 VT cold pipes and how they compare

# VT cold pipes and how they compare

This is a discussion on VT cold pipes and how they compare within the Veloster Performance forums, part of the Veloster Turbo Garage category; Have not tested many of these yet but I will test more when I can get them in my hands. So far this is how ...

# Thread: VT cold pipes and how they compare

1. ## VT cold pipes and how they compare

Have not tested many of these yet but I will test more when I can get them in my hands. So far this is how they compare when flow tested on my rig: low numbers = bad, high numbers = good

Oem: 251 CFM
ORCP: 271 CFM
845 with FMIC kit: 276 CFM  Reply With Quote

2. So what exactly did you test this with, and at how many inches of vacuum?  Reply With Quote

3. My rig does not test based on vacuum but rather uses a given power to drive the compressor so can't be compared easily to other methods.  Reply With Quote

4.

5. What do you mean it cant be compared easily to other methods.???? You gave a CFM value that is the comparison. all I asked is how your arriving at this value. what equipment are you using to test this as the figures don't seem anywhere close to the figures we are getting on the flow meter.

Flow rate is measured by calculating an average velocity for the conduit of interest, and then, multiplying this velocity by the cross sectional area of the duct at the measurement location.

What are you using to measure the velocity or the air????  Reply With Quote

6. Originally Posted by Zapper What do you mean it cant be compared easily to other methods.???? You gave a CFM value that is the comparison. all I asked is how your arriving at this value. what equipment are you using to test this as the figures don't seem anywhere close to the figures we are getting on the flow meter.

Flow rate is measured by calculating an average velocity for the conduit of interest, and then, multiplying this velocity by the cross sectional area of the duct at the measurement location.

What are you using to measure the velocity or the air????
I'm using an anemometer to measure the CFM through the pipe.....
The reason I say you can't compare with other methods is that mine is flow at x power to drive the compressor vs other methods measuring flow at x pressure.

My rig should actually underestimate the differences in flow between comparible parts.....

What do you use and what have you tested and the results?  Reply With Quote

7. While my car is down, I should send you my cold pipe...But at the same time I don't want to pull it off lol  Reply With Quote

8. Originally Posted by trdtoy I'm using an anemometer to measure the CFM through the pipe.....
The reason I say you can't compare with other methods is that mine is flow at x power to drive the compressor vs other methods measuring flow at x pressure.

My rig should actually underestimate the differences in flow between comparible parts.....

What do you use and what have you tested and the results?
I use a proper flow bench the will flow test @ 28inchs of mercury on a 0"-3" orifice and test @ 25inchs of mercury on a 0"-4" orifice.
The software I use is Port Flow Analyzer V3 https://performancetrends.com/pfa.htm

As i said before your findings are very different from anything we have found.
Here are a few tubing findings to wrap your head around.
I have converted the the air speed into MPH to make it easier for the US guys to relate.
In future when you quote a CFM value you need to include @ what air speed or inches of vacuum or the measurement is as Vague and pointless as saying I have 19inch wheels that are this wide.

2" piping
1.57 x 2 = 3.14 sq in
300 cfm = 156 mph = 0.20 mach
400 cfm = 208 mph = 0.27 mach
500 cfm = 261 mph = 0.34 mach
585 cfm max = 304 mph = 0.40 mach

2.25" piping
3.9740625 sq in = 1.98703125 x 2
300 cfm = 123 mph = 0.16 mach
400 cfm = 164 mph = 0.21 mach
500 cfm = 205 mph = 0.26 mach
600 cfm = 247 mph = 0.32 mach
700 cfm = 288 mph = 0.37 mach
740 cfm max = 304 mph = 0.40 mach

2.5" piping
4.90625 sq in = 2.453125 x 2
300 cfm = 100 mph = 0.13 mach
400 cfm = 133 mph = 0.17 mach
500 cfm = 166 mph = 0.21 mach
600 cfm = 200 mph = 0.26 mach
700 cfm = 233 mph = 0.30 mach
800 cfm = 266 mph = 0.34 mach
900 cfm = 300 mph = 0.39 mach
913 cfm max = 304 mph = 0.40 mach

2.75" piping
5.9365625 sq in = 2.96828125 x 2
300 cfm = 82 mph = 0.10 mach
400 cfm = 110 mph = 0.14 mach
500 cfm = 137 mph = 0.17 mach
600 cfm = 165 mph = 0.21 mach
700 cfm = 192 mph = 0.25 mach
800 cfm = 220 mph = 0.28 mach
900 cfm = 248 mph = 0.32 mach
1000 cfm = 275 mph = 0.36 mach
1100 cfm max = 303 mph = 0.40 mach

3.0" piping
7.065 sq in = 3.5325 x 2
300 cfm = 69 mph = 0.09 mach
400 cfm = 92 mph = 0.12 mach
500 cfm = 115 mph = 0.15 mach
600 cfm = 138 mph = 0.18 mach
700 cfm = 162 mph = 0.21 mach
800 cfm = 185 mph = 0.24 mach
900 cfm = 208 mph = 0.27 mach
1000 cfm = 231 mph = 0.30 mach
1100 cfm = 254 cfm = 0.33 mach
1200 cfm = 277 mph = 0.36 mach
1300 cfm max= 301 mph = 0.39 mach

But it also depends on how smooth the piping is inside, bends and skin friction. this results (i would say) are the perfect piping conditions with a 600 grit laminar flow finish.

Zapp  Reply With Quote

9. Originally Posted by Zapper I use a proper flow bench the will flow test @ 28inchs of mercury on a 0"-3" orifice and test @ 25inchs of mercury on a 0"-4" orifice.
The software I use is Port Flow Analyzer V3 https://performancetrends.com/pfa.htm

As i said before your findings are very different from anything we have found.
Here are a few tubing findings to wrap your head around.
I have converted the the air speed into MPH to make it easier for the US guys to relate.
In future when you quote a CFM value you need to include @ what air speed or inches of vacuum or the measurement is as Vague and pointless as saying I have 19inch wheels that are this wide.

2" piping
1.57 x 2 = 3.14 sq in
300 cfm = 156 mph = 0.20 mach
400 cfm = 208 mph = 0.27 mach
500 cfm = 261 mph = 0.34 mach
585 cfm max = 304 mph = 0.40 mach

2.25" piping
3.9740625 sq in = 1.98703125 x 2
300 cfm = 123 mph = 0.16 mach
400 cfm = 164 mph = 0.21 mach
500 cfm = 205 mph = 0.26 mach
600 cfm = 247 mph = 0.32 mach
700 cfm = 288 mph = 0.37 mach
740 cfm max = 304 mph = 0.40 mach

2.5" piping
4.90625 sq in = 2.453125 x 2
300 cfm = 100 mph = 0.13 mach
400 cfm = 133 mph = 0.17 mach
500 cfm = 166 mph = 0.21 mach
600 cfm = 200 mph = 0.26 mach
700 cfm = 233 mph = 0.30 mach
800 cfm = 266 mph = 0.34 mach
900 cfm = 300 mph = 0.39 mach
913 cfm max = 304 mph = 0.40 mach

2.75" piping
5.9365625 sq in = 2.96828125 x 2
300 cfm = 82 mph = 0.10 mach
400 cfm = 110 mph = 0.14 mach
500 cfm = 137 mph = 0.17 mach
600 cfm = 165 mph = 0.21 mach
700 cfm = 192 mph = 0.25 mach
800 cfm = 220 mph = 0.28 mach
900 cfm = 248 mph = 0.32 mach
1000 cfm = 275 mph = 0.36 mach
1100 cfm max = 303 mph = 0.40 mach

3.0" piping
7.065 sq in = 3.5325 x 2
300 cfm = 69 mph = 0.09 mach
400 cfm = 92 mph = 0.12 mach
500 cfm = 115 mph = 0.15 mach
600 cfm = 138 mph = 0.18 mach
700 cfm = 162 mph = 0.21 mach
800 cfm = 185 mph = 0.24 mach
900 cfm = 208 mph = 0.27 mach
1000 cfm = 231 mph = 0.30 mach
1100 cfm = 254 cfm = 0.33 mach
1200 cfm = 277 mph = 0.36 mach
1300 cfm max= 301 mph = 0.39 mach

But it also depends on how smooth the piping is inside, bends and skin friction. this results (i would say) are the perfect piping conditions with a 600 grit laminar flow finish.

Zapp
Your testing rig is different than mine when finding flow as it is pressure based and mine is based on set power to turn the compressor.....
Also I'm testing actual VT parts and you seem to be stating flow for general pipe that has nothing to do with VT parts in any way.  Reply With Quote

10. I guess what I'm really saying here is you have no math or facts to back up your work. There is a word for that unfortunately it escapes me at the moment.  Reply With Quote

11. I dont know about rigs or how they work but I guess they are different rigs. It seems like he is unable to say at X speed but instead it would be at X power. So (insert item here) flows X CFM at X Power, whereas yours is (insert item here) flows X CFM @ X speed. (correct me if im wrong).

Zapper - Any way you can flow test some of the VT items that he has tested to see how they stack up compared to his findings? For actual VT Parts I think it would benefit the entire community which is what TRD is trying to do.  Reply With Quote

#### Posting Permissions

• You may not post new threads
• You may not post replies
• You may not post attachments
• You may not edit your posts
•
Find us on Google+

 Terms of Use
 Copyright
 Privacy Policy