I'm thinking of installing llsoc V8 air intake kit into my '01. My only question is what happens to the stock air filter and intake? With the new air intake there is no need for the stock filter. Can it be taken out? or is it just left in the car as empty space?

you have to remove the stock intake tube and airbox to make room for the new cone filter - which is much larger. it comes out with a bolt and a pull.

I have the LLSOC first version of the intake and love it.

here's an older pic - but shows my modded air box the matches up to my hood scoop.

http://www.llsoc.com/V2R1/registry/registry.svc.getobject.asp?id=1740

I'm with Lou. I had the first Gen system and now have the one piece system. You'll have to purchase the KKM Tru-Rev Induction Filter System for the tube. Lou and I have the first Gen filter and velocity stack.

http://memimage.cardomain.net/member_images/6/web/510000-510999/510004_129_full.jpg

http://memimage.cardomain.net/member_images/6/web/510000-510999/510004_130_full.jpg

http://memimage.cardomain.net/member_images/6/web/510000-510999/510004_131_full.jpg

http://memimage.cardomain.net/member_images/6/web/510000-510999/510004_132_full.jpg

Second Question: Is there an airflow sensor that is in the stock intake that has to be calibrated for the new airflow?

Quik LS,
What's the rectangular hole on top for?

Second Question: Is there an airflow sensor that is in the stock intake that has to be calibrated for the new airflow?

The stock MAF should have no problem dealing with the slight difference in flow. I've never heard of having to re-cal just for a cone filter.

Thanks Katshot. I didn't think there should be a re-cal. But I just wanted to make sure being that I'm upgrading on my own.

Quik LS,
What's the rectangular hole on top for?


The hole matches up with his hood scoop. That way he has cold air coming in from outside directly to the CAI. He's the only one I've seen that has put a hood scoop in his LS.

No kidding? A scoop huh? That's the only thing I could imagine but I would never think that someone would do a scoop on a LS. WOW!
Yo, dude, a picture of your car with the scoop? :GotPics:

Here's a pic of the hood.

It's a scoop from a 944 turbo - I wanted something low profile.

http://www.llsoc.com/V2R1/registry/registry.svc.getobject.asp?id=1932

it's not for everyone's taste...

Looks fine. I must admit it took stones to do it though. :Beer
Are you able to get a good seal under the hood?

Ya know, I'm looking at the scoop you did and all of a sudden it hits me; not to be a ball-buster but have you actually tested that scoop to see just how much it flows? The reason I ask is that area is actually a fairly low-pressure area of the body, so unless you have a scoop that actually stands up into the airstream, you "shouldn't" get much flow, if any. Matter of fact, you "should" get a reverse flow up out of the engine compartment from that area. So....it follows that the scoop as installed "should" actually work against intake airflow instead of helping it. I'd be willing to bet that the faster you go, the LESS air you'll get. You might actually find that it limits your high-speed capability.

Yes - it actually works, and more so at speed. it added +3 rwhp on the dyno (small amount but hey I'll take it) and dropped my 1/4 by 0.073

We did the blow air at the front and looked at "where the smoke in the airstream home-style" test to determine the best place and angle for the scoop - so not wind-tunnel tested but certainly had some thought about it.

I don't doubt that it would do something for you on a dyno since the car is static and you do have a little less restriction in the inlet airstream. To be honest, I'd expect a lot better performance improvement in the 1/4 mile ET though. Most aftermarket ram-air products do a lot better than 7 100ths improvement. Maybe that's showing the scoop's in the wrong place. Did you ever think of experimenting with a different locaton? Like just for S&G's, pull the left headlamp and rig up a scoop behind it. I've seen pretty good improvements in ET's using that location on many different types of cars (very high-pressure area).

I've been looking at some pictures of that KKM air intake and also LLSOC intake... Is it just me or could that tube be machined/bent using a pipe bender and just putting a cone filter on the end of it? I know my question sounds elementary and simple, but it doesn't hurt to ask. :)

I don't doubt that it would do something for you on a dyno since the car is static and you do have a little less restriction in the inlet airstream. To be honest, I'd expect a lot better performance improvement in the 1/4 mile ET though. Most aftermarket ram-air products do a lot better than 7 100ths improvement. Maybe that's showing the scoop's in the wrong place. Did you ever think of experimenting with a different locaton? Like just for S&G's, pull the left headlamp and rig up a scoop behind it. I've seen pretty good improvements in ET's using that location on many different types of cars (very high-pressure area).
I did have a ram installed in the lower grill and ran 4" tubing up to the bottom of the box - it worked. It tended to allow more water in and did not produce any better results (was much simpler to build).

The other members of my engineering team own mustangs, camaros, ... and they get similar 1/10th reduction in times from their various hood scoop designs. My scoop could probably do better if it stuck out of the hood more - but I wanted to keep the lines of the hood.

Kevin - remember that my 1/4 times were under a 100 shot of NOS - not sure is a little more ram air makes that much of a difference....

I've been looking at some pictures of that KKM air intake and also LLSOC intake... Is it just me or could that tube be machined/bent using a pipe bender and just putting a cone filter on the end of it? I know my question sounds elementary and simple, but it doesn't hurt to ask. :)

As long as it's a mandrel bender so it maintains full tubing width amd maintains smooth surfaces throughout the radius of the bend(s), it would work just fine.

I've been looking at some pictures of that KKM air intake and also LLSOC intake... Is it just me or could that tube be machined/bent using a pipe bender and just putting a cone filter on the end of it? I know my question sounds elementary and simple, but it doesn't hurt to ask. :)

You could Mandrel bend some pipe. That cost is not very much. It's steel prices that are freakin' outrageous. We use to buy stainless around $2 a foot but now it's skyrocketed up around $17 a foot.

I would definitely caution the use of a cone filter without some kind of velocity stack. Both the KKM and the version of stack I use is tapered on the inside and mounts directly to the MAF. AND...don't forget all the vacuum hoses that have to be installed and the air flow sensor. Other than that it's just time and materials.

Velocity stack? I fail to see what difference that would make.

Velocity stack? I fail to see what difference that would make.
Kevin - Are you asking 'why does a velocity stack make a difference' or are you stating that in your opinion it does not make a difference?

I'm asking why he feels a velocity stack is needed. As I said, I fail to see why it would matter in that application.

I'm asking why he feels a velocity stack is needed. As I said, I fail to see why it would matter in that application.The benefit of velocity stacks is that they are wider at the top of the horn and gradually get slimmer as they get to the bottom of the stack. This decrease of the inside diameter forces the intake air's velocity to increase, creating a siphon - increase the sucking of air. The CAI I use uses a 5" cone that mates to a velocity stack the reduces to a 3" intake tube.

Since my air tube is 90degrees from the vechile travel - I could actually cause a vacuum as air rushes past the air tube - reducing air flow.

A faster/smoother air stream should cause fuel and air to mix together more completely and achieve better atomization.

...or at least that's the theory.


http://www.knfilters.com/facts.htm#BEYOND
http://www.knfilters.com/images/afffig6.gif

Straight cut velocity stacks, for example, pose a unique problem. Exposed to the outside air, velocity stacks experience a phenomena that actually hinders performance at high speed. We are referring to stacks and air horns that protrude through the hood and extend into the air stream so the direction of the air rushing over the car is at a perpendicular angle to the length of the tube.

Air moving rapidly over these stacks create turbulence inside the opening. At high speed, the rushing air tends to create a partial vacuum inside the tube. The condition is counterproductive to air flow. The phenomena also effects open carburetors. The higher the ground speed, the greater the problem. Vacuum created by the engine is trying to coax air into the cylinders and the high speed air flowing over the open end of the stack is causing resistance.

Reversion creates other problems. In an automotive application, reversion refers to reversed air flow, or in simpler terms, it’s when air in the intake runner reverses direction for a split second. The condition is caused when a burst of pressure escapes into the intake runner from the cylinder during valve overlap.

Reversion creates resonance shock waves inside the tubes which exit the open end of the tube at various rates depending on engine speed. It has also been proven that these shock waves interfere with each other when the stacks are in close proximity.

The benefit of velocity stacks is that they are wider at the top of the horn and gradually get slimmer as they get to the bottom of the stack. This decrease of the inside diameter forces the intake air's velocity to increase, creating a siphon - increase the sucking of air. The CAI I use uses a 5" cone that mates to a velocity stack the reduces to a 3" intake tube.

Since my air tube is 90degrees from the vechile travel - I could actually cause a vacuum as air rushes past the air tube - reducing air flow.

A faster/smoother air stream should cause fuel and air to mix together more completely and achieve better atomization.

...or at least that's the theory.


http://www.knfilters.com/facts.htm#BEYOND
http://www.knfilters.com/images/afffig6.gif

Straight cut velocity stacks, for example, pose a unique problem. Exposed to the outside air, velocity stacks experience a phenomena that actually hinders performance at high speed. We are referring to stacks and air horns that protrude through the hood and extend into the air stream so the direction of the air rushing over the car is at a perpendicular angle to the length of the tube.

Air moving rapidly over these stacks create turbulence inside the opening. At high speed, the rushing air tends to create a partial vacuum inside the tube. The condition is counterproductive to air flow. The phenomena also effects open carburetors. The higher the ground speed, the greater the problem. Vacuum created by the engine is trying to coax air into the cylinders and the high speed air flowing over the open end of the stack is causing resistance.

Reversion creates other problems. In an automotive application, reversion refers to reversed air flow, or in simpler terms, it’s when air in the intake runner reverses direction for a split second. The condition is caused when a burst of pressure escapes into the intake runner from the cylinder during valve overlap.

Reversion creates resonance shock waves inside the tubes which exit the open end of the tube at various rates depending on engine speed. It has also been proven that these shock waves interfere with each other when the stacks are in close proximity.

Lou, thank you very much for that explanation. Evidently Mr. Kevin was just being an arse to me. Of course my reply to him was going to be "Who Cares?" but you've done a great job explaining it. Hopefully it's technical enough he'll understand.

Guys,
I think you're a little confused here. The "siphon" effect that the K&N article refers to is a BAD thing and it's caused by air running across any opening at a right angle. This creates a localized low-pressure pocket at the top of the opening (top of the velocity stack for example) which in turn causes the air below it in the intake etc. to rush towards the low pressure pocket in an effort to equalize the pressure. This what "Reversion" is.
Lou, your statement:
"...This decrease of the inside diameter forces the intake air's velocity to increase, creating a siphon - increase the sucking of air..." is incorrect. The increased velocity of the air going through tube DOES NOT create a siphon. What it does is create a small low-pressure area (Velocity and Pressure vary inversely).
And GrayGhost1, stop trying to make everything personal. As I said to you before, if you would stop running your mouth and open your mind to the possibility that you "could" learn something here, you just might be surprised.
I know, I'm only a Cadillac guy to you so I'm stupid. :Bang

.... I'm only a Cadillac guy to you so I'm stupid. :Bang

You said it. I didn't......but there must be some truth to it.

Guys,
I think you're a little confused here. The "siphon" effect that the K&N article refers to is a BAD thing and it's caused by air running across any opening at a right angle. This creates a localized low-pressure pocket at the top of the opening (top of the velocity stack for example) which in turn causes the air below it in the intake etc. to rush towards the low pressure pocket in an effort to equalize the pressure. This what "Reversion" is.
Lou, your statement:
"...This decrease of the inside diameter forces the intake air's velocity to increase, creating a siphon - increase the sucking of air..." is incorrect. The increased velocity of the air going through tube DOES NOT create a siphon. What it does is create a small low-pressure area (Velocity and Pressure vary inversely).
And GrayGhost1, stop trying to make everything personal. As I said to you before, if you would stop running your mouth and open your mind to the possibility that you "could" learn something here, you just might be surprised.
I know, I'm only a Cadillac guy to you so I'm stupid. :Bang
Dude - think about it.

having the air rush across the end of a tube will create a vacuum - sucking the air back out of the tube. This is bad.

increasing the speed of the air going into the intake sucks more air into the tube. This is good. The velocity stack increases the 'sucking'.

it's all minor - but every little bit counts. like peeling the vinyl off the roof.

I know what you're trying to say Lou, and I know it sounds like it makes sense to you but I swear it's just not that simple. I'm not trying to be an ass about it as GrayGhost1 seems to always think. I'm just trying to help you and anyone else that's interested, understand the way systems like this really work so you don't waste your money. I want everyone to get the most from their cars and their money, and if they can learn a little something about their cars and how they work along the way, great. Sometimes I learn too, that's why I asked about the theory behind why the statement about velocity stacks in the air filter should be used. You and most everyone else here try hard to get the most from their cars, whether they are performance cars or not, and I respect that. The problem is that there's a lot of mis-information out there and a lot of people that talk out their butts about technology they really don't understand. In those cases, a lot of people make a lot of bad moves with respect to mods on their cars and then they either get bummed and give up or just keep piling more money on the car in hopes that it will improve the situation. I've seen it a million times. I used to sell a lot of the performance parts that guys like you buy, and I used to laugh at their expense, all the way to the bank. Ok, so I'm getting WAY too long winded here so I'm just going to drop this, and say that I love your car, it looks hot, and I hope you didn't think I was trying to be a jerk to you.

Kevin - right - but your message is lost in the delivery - you always seem to angle on showing everyone up.

We all love cars - trying to make them better means different things to different people.

I'm an engineer - I hack and mod everything - most of it don't make a difference, was just a way for me to spend a bunch of my time and some of my money. But some of it does make a difference.

I've raced for several years - and miss the days of easy ticks and mods.

The proof is the facts - velocity stacks are a fact - just google it. Most OEMs create funny looking baffles within the intake tube to counteract any resonance and to cancel as much noise as possible.

Kevin - right - but your message is lost in the delivery - you always seem to angle on showing everyone up.

I concur with this statement Kevin. Instead of saying...."you're an idiot" or "you don't know what the hell you're talking about" try to be cool about it. This was my beef all along. We need to get along here and I understand your statement about "mis-information". There's a lot of it out there. I don't claim to know everything and never will but I'm an engineer just like Lou so I understand what's happening underneath the hood. Been there done that, so to speak. I'm cool with it and what Lou has pointed out on velocity stacks is correct.

Anyway, Happy Thanksgiving!

Another thing the velocity stack helps out greatly for is turbulance at the MAF sensor. If you are pushing your engine hard, and let off the throttle quickly, that vacuum created at the filter (which is mounted to the mass air sensor) will actually send a small amount of airflow back into the MAF sensor BACKWARDS. This in, in turn, tell the mass airflow sensor that the engine is sucking less air, and the engine will lean itself out, causeing a low drop in rpm, and sometimes even a stall. Proof? Get a computer that will read your air flow (in GPH, kPa, bar) and monitor the difference with and without, keeping note of engine and vehicle speeds as a control. It really does make a difference.

This backfeed turbulance at the MAF is also why i mounted my MAF sensor at the turbo's compressor inlet instead of outlet on my car. Only there was MUCH more air coming back in this instance.

I get my True-Rev Induction kit TOMMOROW!!!!!!!!! YEAAAAHHHHH!!!! But one question. WHen I take out the stock air box, will I have to change out the air intake gasket that goes one the MAF sensor relay? Just a question, i don't think I do.. but you can never ask a dumb question.

I had to keep the MAF gasket and use it on my new intake - between the MAF and the velocity stack - the MAF has some brass crush-proof bushing that prevent it from making an air-tight seal against any flat surface - the gasket works nicely there.

Just installed my NEW Kustomz Tru-Rev Kit!!! One word sums it up..... AWESOME!!!! Increase in take-off, NEW 0-60 time, and no whistle at 3000rpm. Definetly worth the $89 (10% off if your a LLSOC member!) Next upgrade here I come.

Howdy yall. I'm new to this forum posting wise, but I've been lurking for a couple of months now. I'm a little ignorant when it comes to some of this stuff, but if I buy the Kustumz Tru-Rev kit, will that suffice to give me a boost. Or do I have to purchase other things in addition? How easy is it to install and would it void any warranties? Thanks for the help. BTW I have a black 2000 LS Sport. :L

Chrysler, on their 413 engined 300 letter series cars in the early 60's, had a cross ram system that put the carb for one cylinder bank over the opposite bank. They had a long ram and a short ram intake system, with the short ram being the one used for competition. It involved the reversion principal with the shorter ram reacting to give better cylinder fill at higher RPM's. Both intakes looked the same outwardly, but the tubes were different lengths underneath. Just a tidbit of information for ya all.

Dude - think about it.

having the air rush across the end of a tube will create a vacuum - sucking the air back out of the tube. This is bad.

increasing the speed of the air going into the intake sucks more air into the tube. This is good. The velocity stack increases the 'sucking'.

it's all minor - but every little bit counts. like peeling the vinyl off the roof.

Actually, a vinyl roof give a little better laminar flow across the car, taking about a tenth off the ET at the strip, I believe.

Actually, a vinyl roof give a little better laminar flow across the car, taking about a tenth off the ET at the strip, I believe.

lol, you do realize you pulled up a 4 year old thread, to respond to? ;)

Mark

I'm in CA and now deal with the smog certs every two years. I have the LLSOC sold V8CAI cold air intake from 2003 on my 2001 V8 LS and just recently, the technition was asking me where the "sticker" is for the air intake. I told him this intake has been through a few smog certs and no one has asked before. He ran it anyway and the LS passed just fine.

Anyway, I need a "sticker" that says it's likely compliant and/or approved etc. Anyone know who made this air intake? I need to research for a sticker once I find the manufacturer.

You can get a K&N typhoon sticker and stick it on there.

It was made for the thunderbird but fits the LS V8 as well.

I'm in CA and now deal with the smog certs every two years. I have the LLSOC sold V8CAI cold air intake from 2003 on my 2001 V8 LS and just recently, the technition was asking me where the "sticker" is for the air intake. I told him this intake has been through a few smog certs and no one has asked before. He ran it anyway and the LS passed just fine.

Anyway, I need a "sticker" that says it's likely compliant and/or approved etc. Anyone know who made this air intake? I need to research for a sticker once I find the manufacturer.

You won't find one. The intake was never CARB certified. Certification would have cost a fortune. I had trouble once so I just installed the stock intake for the smog check. It was a nuisance but worth my time.