jaguar air intake

Telco said:
They aren't there for anything other than noise control. If they had any performance application, then replacing it with an aftermarket pipe would result in a very noticeable power loss. What people actually see when they remove the factory tube with all the misshapen lumps and replace it with a straight, smooth tube what they get is engine growl with no change to a small improvement in power, which proves my statement.
Click to expand...

Ok, over the last few days, I've been looking over the two cars' characteristics and specs trying to figure out why there would be a difference. We all know there are differences in the engine sizes and transmissions. I even considered the design of the frontal area of the cars. Still, I couldn't come up with a reason. Then, it hit me. Altitude. Relatively speaking, the UK is flat compared to the US. I'd be willing to bet flexibility and drivability has something to do with it. That extra volume of air may be needed when you need to accelerate above 10,000 ft altitude. The engine and trans combo may need the extra air so the computer can maintain the correct parameters for smoothness.



View attachment 828464583



View attachment 828464584



View attachment 828464585



View attachment 828464586



View attachment 828464587
 
Robot said:
Ok, over the last few days, I've been looking over the two cars' characteristics and specs trying to figure out why there would be a difference. We all know there are differences in the engine sizes and transmissions. I even considered the design of the frontal area of the cars. Still, I couldn't come up with a reason. Then, it hit me. Altitude. Relatively speaking, the UK is flat compared to the US. I'd be willing to bet flexibility and drivability has something to do with it. That extra volume of air may be needed when you need to accelerate above 10,000 ft altitude. The engine and trans combo may need the extra air so the computer can maintain the correct parameters for smoothness.





View attachment 828464583




View attachment 828464584



View attachment 828464585



View attachment 828464586



View attachment 828464587
Click to expand...

EXCEPT......... The S-Type was also always ment to be sold here.....
 
LS4me said:
EXCEPT......... The S-Type was also always ment to be sold here.....
Click to expand...

Yes, and I wonder if the cars run the same at altitude. You know the Mustang really sucked at high altitudes until the British threw in that Merlin engine.
 
Robot said:
Ok, over the last few days, I've been looking over the two cars' characteristics and specs trying to figure out why there would be a difference. We all know there are differences in the engine sizes and transmissions. I even considered the design of the frontal area of the cars. Still, I couldn't come up with a reason. Then, it hit me. Altitude. Relatively speaking, the UK is flat compared to the US. I'd be willing to bet flexibility and drivability has something to do with it. That extra volume of air may be needed when you need to accelerate above 10,000 ft altitude. The engine and trans combo may need the extra air so the computer can maintain the correct parameters for smoothness....
Click to expand...

You're comparing the gen II LS to the S-type. Which gen S-type are you comparing it to?
Anyway, you can't do one-to-one comparisons with gen II of the intake.

Gen II LS - throttle body at the front
Gen II LS - variable intake valve timing

Gen I and Gen II S-type - throttle body at the back
Gen II S-type - stepped intake valve timing
Gen II S-type - stepped exhaust valve timing
Gen II S-type - Optional supercharger

These differences by themselves are more than enough to explain the intake differences.
 
Altitude wouldn't matter for the intake anyway. It's going to move the same volume of air at any altitude. The difference will only be density, since at the higher altitudes the pressure is lower. The air intake will actually be under a vacuum since the engine is drawing air from the intake.

Did a little checking, and it looks like the original P51 used a supercharged Allison engine, but the Merlin used a two-stage supercharger. A regular supercharger can only boost a set amount, but a two stage supercharger produces an incredible amount of boost that a single stage can't match.
 
Telco said:
Did a little checking, and it looks like the original P51 used a supercharged Allison engine, but the Merlin used a two-stage supercharger. A regular supercharger can only boost a set amount, but a two stage supercharger produces an incredible amount of boost that a single stage can't match.
Click to expand...

I tracked a P51 over SLC one day doing 440kts ground speed. I thought his low approach was going to get me fired!! He thought it would be fun to buzz the cockpit of a UAL 727 that was exiting the high-speed! The pilot asked me if it was a Mustang (like we ALL couldn't tell by the music from that wonderful Merlin!!). I apprehensively said that it was. He said I didn't tell him and asked if the Mustang would do it again! Well, twist my arm!, OF COURSE!
 
joegr said:
You're comparing the gen II LS to the S-type. Which gen S-type are you comparing it to?
Anyway, you can't do one-to-one comparisons with gen II of the intake.

Gen II LS - throttle body at the front
Gen II LS - variable intake valve timing

Gen I and Gen II S-type - throttle body at the back
Gen II S-type - stepped intake valve timing
Gen II S-type - stepped exhaust valve timing
Gen II S-type - Optional supercharger

These differences by themselves are more than enough to explain the intake differences.
Click to expand...

I was actually comparing generation to generation whilst excluding the supercharged models. The 1st Gens of both cars had different air intake tube designs with the TB at the back. The 2nd Gens of both cars air intake tube designs with the TB at the front. With the research I've done, I've only seen 2nd Gen S Type throttle bodies in the front. Now, the stepped valve timing thing is interesting. I guess we need someone to take a ride over the divide or around the Colorado 14ers with an aftermarket tube and see how it works. I would suspect the transmission would freak out.
 
Robot said:
I guess we need someone to take a ride over the divide or around the Colorado 14ers with an aftermarket tube and see how it works. I would suspect the transmission would freak out.
Click to expand...

No need; the higher altitude would affect the different intakes the same on a percentage basis. If you see a 5 percent increase in performance with one intake vs the other at sea level, you will see a 5 percent increase at 13,000 feet. Of course, 5 percent of the HP at 13,000 feet will be fewer actual horses than 5 percent at sea level, so the SOTP difference would be less noticeable at 13,000 than at 0.

A side point - in most of the US, you have 87, 89, and 91/93 octane fuel. In Denver and other high points, you have 85, 87, and 89/91, the reason being is the lower air pressure actually lowers the real compression of the engine enough that the lower octane is now correct for the engine. Our Lincolns would require 89 octane in Denver, although 91 would be preferable.
 
Telco said:
No need; the higher altitude would affect the different intakes the same on a percentage basis. If you see a 5 percent increase in performance with one intake vs the other at sea level, you will see a 5 percent increase at 13,000 feet. Of course, 5 percent of the HP at 13,000 feet will be fewer actual horses than 5 percent at sea level, so the SOTP difference would be less noticeable at 13,000 than at 0.

A side point - in most of the US, you have 87, 89, and 91/93 octane fuel. In Denver and other high points, you have 85, 87, and 89/91, the reason being is the lower air pressure actually lowers the real compression of the engine enough that the lower octane is now correct for the engine. Our Lincolns would require 89 octane in Denver, although 91 would be preferable.
Click to expand...

What I am referring to is the initial onset of power through the transition to a demand for higher power. If two identical cars are cruising at a given speed with the different intake designs, the car fitted with the intake having the extra volume should be able to generate the power a bit more quickly as more air is available instantly. The other design would have to draw from the small little inlets to get the same volume of air. This theory is assuming the throttle body is large enough to draw more air than the little inlets can pass.
 
Telco said:
A side point - in most of the US, you have 87, 89, and 91/93 octane fuel. In Denver and other high points, you have 85, 87, and 89/91, the reason being is the lower air pressure actually lowers the real compression of the engine enough that the lower octane is now correct for the engine. Our Lincolns would require 89 octane in Denver, although 91 would be preferable.
Click to expand...

The air pressure has nothing to do the altitude. Air is thinner as altitude increases and trust me, you lose a whole lot more than 5%!!!! Our 200hp Sable was pretty gutless driving the 70 through the Eisenhower Tunnel (just under 12K feet). Performance also deteriorates with heat. The worst combination is a high altitude hot day. In aviation it's called density altitude.
 
LS4me said:
Should be here Friday..... Pics soon after....
Click to expand...

Quoting myself........

I guess it won't be tomorrow......

Scheduled Delivery:
Scheduled delivery information is not available at this time. Please check back later.

Last Location:
Columbus, OH, United States, Thursday, 01/09/2014

Columbus, OH, United States 01/09/2014 10:00 A.M. Adverse weather conditions.
Columbus, OH, United States 01/07/2014 5:04 A.M. Departure Scan
Columbus, OH, United States 01/06/2014 11:00 P.M. Arrival Scan
Chillicothe, OH, United States 01/06/2014 9:45 P.M. Departure Scan
01/06/2014 7:38 P.M. Origin Scan
United States 01/03/2014 4:01 P.M. Order Processed: Ready for UPS
Click to expand...

I guess it was too cold......
 
joegr said:
Gen I and Gen II S-type - throttle body at the back
Click to expand...

Pretty sure the Gen2 s-type has the TB at the front like the LS. Otherwise it would have the intake tube wrapping around to go in the back of the intake like the Gen.1.
 
For the v8, the intake on both generations are similar. Gen1 (S-type and LS) all to the way to the passenger side, Gen2(S-type and LS) facing the front and shorter. Probably in Europe where diesel dominates, the noise levels are probably a non-issue or maybe the LS is just too noisy that they have to tone it down by US standards.

Any takers on a jaguar intake before I return it? for Gen1 only.
$20 including shipping.
 
Kumba said:
Pretty sure the Gen2 s-type has the TB at the front like the LS. Otherwise it would have the intake tube wrapping around to go in the back of the intake like the Gen.1.
Click to expand...

Yes, I think I was misinformed on that. Sorry...
 
joegr said:
Yes, I think I was misinformed on that. Sorry...
Click to expand...

Damnit Joe! Your LS God status is being revoked! Now go make a post asking about a miss in the engine at partial throttle and how you have coolant pouring out behind the drivers side wheel.
 
Robot said:
What I am referring to is the initial onset of power through the transition to a demand for higher power. If two identical cars are cruising at a given speed with the different intake designs, the car fitted with the intake having the extra volume should be able to generate the power a bit more quickly as more air is available instantly. The other design would have to draw from the small little inlets to get the same volume of air. This theory is assuming the throttle body is large enough to draw more air than the little inlets can pass.
Click to expand...

Yes, I figured, and I can understand why you might think this because it is available volume closer to the engine, but the computer measures the air it's using at the time and calculates its load off that. The MAF reading plus the MAP reading tells the computer what's going on. Besides, the tiny amount of air available past the MAF would be negligible.


LS4me said:
The air pressure has nothing to do the altitude. Air is thinner as altitude increases and trust me, you lose a whole lot more than 5%!!!! Our 200hp Sable was pretty gutless driving the 70 through the Eisenhower Tunnel (just under 12K feet). Performance also deteriorates with heat. The worst combination is a high altitude hot day. In aviation it's called density altitude.
Click to expand...

Actually, altitude has everything to do with air pressure. Air pressure is derived by weight of the air, and the higher you are the less air there is over you. This is the same reason submarines get crushed when they go too deep; the weight of the water over you crushes you. Air pressure is also affected by temperature and humidity. Colder air or humid air is denser and weighs more than dry or warm air. No matter what decreases the density of air (heat or altitude) it will decrease performance. The nice thing is a forced induction system can be run at higher boost pressure at higher altitudes, so you can regain full performance. The reason for this is the less dense altitude reduces cylinder pressure (which is why you can buy 85 octane in Denver) even though the compression ratio remains the same. The forced induction allows you to boost the cylinder pressure to the pressure it would be at sea level, which the engine can easily handle.

The 5 percent I indicated was the guesstimated improvement of a performance intake vs the stock intake as well, not the difference in the car's performance at sea level vs high altitude. If the performance intake makes a 5 percent improvement over the stock intake at sea level, it will make a 5 percent improvement at 13,000 feet. This means the performance intake would give a car that makes 200RWHP at sea level a 10RWHP gain, but at 13,000 feet the same car would make 140RWHP and would see a 7RWHP gain with the same performance intake. The difference will be 5 percent regardless, but 5 percent of a much smaller number.
 
Telco said:
Actually, altitude has everything to do with air pressure. Air pressure is derived by weight of the air, and the higher you are the less air there is over you. This is the same reason submarines get crushed when they go too deep; the weight of the water over you crushes you. Air pressure is also affected by temperature and humidity. Colder air or humid air is denser and weighs more than dry or warm air. No matter what decreases the density of air (heat or altitude) it will decrease performance. The nice thing is a forced induction system can be run at higher boost pressure at higher altitudes, so you can regain full performance. The reason for this is the less dense altitude reduces cylinder pressure (which is why you can buy 85 octane in Denver) even though the compression ratio remains the same. The forced induction allows you to boost the cylinder pressure to the pressure it would be at sea level, which the engine can easily handle.

The 5 percent I indicated was the guesstimated improvement of a performance intake vs the stock intake as well, not the difference in the car's performance at sea level vs high altitude. If the performance intake makes a 5 percent improvement over the stock intake at sea level, it will make a 5 percent improvement at 13,000 feet. This means the performance intake would give a car that makes 200RWHP at sea level a 10RWHP gain, but at 13,000 feet the same car would make 140RWHP and would see a 7RWHP gain with the same performance intake. The difference will be 5 percent regardless, but 5 percent of a much smaller number.
Click to expand...

We may be talking different terms. I was referring to barometric pressure.......
 
a picture showing the differences, not so obvious but they're the reason I didn't go with the jaguar intake.

intake2.jpg

intake2.jpg
 
LS4me said:
Quoting myself........

I guess it won't be tomorrow......



I guess it was too cold......
Click to expand...

Quoting myself again.......

At least it's in the state. Looks like I should get it tomorrow and installed either late tomorrow or early Wed. Pics afterword.......
 
Got it today while we were out. Either I will need to acquire the mounting brackets (we'll see) or modify the existing brackets to secure the cover. Anywho...... Here's a picture:

Jag engine cover 2.jpg

Jag engine cover 2.jpg
 
Can you dump ice into that top area and make it a "cold air" (or chilled air) intake? :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 19 (members: 0, guests: 19)
Back
Top