Saab Link Forums banner
1 - 9 of 9 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
77 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Is it alright to put an intake made for Trionic T5 in a car with T7. Im wondering because i just put on the intake from taliafero saab on my car and i was wondering if it was alright
 

·
HNNLIC
Joined
·
4,209 Posts
Yes its totally fine. The important thing is to keep the MAP sensor. As long as you did this, then there's no problems.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,468 Posts
I should probably move this into the intake sticky (and I should probably say "hello" before doing anything else) but the whole intake dilemma has me pretty crazy, as I'm two days into an engine swap that will mate an 01 B205 engine (The H.O.T from the 9-3 SE) to a 97 SET body...

So....I was looking pretty hard at the stock intake and thinking, "The Swedes must have put those ridges and the drain hole in there for a reason..." When I removed mine, there was a lot of coarse sand and bits of dead leaves in there. The ridges trap the crap and keep it from traveling up into the lower pressure zone of the filter's fast-moving air stream. (As they say in Baaahston, that's wicked smaaart)

And looking harder at the whole deal, I saw that little port above the fog light essentialy acts like a ram air port for the (too small) stock air tube. The engineers knew they needed more air into the engine compartment, so those two little holes deflect the frontal air flow up into the cavity under the headlights. Very cool. This definitely seems like the best place to put an intake, except for the whole water issue...

A bad place would probably be low and close to the plastic underbody trim; not just because of the water issue, but because that area probably gets little direct airflow. Here's why, prefaced by saying I'm not an aerodynamics expert (I just play one on TV): The air directly under the bumper is still pretty turbulent and doesn't get the whole ram-air effect. It does, however, get all the road debris and general crap kicked up from the turbulent airflow. Even if it was clean, fast-moving air, it would might even have LOWER performance than stock because being just out of the fast-moving flow would likely place the filter in a zone of lower air pressure, making the engine suck harder to get anything through that straw...

I might be totally, horribly, absolutely wrong on this, but I'm guessing that the stock intake box, with a better filter and the 3'' mod, might be the best way to go....I wish I could do some scientific dyno tests, but the future beast isn't up to it yet!

I'll probably post some kind of an expanded engine removal and refitting sticky when this engine is in and my busted knuckles heal......
 

·
HNNLIC
Joined
·
4,209 Posts
Mike,

Welcome to the site 8)

About that hose with the ripples in it. Im almost certain that the ripples are used to quiet down the intake noise by disrupting the airflow. I too found sand and leaves in my air intake box, but only underneath (prior to) the filter. After the filter there should not be any debris at all, which makes me think your filter may not have been doing its job.

By removing this rippled pipe, I have noticed difference in both performance, and in noise. Of course performance was increase, however the intake became more noticeable from stock.

Considering most people are afraid of water getting into their intake, I decide to make a design that stays in the engine bay, but locates the filter directly behind the headlight right where the intake tube for the stock airbox was locataed. I found by doing this, the cold ram air effect is still used.

Soon, I will have a design made for the T7 setup that will incorporate the filter lower down in the bumper, but not low enough to possibly suck water in.

As far as the debris statement....this is all about a good filter. With a sealed system, and a good filter....sand leaves and other debris won't be an issue.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,468 Posts
Hey Cedric,

Just took a look at your free-flow mod and I see exactly what you're talking about. I think your method is definitely worth investigating. That rippled pipe I've got in the 97 engine definitely has to go, but I've got a T-7 engine so I'll have to keep the MAF. (edited to remove stupidity!)

Speaking of which, does anyone have a pic of their T-7 intake setup? I think the engine core I bought might be missing some bits....

...and those stock airbox ridges are actually under the filter intake pipe, where they looked like they were doing their job as crap-catchers in the pic below!

Thanks for the response...and thanks for creating an antidote to the Grumpy Old Man's site ("Hey you kids....get offa my lawn and don't talk about any other site or I'll ban ya!")
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
584 Posts
mike saunders said:
As they say in Baaahston, that's wicked smaaart
Wouldn't that be "wicked pissah smaaaaht? :D

I grew up with a Baahston accent so thick that they sent me to speech therapy in elementary school. ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,468 Posts
Ha!.....I have co-workers who have hard-core accents and it's a blast!

I've only lived in the Boston area for about 12 years, so I haven't started calling a milkshake a "frappe" or asked for "jimmies" on my soft-serve cone....
 

·
HNNLIC
Joined
·
4,209 Posts
Mike,

Ahh I see what ridges you were talking about. Yea i was talking about the ridges in the pipe leading to your turbo inlet.

So far, I don't know of anyone who has a T7 intake, however that should change soon (hopefully this week) ;) Theres a few people who are waiting for it.
 
1 - 9 of 9 Posts
Top