I have seen them. Parts America has them in stock for about $45, seems a little
high.
I don't see where there would be a problem with it being to flimsy, it seems very
strong.
Colin
rking@jjsnack.com wrote:
> To add even more interest ..How about the new K&N Extream Air Lid for
> the FIPK system? It's supposed to really up the CFM of the Regular
> FIPK setup. Airflow directly through the top of the FIPK unit. I
> called Summit who had it listed in their catalog and they said the
> sale of the Extream Air Lid has been suspended due to technical
> problems with it. I guessed what that problem might be and the sales
> guy said I nailed it. The structure of the filter lid is currently a
> little too weak and in some cases can collapse under WOT type
> conditions. It should be a relatively simple task to redesign to add
> some stonger suspension system (perhaps some heavy wire
> reinforcement). Has't anyone else heard of this K&N gadget?
>
> Rob
>
> ______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
> Subject: DML: Breathing easier (was Air Inlet)
> Author: <dakota-truck@buffnet.net > at Internet-Link
> Date: 10/30/98 8:44 AM
>
> An opinion...
> I feel this is true with non-smooth bore tube systems. The turbulence
> created by the tube itself becomes the air's own worst enemy (reciprocating
> pressure waves look real neat under particle scopes and are hell on airflow).
> The best possible tube solution would be a hard, large diameter, smooth walled
> (polished) tube with gentle bends and a "honeycomb" laminar flow enducer at
> the entrance to the bore ( This could even be made into an air filter) and a
> reduction/compression venturi right before the TB. The idea is that Laminar
> Flow air moves smoothly around obstacles and such because it is all moving the
> same direction. It would move right around the TB's butterfly valves more
> smoothly than even the 14" FIPK and with a slight compression velocity factor
> 'slamming' into the cylinder causing a very slight increase in compression
> ratio (what it would be, would have to be determined: I don't know, it would
> just be very slight). At Higher RPM's (steady air draw) the Laminar Flow
> system would provide smoother air to the engine, but at lower RPM's the 14"
> FIPK would probably be superior due to the "immediate" availability of the air
> that Jules is talking about (the tube would have to pressurize). If I were a
> drag racer I'd want the FIPK, but if I ran my Dak around at high speeds or
> towed a lot (High RPM's at speed, under load), I'd want a Laminar Flow system.
> The entire problem is, nobody makes such a system and it would require some
> wind tunnel time, and hard experimenting with an engine to get it exact for
> each TB setup. If anyone were to attempt to do this kind of thing, I'd
> recommend making a matching TB as part of the whole deal, maybe even an
> optimizing intake manifold. You'd be talking a $1000 for such a setup.
> So what it comes down to is what you really want and how much you are
> willing to pay. For the person that just want's something better than the
> factory suck box, a $20-$50 homemade "Dryer Vent" solution is fine, but if you
> want to get even more power, I'll agree with Jules, the 14" FIPK is probably
> the best of today's options (especially combined with a Ram Air Hood).
>
> Shaun H.
>
> ---original message---
> most tube systems create unbalanced flow characteristics as air turn into
> port. the 14" for ex offers a relatively smooth floral shape 360-degree
> volume of air for the tbi to draw from and you get a balance, enhanced
> delivery...
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:10:51 EDT