Banks Ram Air CAI

[soulezoo]

I put a Banks Power sticker on my tailgate. It gave me roughly 100 hp and 3 mpg.

 

[HeavyAssault]

A turbo compensates for warmer air temperatures by using an intercooler to cool the compressed air, so the engine gets denser (more oxygen rich) air even when ambient temperatures rise, thus maintaining power output.

A turbo is stupid. It doesn't know if there is a intercooler in-line or not. So a turbo can't possibly "compensate for warmer air...". All a turbo knows it input and output. For these VGT's they are told open/close the vanes this much....so they do as they are told. Nothing more, nothing less.

I say we all pitch in for the @HeavyAssault Banks CAI fund…

That would be a waste of money.

Here's the temps sitting in a parking lot after a little town driving.
OMG...I'm loosing SO MUCH HP/TQ when in Park.

Motor running in the parking lot. Jump onto service road, onto HWY. Up to 60+MPH at first, then speeds up to 73+MPH. All told 5 minutes showing how temps drop back down. Truck holding 5 PSI boost shows how much these turbos SUCK.

 

[Explorerinil]

I have a banks CAI, I bought it to get more sound out of the engine. Sounds much better to be with the exhaust brake on. Probably will make a larger difference in sound once and if my truck goes on a weight loss diet. I also think it looks great.

 

[Whaler27]

A turbo is stupid. It doesn't know if there is a intercooler in-line or not. So a turbo can't possibly "compensate for warmer air...". All a turbo knows it input and output. For these VGT's they are told open/close the vanes this much....so they do as they are told. Nothing more, nothing less.



That would be a waste of money.

Here's the temps sitting in a parking lot after a little town driving.
OMG...I'm loosing SO MUCH HP/TQ when in Park.
View attachment 198624

Motor running in the parking lot. Jump onto service road, onto HWY. Up to 60+MPH at first, then speeds up to 73+MPH. All told 5 minutes showing how temps drop back down. Truck holding 5 PSI boost shows how much these turbos SUCK.

Turbos are dumb, but the ECUs processing all the sensor data and telling the turbo what to do are not.

ECU directing turbo to increase boost when hot or “high”

 

[Whaler27]

Garret explains how dumb turbos adjust to altitude-caused air density reduction

 

[JTredway]

Chinese teriyaki tornado go tsuu tsuu tsuu

 

[HeavyAssault]

Turbos are dumb, but the ECUs processing all the sensor data and telling the turbo what to do are not.

ECU directing turbo to increase boost when hot or “high”

Garret explains how dumb turbos adjust to altitude-caused air density reduction

So NOW you are talking about the ECU controlling things.....before you said :

A turbo compensates for warmer air temperatures by using an intercooler to cool the compressed air, so the engine gets denser (more oxygen rich) air even when ambient temperatures rise, thus maintaining power output.

Which is it??? It's a rhetorical question

Turbos don't KNOW what to do until they are told and that's IF they are able to be controlled.

 

[Whaler27]

So NOW you are talking about the ECU controlling things.....before you said :





Which is it??? It's a rhetorical question

Turbos don't KNOW what to do until they are told and that's IF they are able to be controlled.

You have to reread my post. The turbos build the pressure which compensates for loss in air density.

I don’t think anybody thought I was suggesting that the turbo itself somehow decided how much pressure compensation was required.

You should have included this part of the same post:

“In some vehicles the computer will adjust fuel injection timing and boost pressure to maintain target performance parameters with increasing ambient air pressure and altitude. This is the way the Audi systems worked several years back — so the fueling and boost mapping adjusted to keep performance steady, whether it was 40 degrees at sea level or 90 degrees at 4000 feet.”

 

[HeavyAssault]

You said :

A turbo compensates for warmer air temperatures by using an intercooler to cool the compressed air, so the engine gets denser (more oxygen rich) air even when ambient temperatures rise, thus maintaining power output.

Now you are speaking about air density......

I simply said turbos KNOW NOTHING of an intercooler. You keep trying to make a point while imparting more and more additional details that do not support your comment :

A turbo compensates for warmer air temperatures by using an intercooler .....

 

[Whaler27]

You said :


Now you are speaking about air density......
I simply said turbos KNOW NOTHING of an intercooler. You keep trying to make a point while imparting more and more additional details that do not support your point

… and you keep taking partial quotes out of the context provided by the rest of the post they’re pulled from and the others preceding it!

Sheesh… What if I said, “A jackhammer helps us compensate for the harder-than-expected rock we’re digging through.” Would you say, “ A jackhammer knows nothing!!!,”? Obviously, the jackhammer is being directed by its operator, just as a turbo is being directed by its ECU.

At this point any misunderstanding must be intentional on your part, and I feel silly for taking the bait, but there might be somebody who stumbles on this thread and doesn’t know you’re kidding, including some of the folks spending money on cold air intakes to improve performance on engines with turbos, so…

It’s always been “about air density”, which translates to more or less oxygen per volume, which, assuming sufficient fuel, translates to better or poorer engine performance. That’s true whether the initial lower air density is caused by increased altitude or increased air temperature.

Assuming there’s ample fuel to combust, engine performance can be improved by feeding an engine denser air, however that greater density is achieved. That’s the whole argument for cold air intake products (and turbos). The point that you’re pretending to miss is that 1) the ECU can react to sensor data and direct turbo boost required to increase air density to the program target corresponding to fueling rate, and 2) the air density increase created by the combination of intercooler and turbo is a multiple of the small density increase achieved by collecting slightly cooler air from outside the engine compartment.

IF the ECU functions like the Audi system referenced (linked) earlier, cooler ambient air would result in slightly lower boost being required to reach the air density target, but it wouldn’t effect engine performance unless the boost required to reach the required density was above the maximum boost parameters in the program - which is unlikely. (As I said earlier, I don’t know if the new powerstrokes do this to the same extent as the Audis.)

Okay, I’m out. No more taking fool’s-bait on this topic. I’m off to take the bait on the next topic.

 

[HeavyAssault]

and I feel silly for taking the bait,

A fool and his money are soon parted.....Just as Gale Banks wants, but argue all you want about your posts. You make comments without context. You discuss other vehicles showing you know nothing about the vehicles we are driving right now which are Super Duty trucks.
You clearly made a comment to which you JUST NOW have to clarify with info I already know. So you THINK you are teaching me something, all the while just proving you were WAY off topic. So thanks for proving I was right the whole time. As to your initial statement a turbo is only PART of the system, a system controlled by the PCM. Turbos are dumb, they know nothing of ANY OTHER components in the system. The PCM runs the show.

Thanks for playing. Quitters never win.

 

[HolyCrapItsFunk]

Also Gale Banks;

 

[trmrzla]

Also Gale Banks;
View attachment 198897

Will flex seal make my turbo smart?? Adding to cart...

 

[Whaler27]

Well, the quitter remark was my achilles heel. I’ve never quit anything in my life, so I’m back in — at least until somebody else wants to relieve me.

A fool and his money are soon parted.....Just as Gale Banks wants,

We agree here. This is a truth Gale Banks relies upon.

You make comments without context. You discuss other vehicles showing you know nothing about the vehicles we are driving right now which are Super Duty trucks.

Actually, I don’t. I cite general principles which apply to all, then provide examples that are well documented, and then note when I am unsure whether the Super Duty PCM-Turbo-fueling operated in exactly the same way as other PCM/ECM/ECU-Turbo systems. That doesn’t show I know “nothing” about Super Duty trucks. It shows I don't know everything about them, I’m quick to admit the limits of my understanding, and I’m willing to learn from others. I admitted that I have been unable to find similar detail on the computer-control relationship in the new Powerstrokes. This was your chance to show me how the PCM-turbo-fuelling relationship works in Super Duties. Did you explain it? Nope. Any useful information in your response? Nope. Just persistent efforts to muddy the water and suggest I was making claims I clearly wasn’t making.

Although I haven’t been able to find whether the Super Duty PCM compensates to the same extent as the Audi in the examples provided, that Audi system is now fairly old technology, and I can’t imagine a more sensible way to move forward, so I’d guess they’re similar — but if you know the details on how the Powerstroke brain and turbo respond to variance in ambient temperature and altitude/density please share it here. I’d be happy to learn.

You clearly made a comment to which you JUST NOW have to clarify with info I already know.

I suspect nobody else on the board managed to misunderstand my remark you called out concerning the effect of the turbo, particularly if they read my posts that preceded it. You alone imagined that I was saying that a turbo “thinks”, as opposed to doing what it is directed to do by the truck’s “brain”. I subsequently tried to provide a remedial explanation for you. That’s why I assumed you were kidding/chiding/baiting me. I still suspect you are.

So you THINK you are teaching me something,

I never suspected I was actually teaching you anything. I suspect you’re probably just goading me into going on and on about something every reader including yourself understood pages ago (or before starting into this thread). The only other possibility is you’re too dumb to follow along, and based on your many other intelligent contributions I believe that’s not the case.

all the while just proving you were WAY off topic.

None of the discussion of the air-temperature-density-turbo effect is “off topic”. Discussing the basic principles and analogs is a common way of clarifying relevant principles. If we were only talking about folks who buy the air filter and CAI kits because they like the looks or the sound (which is true of some folks) we wouldn’t be having this discussion, but some folks actually believe they are adding power. Others believe they are adding power AND improving fuel economy — because those were among the claims made by early filter-replacement manufacturers like K&N. My discussion has been responsive to that — explaining why, although we have all been told to expect power improvement, we should expect to measure none when we actually test our trucks before and after at the drag strip (or wherever/however).

So thanks for proving I was right the whole time.

If you were right about something I’ve missed it. Here’s another invitation for you to explain how our Powerstrokes interpret and respond (or don’t) to the density-changing influences of ambient air pressure and temperature. Are they similar to the Audi example or not?

As to your initial statement a turbo is only PART of the system, a system controlled by the PCM.

This was never in dispute, obviously, as I’ve explained repeatedly. Nothing in the system is acting independently of every other part, and nobody else thought I was saying the turbo made its own decisions on how much boost it would generate. Sheesh.

Thanks for playing. Quitters never win.

Here we agree 100%. It’s a basic life truth.

 

[Lunch Box]

Also Gale Banks;
View attachment 198897

 

[HeavyAssault]

@Whaler27 : Once a quitter always a quitter. You can't unring the bell. Nice effort, but falling short again.

 

[CaseyJ]

To add to this, all I’ll say is if people were into building diesels around the 08 mark ish I’m bad with time he pulled some shady ass shit crying to the government (while HE bad contracts with the government) and threw a pile of tuners under the buss and got them run out of business, I for one will never forgive this

Pretty sure that was ATS. The letter they sent to the EPA got leaked too.

 

[Cux211]

Pretty sure that was ATS. The letter they sent to the EPA got leaked too.

Oh no no no 1000% positive

 

[CaseyJ]

Oh no no no 1000% positive

EPA Letter From ATS

I dont know how closely you guys follow other forums or not but this has been circling around a few of them and thought I would share the info with fellow diesel investors. Now just a disclaimer, as far as I know no one has been able to verify this letter yet but it all makes to much sence for...

www.powerstroke.org

Obviously all the links to the original letter are broken, as is the files that ATS had on their own website.

Basically the gist of it is ATS was trying to develop a high flow DPF to sell to consumers and wanted the EPA to go after the tuners making delete files and specifically H&S performance was called out as was their parent company. All so they could make money on something the EPA wasn’t about to approve anyways.
This is the reason I’ll never own anything ATS nor will I recommend the to anyone. I used to have a diesel performance shop in my garage when I was in the military. I stopped the whole thing when all the fines started flying, and yes ATS is the ones who got the ball rolling. The letter used to be posted on the competitiondiesel website for all to see.

 

[Cux211]

EPA Letter From ATS

I dont know how closely you guys follow other forums or not but this has been circling around a few of them and thought I would share the info with fellow diesel investors. Now just a disclaimer, as far as I know no one has been able to verify this letter yet but it all makes to much sence for...

www.powerstroke.org

Obviously all the links to the original letter are broken, as is the files that ATS had on their own website.

Basically the gist of it is ATS was trying to develop a high flow DPF to sell to consumers and wanted the EPA to go after the tuners making delete files and specifically H&S performance was called out as was their parent company. All so they could make money on something the EPA wasn’t about to approve anyways.
This is the reason I’ll never own anything ATS nor will I recommend the to anyone. I used to have a diesel performance shop in my garage when I was in the military. I stopped the whole thing when all the fines started flying, and yes ATS is the ones who got the ball rolling. The letter used to be posted on the competitiondiesel website for all to see.

This is not at all what I’m talking about, that bs that went on with banks was well before this in the early days of efi live in the era of Idaho Rob which was one of the first dmax custom tune writers and helped me immensely with my first LBZ build