have no idea

ok i know for this one i will get flamed big time but i can take. i want to know wat is the difference between a cold air intake system and an air intake system??? im ready for the flames

Cold air intake is when you turn your air conditoner around backwards and hook it up to your throttle body.

whoa!!!! I didnt know that, really. Learn something new everyday.

^^^^BAHAHAHAHA!

look, it says "gullible" on the wall over there...

:disappoin

Hey the new Lightning F150 uses the a/c to cool the intake charge, I think that will be better that an intercooler don't you think???????

ohhhhh

Hey the new Lightning F150 uses the a/c to cool the intake charge, I think that will be better that an intercooler don't you think???????



I don't think a conventional air conditioner could possibly supply enough cool air to feed a turboed or even NA engine when it's idling. I seriously doubt even the air conditioner in my house can push that much air (and it weighs at least 500 pounds)

Also cooling the incoming air with the AC is kind of moot because the engine is powering the AC, and thermodynamics insists that you would loose more power than you gain.

EDIT: Any way u need hot air to blow up easyer, cold air messes up ur enjine.

ohh ok so is there a difference?

oxygen is more dense in cool air than in hot air. More oxygen-better combustion. That is the entire idea behind nitrous oxide.

Cold Air Intakes Pull Air From An Isolated Part Of The Car While And Normal Intake Pulls Air From The Hot Engine Bay.

Ken2112, I don't know where you get you facts but they are dead wrong.
First and for most, the whole idea about thermodynamics and whatever else is that cold air is denser than hot air, and in turn carries more oxygen, that is why Ford is using the A/C to cool the incoming charge by lining the intake with a grill like radiator that passes cold free-on in the pipes that absorb heat before entering the intake manifold. That is the whole idea of intercoolers, or what did you think they are for? BEAUTY???? If that was the case, I would pump air from my engine bay into my intake and as an added effect, have heater coils in them, hot air burns easily, what were you doing during physics and chemistry?????
Secondly, I said "USE the a/c to COOL the air NOT SUPPLY it", two different statements. The Air compressor works off the drive belts, you so happened to be right on that one kudos for you. Using the A/C to cool the incoming charge has less robing effects (rather than trying to pump hot air into your engine), but was a briliant Idea, it has been on paper since the late 60s, intercoolers aren't that useful on cars that don't have a turbo or are NA, guess you going to tell me you saw a supercharged car with an intercooler now.
And thirdly the Ford Lightning is a Supercharged V8, where did you think I came up with the facts, in my sleep????? knowledge is power, read tech articles and Ye shall receive.
Lastly, since when did thermodynamics have anything to do with work?????? they specify heat loss and heat transfer, :banghead:
DAMN IT, get your facts straight next time, "hot air burns more easily, the hell are you talking about" :screwy:

thermal dynamics my ass

thermodynamics have plenty to do with work. the whole 2nd law of thermodynamics is the driving force behind the efficiency of engines, etc. energy is energy, whether its heat energy or work energy. a lot of the combusted mixture of fuel and air is lost thru heat energy, detracting from work energy and the overall efficiency of the engine.

however, what the intake does is more chemical than physical. it strives to bring in a richer concentration of O2 molecules, allowing more fuel to burn.

cold air intakes, as musicsurfman said, draw air that is away from the heated air around the engine, which is less dense than the air even a foot away from the engine. less dense equals less O2.

intercoolers aren't really meant to "absorb heat", sho411. they are actually meant to increase the efficiency of dispersing the excessive amount of heat generated from a turbo. i don't THINK they actually have too much to do with the actual O2 to fuel ratio in the engine. but...i'm human and i make mistakes. please correct me if i slipped up somewhere.

Intercoolers don't absorb heat, I never meant to say that, I put it in the same sentence as the Lightning intake which uses the free on to cool the surounding air, the heat is absorbed with this A/C grid pipes. Intercoolers Disipate heat much like a radiator does, I didn't get confused with absorb and disipate, those are two diff words. Supercharged cars can't have an intercooler (well technically they can but it is pointless in them), so that is why ford came up with a genius solution, and it works. And I liked it. It is Ken2112 who said:
"Also cooling the incoming air with the AC is kind of moot because the engine is powering the AC, and thermodynamics insists that you would loose more power than you gain." Does this make sense to you????

I understand the laws of thermal dynamics, a normal combustion engine uses 20% of energy from each gallon of gasoline, learnt that in school. the remaining 80% is lost through heat, drag, and resistance of the reciprocating mass. Thermal dynamics helps you see the amount of work lost through the amount of heat lost, but it is not used to describe work, eg the more you run the faster you breath, but fast breathing doesn't necesarily mean you are running, get it. We use T.Dyn to influence how an engine is designed and built for better effieciency, the less heat that is lost the more efficinet the engine, but that doesn't mean the more powerful the engine will be. It is too complicated for me to explain, it will take almost four pages so drop it.
I know the whole theory of cold air and its O2 content, read my post correctly, I was trying to tell that to the guy who said: (Ken2112)
"Any way u need hot air to blow up easyer, cold air messes up ur enjine."
Does that make sense to you?????????????????

I said the new system the lightning uses was state of the art, by using the A/C to cool the intake charge and thus making it more denser. Read the posts carefully, I was mocking him not agreeing with him!!!!!!!!!!!
You seem to know what you are saying but you don't seem to read carfully as to what I was saying, I was trying to correct the other guy, what you are telling me I already know. Inform Ken2112 he's the one with his facts twisted.

Intercoolers dissipate heat from the intake charge just like a radiator dissipates heat from the coolant in your engine. The heat created from the explosion inside the combustion chamber transfers to work. Heat and work are the same thing-energy. The things that rob energy are inertia and friction. Now the more energy we can create using cooler, more dense air and more fuel, the easier it is to overcome inertia and fricion.

Sho411: Congradulations! You have solved all the worlds energy problems! You've created a device which gives more energy than it uses! Wait no, You broke the law,

Thermodynamics; conservation of energy; Entorpy; Energy in a closed system must always Decrease.


Powering the AC with the engine can only result in less work
Using the AC to cool incoming air will also ONLY result in less work

Intercoolers work because they are "powered" by an source outside of the system, (the colder air outside the car)

For example if you try to cool incoming air with an AC at max power (sustained 60*F is a generous estimate) with say 20 liters of air/sec ( Another generous estimate) surrounding the intake pipe, you will only serve to decrease the incoming 100*F 600 liters air/sec by 1 or two degrees tops.

This will make almost no difference in power, however the said air conditioner that is powered in the closed system (the engine) will be consuming LOTS of power from the engine.

If the AC was 100% effecient (in this case I would estimate it's closer to 10% effecient) you would only BREAK EVEN, you would not gain ANY power, you would only increase weight.
You loose work, there is no way around it.


And uh, also you fail at sarcasim =(
"Any way u need hot air to blow up easyer, cold air messes up ur enjine."

EDIT: Oh yeah, pls read thermodyamics, you seem to have confused it with something else.

So then if that was the case how is it the stats on the prototype lightning stated that their new system gave a power boost of 10-25% (can't recall the exact #) but it was the main reason that the prototype put out around 450Hp, if it was robing the engine then there would be less power produced. Secondly, the A/C system already exists in the car, all they did was run aditional aluminum tubing into the manifold and there you go, the circulating free on absorbed most of the heat, and reduced the intake charge. Tell me I am imagining it all.
Hot air is less dense than cold air, and carries less O2, how is it going to burn better than colder air that has more oxygen? That I would like to know.
Secondly, like I said, we use thermal dynamics to find out the efficiency of an engine, true heat is a by product of work, but it is not used to measure work. I worked with an auto engineering grad, when he told me he had to learn about T-dynamics, I couldn't see the point. He explained to me as we are concerned with power auto makers are concerned about efficiency and there goes your whole theory. The less heat produced the more efficient the engine, which will give you added performance, but they don't use it to calculate the work the engine does, just the amount of energy lost and how efficiently it does it.
And since when did cold air damage your engine????

Heh,

You are confusing power and work. Using the AC to cool the intake WILL increase horse power output, HOWEVER that horse power does not go to the wheels, it goes to power the air conditioner, and on top of that, you lose even more energy through entorpy. ^^

More power is put out, LESS power goes to the wheels (and no matter how you cut it you will raise weight). And that means you have less work.

Furthermore, if the AC is taking extra heat off of the intake air, it won't be as cold when it comes out of the vent to blow in your face, To compensate you have to use a bigger AC that both weighs more and consumes more power.

Again the difference between this idea and an intercooler is that an intercooler is powered by the outside air flow, not your engine, thats why intercoolers work at all. You are trying to get energy from nothing, Ford cannot do that. =(

As to why ford would do that (and thats the first I've heard of it) the only reason I can think of is that they are trying to pull a fast one on consumers.

And a final note because you seemed to have missed it, the cold air line you quoted was sarcasm.

ok i sort of get it

Intercoolers work well for turbo cars, but it will be dumb putting one in a supercharged car. however, try telling the SVT crew then that they were stupid for trying that idea, and if they agree with you, you will have a written apology from me, till then I don't believe SVT (not Ford) are dumb enought to brag about something that is pointless and doesn't work. It was at the Auto show where they were showing the proto type F150 lightning, they said it had 500hp but the production model was going to be around 450hp. Any way, I'll go search for that system and put this once for all to rest.

Here are bits on the Article:-

Ford’s patented SuperCooler technology cleverly provides a special burst of power for the SVT Lightning concept. Traditional intercoolers dissipate heat from the supercharged air by circulating coolant through a front-mounted, air-cooled radiator. With the SuperCooler system, the vehicle’s air conditioning system is used to chill a small storage tank of coolant to about 30 degrees Fahrenheit.

On demand, the SuperCooler system switches the intercooler flow from its normal circulation and dumps the chilled coolant into the engine’s intercooler. In turn, the intercooler dissipates up to 20 percent more heat from the charge air – resulting in a denser air charge.

A green light on the instrument panel indicates the system’s readiness. SuperCooler is activated automatically when the driver depresses the accelerator to a wide-open-throttle position.

“This technology plays directly into the hands of the enthusiast,” Coletti says. “The SuperCooler provides the edge for the driver, and it is done simply by taking advantage of the hardware that already exists in the vehicle.”

As a result of this cool technology, the SVT Lighting concept can give its driver as much as 50 transient horsepower. The SuperCooler is completely self-contained, environmentally friendly and regenerative.


Well I was wrong in that it doesn't run into the manifold, it cools the coolant instead, but like I said it is a cool idea. The one they featured on speed channel was an old concept that would ran a grid of aluminum tubes right on top of your manifold, there might be some reason why no one picked this system up, but ford has basically used the same idea of using the A/C but just used it to cool the coolant. I think the older one sounded better than the SVT Super cooler, will have to try it one day. Also learnt something new, supercharged cars do run intercoolers, funny most guys at race shows tell me they are pointless on supercharged cars cuz the air is not as hot as the one off a turbo.
Now is this resolved??????????????

That sounds almost completely different, it says it is still using an intercooler, which uses entropy in a beneficial way. This is also not a continuous boost, that extra speed does not come for free:

Say it takes a minute to cool the coolant to 30*F, in that minute your car will be driving SLOWER and be consuming more gas.

Once the system is active, (and I can't imagine you getting more than 1/10th of the down time back) you get about 6 seconds of boosted performance, after that the coolant will have regained it's energy (heat) and you would once again lose performance as it recharges it.

Entropy being what it is, if you were to race this vehicle against another one with out the system, the one with out the system will win.
The one without the system active will not be suffering the penalties associated with the higher entropy (unless your AC is 100% efficient, which thermodynamics says is impossible.).

I think most air conditioners are in the vicinity of 10% efficient, if even that. That means you lose nine tenths of all the power that goes to the AC, you do temporarily raise the peak horsepower, but your net work goes down, so you still lose the race.

The only practical application for this would be if the AC was far larger than normal, and would reduce the coolant temp further, but most importantly, cool MORE coolant and supply that. This would either drasticly increase your weight (so I'm not sure if it's worth it) or would increase the charge time by a lot, Then you could just ride through the entire race on the boost. O_o

It would create more power for the general public that uses air conditioning all the time. In a sense, you could use the a/c and not lose a lot of power.

Hey, I can't remember what the exact figures were but for every __ amount reduction in intake temprature, you gain __ amount of power, most pple use an A/C during summer, if you used your A/C to cool the intake charge which will have a side effect of making your A/C blow a little less colder, but, the power increase will be higher. A normal A/C sucks an average of 10-15% (give or take) of power when on, but the cooler intake charge will prevent detonation, and thus you can turn the boost higher and make even more power than you lost, like the Aquamist system (although very $$$$$) will rob you of around 5Hp, but with it, you can turn boost up to 20% higher I think give or take a few. I still think it is a cool idea. I could deal with a little loss of air and a small powerloss if the gain is worth it. Remember one of the main restriction of boost in a well built engine is detonation, if you can control it, the possibilities are great. GT race cars run on two water pumps. I'll have to try that concept in the near future.