I agree with Patrick. Thats why I put the scoops up toward the front of
my hood. Just makes more sense and seems to go along with everything
aerodynamically that Ive learned.
Eric
Patrick and Kelly Engram wrote:
>
> "There has to be tons of variables involved in this question.
> so I'll take an average "best guess" from some of the gurus.
> Frank, BruceB, Eric, Patrick, Bernd, Shaun?, Charles, Jon?
> Bill (Tier), Bob, Doc ? Hehe....Jules...?(shocker!)"
>
> -If your looking for my opinion, I think that any shaker hood is
> cosmetic, not a performance increasing modification. My belief is the
> original intent when these hoods were put on the older Barracuda's and
> Mach1's was to have the power of the engine show by a vibrating scoop
> visible to anyone looking at the hood. These cars basically had a race
> engine installed in them with a very racy, rough idling camshaft, and
> the shaker hood showcased the power.
> Ram air can only be effective if it is put in a high pressure center.
> If I am correct, I believe the base of the windshield is a low pressure
> center, the front of the hood is a high pressure center, and the middle
> of the hood is somewhere in between.
> The newer TransAm's have a dual snorkle style hood that puts 2 huge
> nostrils right in the airstream. Oldsmobile put big scoops on their
> 442's in the late '60's and early 70's, and they were up in on the front
> of the hood. I think these cars were effectively utilizing a ram-air
> hood. I think the best place to put an air inlet for a ram air system
> would be in the grill or nose of the car/truck and duct the air directly
> to the intake/throttle body with as little turning radii as possible.
> Restating my comment on the shaker, I believe it to be more cosmetic
> than a power enhancing modification.
> Do I like it or would I buy it? Hell yeah, I think it looks cool.
> Patrick
> (one of the many)
> Firestone/Baltimore
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:16:13 EDT