opinions of AEM V1 vs V2
05-20-2004, 04:49 PM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: South
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
opinions of AEM V1 vs V2
has anyone changed over from a AEM V1 to an AEM V2, and if so did you notice an improvement? I was looking at the comparison on AEMs site, and it looks like it makes improvements in some areas and losses in others....which one is better?
Opinons??????????????
Opinons??????????????
05-20-2004, 08:30 PM
#3
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Land of the landeaus
Posts: 2,956
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not many folks have switched from the V1 to V2 since the difference between the intakes really can only be measured by either a dyno, stopwatch or accelerometer. The V2 (based on general dynos done by AEM on various cars) appears to consistently provide a wider range of additional torque due to the increase in pipe diameter which relates to their manipulation of the intake resonance. The V1 has a 3-inch diameter tube and the
V2 has a 3.5-inch tube. Several dynos (both from AEM and independent tuners) have shown the V2 to either match or exceed the horsepower/torque of the V1 on the same car (same day, etc) but if you look at the dyno graphs (from what I've seen) the V2's power/torque increases come on sooner and maintain their consistency straight to redline.
I think AEM (if you get past their PR department) have actually improved on an otherwise great product. There is a science behind their enlarged chamber (just ask Comptech) and to understand how it relates to intakes, you must be willing to accept the thought that SOUND waves (and their manipulation) have much to do with the quality of intake design. It's just not where the filter is located, what kind of box it might sit in, how much carbon fiber is wrapped around it or how low the pleats sit from the engine bay. I think AEM is the leading intake manufacturer for the import community for a reason. They make a quality product.
V2 has a 3.5-inch tube. Several dynos (both from AEM and independent tuners) have shown the V2 to either match or exceed the horsepower/torque of the V1 on the same car (same day, etc) but if you look at the dyno graphs (from what I've seen) the V2's power/torque increases come on sooner and maintain their consistency straight to redline.
I think AEM (if you get past their PR department) have actually improved on an otherwise great product. There is a science behind their enlarged chamber (just ask Comptech) and to understand how it relates to intakes, you must be willing to accept the thought that SOUND waves (and their manipulation) have much to do with the quality of intake design. It's just not where the filter is located, what kind of box it might sit in, how much carbon fiber is wrapped around it or how low the pleats sit from the engine bay. I think AEM is the leading intake manufacturer for the import community for a reason. They make a quality product.
05-21-2004, 12:26 PM
#5
Registered User
UL did the V2 - read what he has posted, and also check Temple of VTEC.
I think Russ' post was high quality stuff. Thoughtful and accurate. The intake has to be looked as the closed-loop system it is - and AEM has had plenty of time to refine its basic design, which doesn't change much.
I think Russ' post was high quality stuff. Thoughtful and accurate. The intake has to be looked as the closed-loop system it is - and AEM has had plenty of time to refine its basic design, which doesn't change much.
05-26-2004, 03:28 PM
#7
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Close to the Dragon
Posts: 956
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I went from V1 to V2 simply because I bought one used and I wanted a new one that would look better in my engine bay. I don't know numbers and such but I can tell you what I felt and how it sounded. As far as feeling it come on a little lower I can't necessarily say but the V1 had more kick at V-tec but the V2 had a more transitional feel that you could still feel V-tec but not as hard because I guess that the V1 didn't have that much down low. Also the V1 is just a hair louder than the V2. These 2 reasons is simply just because of bigger piping. These are just my opinion though. The only other person that I know that has done this is s2kjones but he didn't go from 1 to the other like I did. He took his off about 2 months before I bought his and put on a V2 but he said the same things that I said. Overall I am happy with the V2.
Trending Topics
05-26-2004, 05:03 PM
#8
Registered User
The total pressure drop through the intake runners is the sum total of the dp thru the filter, the turns that the runner makes, the throttle, and the turns into the individual runners. The traditional way of describing the dp across each individual piece is to sum the resistance values (K values) for each piece and add in a piping loss factor. The fun part is that with compressible fluids, the velocity increases as the pressure drops.
When one hones the intake, all one is doing is reducing the K factor for that individual pipe and restriction.
The "bulge" in the V2 and Comptech servs to change the frequency of the air pressure waves... tuning (a Helmhotz gnerator).
A better and more thorough explanation can be found on the "physics behind intakes" thread.
When one hones the intake, all one is doing is reducing the K factor for that individual pipe and restriction.
The "bulge" in the V2 and Comptech servs to change the frequency of the air pressure waves... tuning (a Helmhotz gnerator).
A better and more thorough explanation can be found on the "physics behind intakes" thread.
05-26-2004, 07:09 PM
#9
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Close to the Dragon
Posts: 956
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE]Originally posted by tenblade2001
The total pressure drop through the intake runners is the sum total of the dp thru the filter, the turns that the runner makes, the throttle, and the turns into the individual runners. The traditional way of describing the dp across each individual piece is to sum the resistance values (K values) for each piece and add in a piping loss factor. The fun part is that with compressible fluids, the velocity increases as the pressure drops.
The total pressure drop through the intake runners is the sum total of the dp thru the filter, the turns that the runner makes, the throttle, and the turns into the individual runners. The traditional way of describing the dp across each individual piece is to sum the resistance values (K values) for each piece and add in a piping loss factor. The fun part is that with compressible fluids, the velocity increases as the pressure drops.
