Lincoln ls fog light air inlet

sleeperLS

sleeperLS

LVC Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2016
Messages
33
Reaction score
0
Location
panama city
Has anybody ever removed their fog light and made a air intake or pipe that goes from their fog light to their air filter? I was thinking about doing this because I have a short ram intake and wanted to get some cold air to the filter
 
sleeperLS said:
Has anybody ever removed their fog light and made a air intake or pipe that goes from their fog light to their air filter? I was thinking about doing this because I have a short ram intake and wanted to get some cold air to the filter
Click to expand...
No sorry, I like my fog lights but that sounds pretty cool! Never know until you try it man. Post that when your done!!
 
There is enough room to snake it around and utilize the lower grill. But I have also thought about removing the fog for a more direct route. I use my fogs a lot though so not ready to commit to that just yet.

IMG_7381_zpsisc6yghe.jpg



IMG_7377_zpst9loforj.jpg
 
Possible? Sure, but likely? - no. Guess I will have to try my best to avoid large puddles, like I do every other *possible* road hazard.
 
joegr said:
Seriously? What do you think it does then?
Click to expand...

It's a duct. It guides air from outside to the filter. It is not connected to the intake manifold in anyway nor is the filter sitting in an enclosure connected to it creating a vacuum to suck air, water, leaves, or anything from outside. People have been doing this for decades on cars.
 
Joegr - Just making sure, you are aware that my setup is not physically attached to my intake right? As opposed to some of other questionable setups found here:

pics from weekend of CAI setup on 03+

In order for my LS to hyrdo-lock, it would have to experience enough direct water flow through the bumper, up the corrugated tube, and then, saturate and come close to submerging the filter. In order to achieve these conditions, the car would have to experience a scenario so extreme, that it wouldn't make my setup that much worse than a stock one. Since the filter area is now open, I am not routing air/fluid to a fully enclosed area. In stock form, the airbox also has "feeds" on it for cold air induction - while not as direct as mine, would impose a similar amount of risk in a large puddle under acceleration situation.

You are valid in that a risk of hyrdo-lock exists, but I have put some thought into and tested my setup, and put fail safes into place to mitigate this event as best as I can while maintaining the benefits of additional cold air routing. For instance:

1 - the large hole in the fender/wheel well seen in my picture would act as a drain and the gap between my tube's flange mounted on the underside of the body allows an additional escape for water. These pre-filter fail safes will help in an extreme water collection scenario, preventing full submersion of the filter.

2 - I have driven in HEAVY rain, and immediately pulled over to observe the filter, which was dry.

3 - There are also minor drain holes in my tubing to allow for water escapes as well before traveling upwards towards the filter.

4 - Lastly, the most important variable, driver precaution is followed. Avoid puddles like you do potholes, animals, tailgating, etc.

5 - In the event any of these scenarios cannot be maintained and I am at higher risk, I keep a large softball in the car to wedge into the hole, preventing any water intrusion.

As an aside:
I might be, (and hopefully am) wrong, but I also think you like to troll me and my posts, which is unfortunate because 99% of your posts are effective and mature. I view you as an intelligent and overwhelming helpful poster, but on multiple occasions you have poked at semantic based posts of mine (coilpack vs coils, strut vs shock) and like to make it known that you dont approve of a majority of modifications. If your goal is to be helpful on here, which you are most of the time, than be just that - helpful. I can also be sensitive at times, so as the internet often goes, maybe we just aren't hearing one another enough. So I will close with saying that I mean no disrespect to you and your applicable knowledge in these discussions. But As I approach you and others on LVC with an objective mindset, I guess I just expect the same.
 
DeviLSh said:
...
As an aside:
I might be, (and hopefully am) wrong, but I also think you like to troll me and my posts, which is unfortunate because 99% of your posts are effective and mature. I view you as an intelligent and overwhelming helpful poster, but on multiple occasions you have poked at semantic based posts of mine (coilpack vs coils, strut vs shock) and like to make it known that you dont approve of a majority of modifications. If your goal is to be helpful on here, which you are most of the time, than be just that - helpful. I can also be sensitive at times, so as the internet often goes, maybe we just aren't hearing one another enough. So I will close with saying that I mean no disrespect to you and your applicable knowledge in these discussions. But As I approach you and others on LVC with an objective mindset, I guess I just expect the same
...
Click to expand...


Come on now, he meant no foul, merely suggesting a possible increased risk of sucking in some water.
We all understand the car would now have to be a foot or two in full water to even begin a hydrolock, by putting it where you did it's sitting lower then the original thus increasing the chance. As long as your not planning on going through deep constant water you'd be alright other then the rain it my suck in, at worse causing a water soaked air breather element. Water is no good for no engine, we all know this already. Keep it dry.

Let's all have a Snickers already .. together!

5258c9ea307a2c3a75843ffffb420b4d.jpg


.
 
If you really believe that I am "trolling" you, respond with yes and I will put you on ignore so that it won't happen again.
If your duct is really directing air into the filter, then it can direct water there too. If the gap is big enough that this isn't a problem, then it isn't doing anything for airflow either. Have you monitored the IAT to see if this made any positive difference at all?
 
Shortly after install I monitored IAT on the X4 during some test drives. Basically anytime the car is moving the IAT is equal to ambient. (there are actually times where IAT was 1-3* less than ambient). The temp will slowly rise at idle/traffic, but drops quickly whenback on the move. While harder to quantify, the ducting and XCAL were the only two things I changed between my last two track visits last year, where the car ran almost 1/2sec faster in the 1/4mi. Most of this is attributable to the tune for sure, but my 14.7 was with the K&N, and the 14.3 with the added ducting.

I have every reason to believe it is pretty effective. You can also grab the K&N tube after a drive without it hurting your hand, so the airflow might even be helping keep the post heat shield side a bit cooler than before the additional ducting as wadded.

I don't want you to ignore me. :)
 
BigPapaLS said:
:rolleyes: Lol what? It's ducting... It's not sucking up anything....
Click to expand...
hahaha there's so much funny on this thread. ^^

DeviLSH, your IAT's are consistent with what I see without any extra tube. The only way to drop the reading is to consume more air. Whether its stock location air or front grill air makes a minuscule difference.
As an aside, I'm impressed with the spotlessness of the underneath of your car. Wish mine looked that good.
 
On my way to an ultimate AB in Chemistry, I also had precursor studies in Physics. Air is almost entirely gaseous and water is a fluid. They don't act quite the same way. It's been proven that air picked-up from the front of a car is of value to making power---over air picked-up from inside the engine compartment. It's largely a temperature thing.

It's POSSIBLE to get water from such forward ducting but such ducting, having been used on various factory 'hot-rods' over the years, have shown that it isn't really very likely. Be wary of deep puddles and river crossings!

KS
 
yes, rain isn't much of a problem, but puddles of unknown depth certainly can be, especially if you lowered your car another inch or so as well.

I guess my reply would be that the air under the hood is displaced fairly quick once you're moving at all. The supplemental ducting may also create turbulence and hinder flow and rob power. No matter where the entry point is, you still have to travel through the same heat soaked air tube and aluminum manifold.

I'm on another forum where a guy with significant upgrades put his stock intake tube back on after he consistently and scientifically proved the aftermarket one lost power. Unless the stock design is incredibly horrible, its usually not worth the money to mess with it. The LS has pretty good flow intake and exhaust.
 
Last edited:
The issue I see is excessive water getting splashed up through the duct and hitting a paper filter element. Once the paper gets wet it will expand causing a restriction that is not due to it technically being dirty. Once the filter dries back out it would be fine.

The big difference is water mist versus the amount of potential water exposure in a short amount of time. It's easier to draw enough air through the filter with water mist to keep the filter in a somewhat happy state. But with the duct it's also possible to get a large enough splash of water to get scooped up and shoot into the filter causing it to saturate and the engine to bog down.

The Motorcraft filters (and I presume most aftermarket ones too) combat the water mist scenario by lightly coating the paper filter elements with oil. This makes water vapor and mist slide through the filter without getting into the fibers where it's harmlessly burned off in the engine. The problem with an actual splash of water is that this will not flow through the filter and will soak into the paper fibers.

The fix to combat this is similar to a conical dust collector like in a woodshop or a vortex air filter on a semi truck. You take the incoming air charge and push it against a surface so that things suspended in the air will hit the surface. This causes the things in the air to slow down which means they drop out of the air stream and collect at the bottom. They usually also have a couple small holes in the bottom so that whatever falls down can also get pushed out by excess air entering the system.

I don't really think there will be a huge issue here unless you try driving through standing water more then a couple inches deep. Where I live that happens regularly (almost daily) so this wouldn't be an option for me. Then again my LS is my hobby now so it's easiest enough to just not drive it when it's raining.
 
I have always found that the stock airbox on most of my vehicles is indeed ideal for temperature management and performance. The LS intake being no exception. I will happily admit that having the K&N system on my car is primarily for sound. Under various light loads, low rpm, you get a phenomenal deep induction tone on this car with the fipk system. If I could successfully use the stock box with the K&N elbow, I would. but the overall dimension do not allow that without seriously mocking up parts. I would rather just substitute the stock sound chamber portion with a 3.5" silicone elbow.

I added the ducting after my K&N install since I was now loosing the plastic enclosure that was the stock airbox, as miniscule as it may be, with the K&N the hot engine air could now make its way around the filter when the car was stopped. I spend a good amount of time in the staging lanes at the track, and the IAT's during that time climb significantly. Having freshly ducted air during the pass and immediately after launch, I *assumed* would net me cooler IATs during the pass than if I had the airbox. We only have 14 seconds to deal with here! lol.

Let me propose a question, since this is now becoming a good discussion about the potential merits of this system. Next time I go to the track, I could easily swap stock with the K&N/ducted setup between passes. Would this be a worthwhile test, or is there not enough adaption time to properly evaluate the results.

If this tube is slowing me down, increasing risk of hydrolock, and under performing the heat retention qualities of the stock box, then I will gladly ditch it. So far, the data I have is not suggesting that. But I am all for science and doing it right. I have been wrong before, many, many times. ;)
 
I personally don't see this giving you any gains or helping with heat soak while staging or even at launch. I think it would have benefits after 30-feet or so at WOT. By then you'll have a cold air charge running through the system fast enough that heat soak shouldn't really be much of an issue. I think the gains are going to be marginal though. The real way to measure this would be to drop a temperature probe in an intake runner and see if the temperature goes down with and without this during your run. However, I am pretty sure that is not an option. So it's back to the butt dyno and comparing time slips :)
 
Keep in mind, his front end ducting is not straight into the intake, it merely provides air flow to and around his heat shielded area where then the breather element is attempting to suck colder air in. Although not a recommend procedure but if he went through deep enough water to fully submerge the opening of his ducting, water would not in one gulp be pulled straight into the intake. What I'm trying to get at, is the fact that the 'openess' of his heatshield around his filter has sufficient space to pull air from around it as apposed to being air tight all the way to the opening of his lowered ducting.

I highly doubt it would ever grab a puddles worth of water and deliver it straight down the intake. There is air around the heatshield which would be delivered, along with some mild water or dampness.

Personally I thing it ads value in delivering more direct fresh air to the environment that makes up the heat shielded enclosed area. I would attempt this myself without hesitations and would surely avoid running around in any standing water including heavy rains. I would never dispute the fact that eventually it will deliver moisture to the filtered area. There is enough suction at WOT that will make that air breather element soaking wet and it will become part of the fuel/air mixture.


:: Devin, your mod looks good, you know what to do as far as running it in wet conditions.
(Round disk, movable to close the underneath ducting to airbox opening, for when it begins to rain, might be in order)
.
 
Kumba said:
I think it would have benefits after 30-feet or so at WOT. By then you'll have a cold air charge running through the system fast enough that heat soak shouldn't really be much of an issue.
Click to expand...

This is what I was attempting to convey in my other post. The stock setup when cruising probably also sees close to ambient, but after how long? That was something I actually compared before adding this. Because I was seeing a longer amount of time for temps to fall to ambient on stock airbox. If I stage, and then make a pass, I am seeing fresh air immediately once I get going. Not waiting for any hot air to go away from the bay.

RigsLS said:
(Round disk, movable to close the underneath ducting to airbox opening, for when it begins to rain, might be in order)
Click to expand...

This is so much better than my current jam a softball in the tube method. :) A nice slide in slide out style setup.
 
DeviLSh said:
This is so much better than my current jam a softball in the tube method. :) A nice slide in slide out style setup.
Click to expand...

Go to an HVAC store and look for a 3" duct damper. Has a little handle on the side and a wing nut to lock it in place. Then you just reach under the bumper and close it. Or pop the hood and close it. Either/or.
 
Thanks guys

Think the OP got more than he bargained for on this thread. :D
 
... and we all enjoyed a bar of nuts, coated with caramel and chocolate. Even Joe did. ;)
 
Path of least resistance. Unless the filter is somehow isolated/connected to that tube, it will be sucking more (hot) air from under the hood than it will be through that corrugated pipe.

Years ago on a car long long gone I tried a filter with conical 'heat shield' (from under the hood) isolated with abs pipe & elbows to the front in attempt to improve CAI. Even though the piping made it sound like a damn tuba, it wasn't worth it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

Total: 286 (members: 1, guests: 285)
Back
Top