Quote:

Originally Posted by RacinJasonWV

I’m confused about the green hose comment. I’m running the Eswift homebuilt intake tube. The green hose you’re speaking of is between the CCV tube and the turbo. That’s in the attic (it was also plugged years ago). There’s a photo of my setup way back on the 1st page I believe.

If you were running the piece of the OEM intake that previously had the green hose plugged into it, which is now plugged with a screw or whatever, you could install your port to the vacuum gauge there. So, think about riding in the back of a truck at 40 MPH standing up with your head just above the cab. Now, think about riding the back of a truck at 40 MPH standing up with your head just below the cab. There is definitely going to be a different level of force/vacuum applied to your face based on the location in relation to the air flow.

I was simply looking for a non-destructive way to move the vacuum gauge port into the intake tube that is not in the oddly shaped CCV port. I don't know if the odd shape of the CCV port has an effect on the vacuum gauge, but it was something that came into my mind when you mentioned it.

Your right, I was mixed up. It has been quite some time since the AIS was under the hood of my truck and I have had several cold beers since then... I get the apples to apples comparison, but if you are comparing rotten apples to rotten apples, then is that still a valid comparison? It might be, but I don't know.

Even in your own words you said "Have you ever stuck your hand in front of the snorkel with it just idling? I did in front of my loose IC port after some work. Man that thing pulls some air!" What that translates to me is that the vacuum gauge should be pulling more than 1 inHg, but again I could be wrong. Just a thought I had...

You are welcome sir, but you have done all of the hard work, I simply made a hyperlink to your thread. Solid enough data? You have readings, pictures, data, logs, etc... When I was making my "non-Stinky Spike" thread I accomplished and gathered exactly the same things you are doing now. It was a bit easier for me though because Tugly has already addressed all of the questions and theories and I simply readdressed them with conflicting data, screenshots, logs and videos.

Keep up the good work sir, we are very good about telling people what to do in their spare time as well as spending their money!

 

Yes, FM on 6637’s. How else do you know when to change it????

I’ve just guessed and likely over changed the filters on my truck for years. I prefer to change it when it needs it. I’m not cheap, I’m broke!!

 

SSJ

"A dirtier filter filters better", does not apply to air intake...?

 

Yes, it does!!!

In fact, increasingly better filtering right up to the point that there is no more airflow.

 

Im not worried about that in the least. Id probably be able to sell the S&B fairly easily if I ended up just buying the AIS and re-coup a good percentage of the $.
Wife has kind of gotten used to the noise climbing hills etc.
If i wasnt back to the grind with rediculously long work hours i would offer to test my ais on the 2003 andn the s&b on my 2001. My issue with 2001 is that it has a mystery tune in it.

Overall i just dont have the time right now, still have a back log of some things that need done

Thank you for sharing this and taking the time to make it all happen

I suffered thru cleaning the s&b on the 2001 recently so we should be good to go for awhile. I would buy a dry filter for it if they werent $70.

I cant bring myself to put a stock box on it, a friend of mine just bought a 2003 4 door that lived in nevada/ca most of its life from original owner. 120k. He invited me to come look it over on my way home one day. I pointed out it had been sucking dust, showed him in the tube and where one of the plastic latch tangs had crushed and was no longer holding tension. Along with a list of other things like oil in ipr etc.

Anyways, Thank you for this thread! awesome data

 

Yeah, no way I’d go back to the stock box. Mine was broke when I purchased the truck as well.

I can’t stand oiled filters. If I end up doing a S&B it will have the dry filter (even if we end up trading out).

Sometime we may need to have an offline discussion about noise levels of S&B vs AIS since you have both. I know I beat it to death on another thread a couple years ago.
Honestly though knowing how the 6637 flows it would be hard to justify a S&B since I’ve got the 6637 setup already.

It would be nice to know how the S&B compared vacuum wise. Too bad we’re too far apart as we could do temporary swaps.

As Sous mentioned earlier, it looks like I’m going to need to compare the FM port vacuum reading to my current location. Too much testing going on here to leave that loose thread.

 

For the record, the stock filter assembly flows and filters adequately for a stock or even tuned truck.

I have a truck here now for up-pipes and other work that appears to have a non-broken stock box. If it is intact, I will not recommend 6637 (which is a standard recommendation for me because 98% of the ones I see are broken).

 

LEt me know, I can pm you my #
I havent ran a 6637 in like 10 years other than on my C&C 97 but i hardly drive it as its still at my dads place, but i put alot of miles on one in the SRW 97 i had and a 2003 c&c.
I would rank from loudest to not - 6637, AFE ( i bought in 2002), s&b, stock/ais.

S&B is like a 6637 with a small muffler on it

Maybe ill get layed off or something soon, then i can test it out for everyone
I did something similar on my 89 f150 testing the egr valve operation

 

Not broken??? It’s just a matter of time.

 

There is that.... The monkeys at an oil change place broke mine for me. AFTER I specifically said not to duck with my air filter, transmission or differentials.

I made time to change my own oil after that. To hell with those RV Park ‘rules’ preventing such activities when I worked out of town!!! Fumoto drain valve FTW!

 

Finally got around to testing vacuum at the FM port location as we discussed a while back. It DOES make a difference.

Yesterday’s test was at the same location, 5:00pm, and 81*.

Currently still setup with the AIS.
Previous max vacuum in the CCV port was 2.0inHg.
Testing with gauge in the FM port showed a max of 1.0inHg.

The flow of air across the CCV port doubled the vacuum seen on the gauge.
@SkySkiJason this may indicate that your 6637 FM install in “like stock location” might be pulling the FM early. Maybe not really an issue though as the 6637 flows so well it’s probably time to change at that point anyhow.

I believe the current testing results to be “actual” vacuum seen at the filter and more accurate than reading in the air flow stream.

To add some more strangeness to the mix.... The vacuum at 20psi was the same 0.75inHg in both gauge locations. Is it just the higher flow levels that cause the deviation from FM port to CCV port? Does that mean the 1.0 difference between locations is only relevant above 30psi? How does this effect the 6637 testing results? With this logic the 6637 could be near zero vacuum at this high air flow if the port location is causing vacuum increase.

At 25psi FM position was 0.9inHg while CCV location read 1.0inHg.

With that said, I also feel the comparison between filters using the CCV port is still valid. The numbers are skewed from actual but the relationship between the 2 should be (mostly) an apples to apples comparison. It also makes the difference easier to see on my crude gauge setup.

In regards to SSJ’s experience with the extra vacuum pulling oil through the CCV, maybe testing at the CCV is the best place, at least if someone wants to run the CCV like stock.

So..... now we are at a true max vacuum of 1.0inHg at 32.5psi boost with the AIS. Back to the main question. How much is too much?



140HP tune with AIS, vacuum gauge in FM port. Max reading of 1.0inHg.

140HP tune with AIS, vacuum gauge in CCV port. Max vacuum 2.0inHg.


Snapshots of Lower boost levels:

FM location, 20psi, 0.75inHg


CCV location, 20psi, 0.75inHg



FM port location, AIS 25psi, 0.9inHg


CCV port location, 25psi, 1.0inHg


My current plan is to move the gauge back to the CCV port and leave it until I can tow. We already have towing results with the 6637 in this location. By using the CCV port it will be easier to get a second set of data to compare towing results.

As a side note EGT values seem consistent. This test ambient temp was very similar to the previous 6637 testing condition. The max EGT with 6637 =1202*, this test with AIS 1216*. Previous cooler outside temp testing with AIS was 1214*. Not much of a difference between all of these and the max EGT was very brief as it peaked and quickly came back down.

 

Ok, coffee still kicking in (moving slow this AM.., )

Sounds like stock FM location - like where I put it on 6637 installs - pulls similar vacuum on both filters, but there is an additional drop in pressure at the CCV port with AIS??

Ive got to read your post again later with a less foggy brain.

 

I think ‘too much’ vacuum could be quantified by EGT and boost.

If you put a bag over the filter, I’d expect MUCH lower pressure, less boost and higher EGT.

If Boost and EGT are acceptable with AIS, I’d be inclined to run it!!! Your results would explain why I was sucking oil out of the crankcase. I’m still confused why the vacuum there appears to change with different filters........

 

I’m still de-fogging my brain as well.

The stock FM location for the AIS (and I suspect the factory box) is out of the air flow path. So it will not be affected by air flowing past the FM. It should be only seeing true vacuum in its home location. By comparison your 6637 positioning is close in location but differs in the fact that it is in the air flow path. So it has air flying by that could create extra vacuum acting on the FM. I believe the shape of the CCV “hood” is designed to partially counteract this effect (as you also mentioned earlier). I’m picturing an even higher vacuum reading if the hood was missing. This of course is only speculation and I have no plans to cut mine off to test it! Lol

But in regards to that, the CSD intake tube does not have the hood and is only a welded pipe. So I wonder what type of numbers we would see if using this port?

I’m wondering about the wording here. A bag over the filter would make “lower” pressure which would mean higher vacuum readings. Does that make sense? If I covered the filter up then this vacuum gauge would peg out. So our goal is to have as close to zero as possible.

I think the change in vacuum at the CCV port is directly related to the restriction in the system. The AIS is more restrictive so the turbo is working harder to pull air through the tube.

Bottom line I think you are correct as was BWST in regards to what is acceptable.
If EGT is under control, and boost levels are reasonably the same then the AIS should work.

There is a drop of 2.5psi at the max boost in my hot tune. But this doesn’t really play into real world driving. When towing it was normally around 20psi with the 6637. If boost remains relatively the same under these conditions then I say it would be fine for me to run. This may change however if I run the CCV back to the intake as I originally planned. If it sucks oil then it’s a definite no go!

 

Yes, lower pressure IS higher vacuum in my description earlier. The bag increases vacuum and should peg the vacuum gauge.

That said, my theory is the ‘hood’ on the CCV increases the Bernoulli Effect and creates a higher vacuum than if the hood was not present. I don’t think that there will be a significant difference in my 6637 FM location and the stock air box/AIS location - because the Bernoulli Effect is not in play. The pressure (vacuum) should be the same everywhere else from the turbo to the air filter. But, it’s been a long time since I was in a physics class....

So, if vacuum is increased at the CCV using the AIS - that explains my oil consumption. But, leaves me confused about WHY the pressure is lower with AIS there but not in the FM location? Does the FM get pulled the same with both filters?

Long ago there was discussion about putting a similar ‘hood’ or angled tubing into the exhaust to create a vacuum for the CCV. Some people did this, but the images I remember did not look like they would work as intended and if they did - had the potential to create excessive vacuum at high Boost/RPM’s. There was absolutely no testing at all - unlike your extremely valuable contribution here!!

I think using the WG bleed ‘green hose’ location on the intake for AIS and 6637 to measure vacuum would even the playing field and provide the most comparable data since that spot is common to both filters.