Vented hood on the cheap
08-07-2013, 07:03 AM
#2
Nice, have you tracked with it yet? Have you noticed any lower temp readings? (Sorry, I have not read the article quite yet)
I made my own budget hood, using a hood I got for $85 and $25 marine louvers.
I made my own budget hood, using a hood I got for $85 and $25 marine louvers.
08-07-2013, 12:02 PM
#4
But as I like to say, something is better than nothing. And for whole cost of 'freebie' (not including the cost of the hood), it certainly doesn't hurt.
Did you read the article and check out the flows with the tufts?
08-07-2013, 12:30 PM
#5
I didn't read it before, but did after you recommended it.
I think it'll work, but the question is: "Does it work enough?"
I'd probably go with the standard vented hood mod and do some garage trim strips to help funnel and lift air out of the hole. I also think that you could get quite a bit of flow through the hood (even without louvers) if you diffuse the undertray. All the nose flow has to go somewhere.
I think it'll work, but the question is: "Does it work enough?"
I'd probably go with the standard vented hood mod and do some garage trim strips to help funnel and lift air out of the hole. I also think that you could get quite a bit of flow through the hood (even without louvers) if you diffuse the undertray. All the nose flow has to go somewhere.
08-07-2013, 08:18 PM
#7
If it doesn't actually wind up being better at venting heat than the traditional cut holes, then I wouldn't do it over the traditional cut holes.
They didn't test it back to back with the other "free mod."
Their model of lift and flow stick diagrams didn't account for the fact that air is being pushed into the engine bay from the nose and will want to escape out the hood holes. It's not just about the simple flow over the top. It's the extra contribution of flow from under.
Not to mention that cutting and retaining the under-hood fire mat is just ridiculous. You're trying to release heat from the engine bay and then you're going to basically keep the retaining blanket. Note that the CRs don't come with that mat in the first place. At least he realized (later) that his IR temp check of the hood with the insulation in place was completely flawed. He should be taking under hood temps, not hood temps. You want to know what the engine bay is feeling, not what the surface of the hood is feeling with a layer of insulation in between.
It's like a grade school science fair. Good idea, might actually work despite the flawed testing methodology, but does it have a point and could it be better at the same price or hassle point?
Trending Topics
08-07-2013, 09:36 PM
#8
If it doesn't do much or serve a functional purpose, I probably wouldn't spend the time and effort to hack a hood.
If it doesn't actually wind up being better at venting heat than the traditional cut holes, then I wouldn't do it over the traditional cut holes.
They didn't test it back to back with the other "free mod."
Their model of lift and flow stick diagrams didn't account for the fact that air is being pushed into the engine bay from the nose and will want to escape out the hood holes. It's not just about the simple flow over the top. It's the extra contribution of flow from under.
Not to mention that cutting and retaining the under-hood fire mat is just ridiculous. You're trying to release heat from the engine bay and then you're going to basically keep the retaining blanket. Note that the CRs don't come with that mat in the first place. At least he realized (later) that his IR temp check of the hood with the insulation in place was completely flawed. He should be taking under hood temps, not hood temps. You want to know what the engine bay is feeling, not what the surface of the hood is feeling with a layer of insulation in between.
It's like a grade school science fair. Good idea, might actually work despite the flawed testing methodology, but does it have a point and could it be better at the same price or hassle point?
If it doesn't actually wind up being better at venting heat than the traditional cut holes, then I wouldn't do it over the traditional cut holes.
They didn't test it back to back with the other "free mod."
Their model of lift and flow stick diagrams didn't account for the fact that air is being pushed into the engine bay from the nose and will want to escape out the hood holes. It's not just about the simple flow over the top. It's the extra contribution of flow from under.
Not to mention that cutting and retaining the under-hood fire mat is just ridiculous. You're trying to release heat from the engine bay and then you're going to basically keep the retaining blanket. Note that the CRs don't come with that mat in the first place. At least he realized (later) that his IR temp check of the hood with the insulation in place was completely flawed. He should be taking under hood temps, not hood temps. You want to know what the engine bay is feeling, not what the surface of the hood is feeling with a layer of insulation in between.
It's like a grade school science fair. Good idea, might actually work despite the flawed testing methodology, but does it have a point and could it be better at the same price or hassle point?
Examples:
Why is cutting only part of the insulation ridiculous? The goal of the vents is to extract AIR is it not? And by reducing the resistance of airflow out of the engine bay, that should increase the airflow through the radiator, correct? And based on a quick google search, the under hood insulation also serves to absorb noise and help in the case of a engine bay fire. CRs probably didn't come with them to cut weight at the cost of extra noise.
Based on the flow visualization with the tufts, it looks to work to me. If you have any doubt in the results, feel free to run your own experimentation and it'd be interesting to see how they line up with this.
