VT cold pipes and how they compare

Veloster Turbo Forum

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 ...

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 17
Like Tree15Likes

Thread: VT cold pipes and how they compare

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    This user has no status.
     
    trdtoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Member
    #5406
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    2,516

    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

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Better to be smarter than you
    look then look smarter than
    you are.
     
    Zapper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Member
    #4084
    Posts
    538
    So what exactly did you test this with, and at how many inches of vacuum?
    DenverVeeTee likes this.

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    This user has no status.
     
    trdtoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Member
    #5406
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    2,516
    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.

  4. Remove Advertisements
    VelosterTurbo.org
    Advertisements
     

  5. #4
    Senior Member
    Better to be smarter than you
    look then look smarter than
    you are.
     
    Zapper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Member
    #4084
    Posts
    538
    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????

  6. #5
    Senior Member
    This user has no status.
     
    trdtoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Member
    #5406
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    2,516
    Quote Originally Posted by Zapper View Post
    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?

  7. #6
    Senior Member
    Buy my love with corndogs
     
    Mr.MattyV's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Member
    #4113
    Location
    Fullerton, CA
    Posts
    2,949
    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

  8. #7
    Senior Member
    Better to be smarter than you
    look then look smarter than
    you are.
     
    Zapper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Member
    #4084
    Posts
    538
    Quote Originally Posted by trdtoy View Post
    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
    MrPalms likes this.

  9. #8
    Senior Member
    This user has no status.
     
    trdtoy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Member
    #5406
    Location
    North Carolina
    Posts
    2,516
    Quote Originally Posted by Zapper View Post
    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.

  10. #9
    Senior Member
    Better to be smarter than you
    look then look smarter than
    you are.
     
    Zapper's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Member
    #4084
    Posts
    538
    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.

  11. #10
    Senior Member
    This user has no status.
     
    Rmas101's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2016
    Member
    #8457
    Posts
    108
    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.
    Go Fast: 6EE CAI, Pierce HFC, MagnaFlow Catback, HF ORHP, ORCP, 60mm TB, 3TBS
    Twisties: Pierce Upper Rear Chassis Brace, Pierce torsion bar, Pierce strut bar, Pierce 2 point subframe brace, Rigid Collars
    Looks: NIA Eyebrows, 35% tint, Motegi SP10s, 35% smoked tails, neochrome fogs

    To come: 6EE Tune, Modded OEM IC w/ Shroud, Ark Springs, Shocks, 160Tstat, STI Lip

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Sponsored Links

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+