept and product could produce the advertised performance gains, meager as they are.
As far as the benefits of RAM intakes, you may be correct. The 10% at 160 mph could have been bad information.
Let's check...
The stagnation pressure (Q) at atmospheric standard temperature and pressure can be found from the following relation...
Q=V^2/391
with V being the speed in mph and Q being the stagnation pressure in psf.
So, at STP and 160 mph Q=160^2/391=65.5psfa=0.455psia, so dividing that by atmospheric pressure (14.7 psia) will tell us the optimum ram air power increase... 0.455/14.7=0.031 or 3.1%.
It appears that your information was correct.  Where did you find it? |
Rick_A
| | Posted on Monday, February 03, 2003 - 03:04 pm: |
|
Hell, I got that info out of old Cycle World articles...the magazines themselves are probably long gone but I remember the figures. |
Blake
| | Posted on Tuesday, February 04, 2003 - 04:09 pm: |
|
It certainly checks out. Thanks for sharing. |
Rick_A
| | Posted on Wednesday, February 05, 2003 - 12:00 am: |
|
I remember the pretty pictures, too  |
|
