ok, ridiculous the claims may be, but you guys are speculating on pieces of physics and engineering that i'm not entirely sure you are qualified to evaluate.

a pipe is NOT just a pipe, there are fluid dynamics taught in basic physics and thermodynamics which dictate the velocity, density, and compression of a fluid in a system all with a strong base on the size and shape of the pipe.

I would imagine that the only real way to settle this is an independent dyno on a stock vehicle which i havent seen for the accord yet. While I agree that there is a strong chance that this is a line of ****, I hate the fact that people on this board suddenly possess mechanical engineering degrees when a new piece of technology comes out that might appear ricey to them.

 

I know you weren't addressing me but I have an ME degree. So I also think AEM would not release a new version of an intake unless if it's significantly different.

And as we may all know, throttle body spacers and other contraptions (forced induction) that change the air flow and velocity will ultimately change the amount of air that goes into the combustion chamber.

 

Well guys, if you REALLY want to settle this...

I've got a bone stock ITR waiting for an intake. You come up with both AEM pieces, I'll let you dyno my car with them both. :thumbup:

 

Like TJ said, a pipe is a pipe. If you want to get elaborate, get one made out of carbon fiber, but that's as extensive as it goes. The air filter is more important.

 

That's not true, the pipe is equally as important.

 

Not really. The length of the pipe is, so is the diameter. But comparing them side to side with similar dimensions, nothing stands out.

 

AcuraFanatic, if you dont mind, would you elaborate on your qualifications to make that statement?

I'm not trying to be a dick here, but none of us have a dyno graph for one of these things sitting in front of us and I would like a more logical reasoning for why it WONT work as opposed to more one line posts.

As I'm sure showgunz can tell you, the shape of the pipe is very important. The most important part of an intake's effectiveness is air velocity into the throttle body. The velocity of the air into the throttle body is governed by the fluid system created by the intake pipes. If the fluid were an ideal noncompressible substance, the junction of the pipes of two different diameters would create a larger air velocity in the smaller pipe going into the throttle body. This can be shown with the fluid continuity equation

A1V1=A2V2 where A is the crosssectional area of the pipe and V is the velocity.

This of course is an oversimplification of the system involved. The real system involves compressible fluids which would involve subsystems and differential equations i am not qualified to evaluate.

My point is, it's ridiculous to dismiss the V2 as a gimmick unless 1. you are remotely qualified to do so (which I am not, as an EE/CSE major, I am merely speculating that this is possible) or 2. we get a dyno that shows this whole thing is ridiculous.

 

This has just been my limited experience. I'm probably wrong, I apologize. But theoretically, I just don't understand why the tube itself matters beyond the basic dimensions. It's just flowing air.

 

Not a clue here man, really this is all conjecture until we get a dyno. . .I'm electrical and computer systems engineering, not mechanical. You could get one of the members with a degree to do a fluid analysis of the system, but thats about the best you can get until there is a dyno.

I mentioned fluid dynamics as an explaination for the performance increase and on their webside they say they are using sound waves for better compression. . .its not a such a ridiculous idea, but we really need a dyno. . .

 

I don't think we'll have to wait too long to see a magazine publish tests and dyno runs to see if V2 is better than the original CAI and what not. And when people buy and dyno their own setups, we'll know for sure.

But you guys are forgetting that the V2 has two pipes in one intake: each with different diameter and length.

AEM's explanation:

Now I don't see how sound waves would change the amount of air that exits out of the intake pipe but for one thing, when you have the same frequency sound wave at a phase one-half period earlier, you'll get cancellation effects. Or at the right phase, an amplification effect. Or interference and etc. So the part about sound frequencies sound like a marketing blitz unless if these intakes are acoustically precise.

My guess on the intake design is that it pulls in a lot of air albeit at a slow speed (the Si intake diameter is a whopping 4") but then it effectively reflects air around to create a supercharger-like denser air flow when air exits out of the smaller pipe (probably 2.5"). Now you can't just create an intake pipe that has a big opening with a filter (4") and narrow it down to 2.5" at the other end and expect big gains. That could cause a bottleneck in flow. You might be losing power by doing that. So what AEM probably did was create either a swirl effect to charge more air in than just straight flow (like what the Tornado was supposed to do) or some other effect that flows the air out fast and dense. But I never was very good at fluid dynamics so this is just an educated guess.

In any case, it's not just another pipe into the throttle body. It now has two and charges the air more (ramming effect I guess) for more power. At least that's what AEM is saying on their web site.

P.S. I'm dying to hear how this intake would sound like. If the varying sound frequencies phenomenon is true, who knows what it could sound like.