Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Velocity stacks, ram air and cowl induction.....

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    raleigh, nc, usa
    Posts
    5,252

    Default

    Carburetor section of the ITCS prohibits these, and (as we all know) requires the pick up of intake air within the engine bay or stock location. However, the ITCS ALSO says that all pipes, resonators, tubing, etc. forward of the carburetor (or AFM in an FI car) are free.

    Ram air and cowl induction I therefore see as being prohibited and consistent with the pick up in the engine bay/stock location rule.

    Velocity stacks? Why are they, or air horns, prohibited? Seems inconsistent with the "free ahead of the carb" rule? Anyone with "IT History" who can help me out with the thinking here?

    Full disclosure: Pegasus Racing catalog just showed up with "new" air horns for my carbs with claimed 6-8 hp increase. Sure would like those, and since I'm still picking up in a legal location, having a hard time seeing why something like this shouldn't be free as a pipe, resonator, tubing, etc.

    Thoughts? Is this a vestige of an old rule that should have been deletd once the intake track forward of the carb was freed up? Or is there a good reason for it?
    NC Region
    1980 ITS Triumph TR8

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    NNJR
    Posts
    514

    Default

    Actually in the Reciprocating Engines section.

    I agree with you, based on glossary terminology the specfic exclusion of ram and cowl induction remains internally consistent with the current language. The exclusion of velocity stacks is is internally inconsistent with the remainder of the rule and explanations that were given here - unfortunately the glossary terminology is sufficiently well presented to potentially enable someone to say the exclusion of a defined element negates the subsequent freedom to substitute.

    One of two things are needed, either the prohibition on velocity stacks needs to be moved to be an explicit exception to the freedom to substitute rule rather than implicit, or more approriately in line with the discussion regarding the change on these boards (i.e. attach any dang thing you please, in the engine compartment, without air metering modification) the velocity stack exclusion should be stricken.

    Send a letter to the CRB and ITAC.
    Ed.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    long valley, NJ
    Posts
    335

    Default

    check out the cast aluminum "sub stacks" from an MGB w/dual 1 1/2" SUs that was the base of the airfilter assy mtg. They're certainly not velocity stacks, but I'll guarantee you they'll have the same effect on airflow.
    (see David Vizards "How To Modify Your BMC A Series Engine) Al ittle work with a die grinder and some creative drilling to vent the lower piston chamber and they'd work fine. PS: IXNAY the grose jets.
    phil hunt

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Northeast
    Posts
    7,031

    Default

    Jeff,

    I understand your point. I think that what the rules makes want to prohibit is a 'air intake velocity accelerator' for lack of a better term.

    Velocity stacks are effectively forcing more are in the car than any 'open' filter would.
    Andy Bettencourt
    New England Region 188967

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Somewhere in NC
    Posts
    969

    Default

    I have seen a few cool z cars in the past with a nice airbox hiding velocity stacks...i wondered about them but began racing a FI car. Most of the intakes I see sold have a similar tapered orfice built in to them...what is the ruling on them? The one I run is a basic APC cheapie filter with no tapered stack inside...id love to run one if it is legal...
    Evan Darling
    ITR BMW 325is build started...
    SM (underfunded development program)
    SEDIV ITA Champion 2005
    sometimes racing or crewing Koni Sports Car Challenge

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    raleigh, nc, usa
    Posts
    5,252

    Default

    Thanks to everyone for the responses.

    Andy, understand your thinking. Counter-question (and hitting on what Evan said):

    1. Couldn't I modify my pipes/tubes/resonators to speed up air flow into the carb? When does this cross the line into illegally becoming an air horn/velocity stack? Seems we have a grey area here.

    2. What if I put a small high speed fan in the tubing -- not prohibited per se and arguably legal under the theory that anything in front of the carburetor is free?

    I probably will write to the CRB on this one. Evan, I too have seen "shaped" connectors between the carb and the filter that certainly looked like air horns. In fact, I think I have seen them on the Z car I own with Ron that we bought last year.....
    NC Region
    1980 ITS Triumph TR8

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Raleigh NC
    Posts
    3,682

    Default

    Thanks to everyone for the responses.

    2. What if I put a small high speed fan in the tubing -- not prohibited per se and arguably legal under the theory that anything in front of the carburetor is free?

    [/b]
    Yeah, a small high speed fan. That's it! A small high speed fan driven by, hmmmm, let's see, how could we drive it..........hmmm, I know, we could power it with an exhaust turbine! Yeah! Now, I wonder where we could get one.....hmmm, www.turbochargers.com maybe?

    I don't think that is going to fly bubba. Next thing you know you'll want to spray some "gas" in the intake as a free modification!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Black Rock, Ct
    Posts
    9,594

    Default

    Well, Jeff has hit, as you would expect a sharp eyed person of his background to, a pretty large contradiction in the rules, and I suspect that his idea of the velocity stacks being not considered when the "Anything goes up to the carb" rule was written, is likely the case.

    Interestingly, the SIR is pretty much the same thing! A device designe by CFD to flow the maximum amout of air through a certain defined opening at the limits of theoretical possibility.

    Jake Gulick


    CarriageHouse Motorsports
    for sale: 2003 Audi A4 Quattro, clean, serviced, dark green, auto, sunroof, tan leather with 75K miles.
    IT-7 #57 RX-7 race car
    Porsche 1973 911E street/fun car
    BMW 2003 M3 cab, sun car.
    GMC Sierra Tow Vehicle
    New England Region
    lateapex911(at)gmail(dot)com


  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Oregon City OR.
    Posts
    1,550

    Default

    Well, Jeff has hit, as you would expect a sharp eyed person of his background to, a pretty large contradiction in the rules, and I suspect that his idea of the velocity stacks being not considered when the "Anything goes up to the carb" rule was written, is likely the case.

    Interestingly, the SIR is pretty much the same thing! A device designe by CFD to flow the maximum amout of air through a certain defined opening at the limits of theoretical possibility.
    [/b]
    c. Air cleaner assemblies may be modified, removed or replaced.
    Velocity stacks, ram air or cowl induction are not permitted
    unless fitted as original equipment.
    Air intake source shall
    be within the confines of the engine compartment or stock
    location. Air intake hoses, tubes, pipes, resonators, intake
    mufflers, housings, etc., located ahead of the carburetor/
    throttle body may be removed or substituted. On cars so
    equipped, the air metering/measuring device (i.e. air flow
    meter, air mass meter, MAF) must be operational and shall
    not be modified.

    I think if you can't prove that they came from the factory with velocity stacks or cowl induction (zcars all did) then you may be stuck. No legal part can perform an illegal function. I would say that would include a free intake tube.
    GTL Nissan Sentra
    DP 240sx
    Vintage BS 510
    ITS 240z
    I just type like a pompous ass!
    http://www.saveclubracing.com

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Black Rock, Ct
    Posts
    9,594

    Default

    True, but it's a fine line between a smooth taper and a velocity stack, in certain theoretical cases, isn't it?
    Jake Gulick


    CarriageHouse Motorsports
    for sale: 2003 Audi A4 Quattro, clean, serviced, dark green, auto, sunroof, tan leather with 75K miles.
    IT-7 #57 RX-7 race car
    Porsche 1973 911E street/fun car
    BMW 2003 M3 cab, sun car.
    GMC Sierra Tow Vehicle
    New England Region
    lateapex911(at)gmail(dot)com


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    raleigh, nc, usa
    Posts
    5,252

    Default

    Jake, thanks -- you made my point in a much clearer fashion than I was. Why are air horns/velocity stacks illegal but a tapered tube running to the carb not illegal?

    I will do a letter to the CRB on this, especially since there seem to be gains for me here!
    NC Region
    1980 ITS Triumph TR8

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Oregon City OR.
    Posts
    1,550

    Default

    Jake, thanks -- you made my point in a much clearer fashion than I was. Why are air horns/velocity stacks illegal but a tapered tube running to the carb not illegal?

    I will do a letter to the CRB on this, especially since there seem to be gains for me here!
    [/b]

    Jeff, Rather than waste a letter. There are plenty of ways to get the HP yuour looking for without having to change the basic rules of IT.

    Jake, While I don't disagree if in a protest a reasonable arument can be made that the intent of the tube was to work as a velocity stack I think you loose. I really try to follow the book are close to what is written in these kinds of things.

    Back to the basic rule: no legal part shall perform an illegal function.
    GTL Nissan Sentra
    DP 240sx
    Vintage BS 510
    ITS 240z
    I just type like a pompous ass!
    http://www.saveclubracing.com

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •