I think people run their engines up to the indicated 9500 RPM because they've seen this video too much LOL ....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=21HwiUsEmLU

Awesome video, and yet most of it is filled with the rev limiter buzzer...

 

it's an awesome video

 

except tha'ts a factory tachometer, which reads 500 rpm higher than actual

 

I keep seeing you post about this, what would this accomplish? The jet air flow path is weird coming off the accordion tube intake - that's vacuum isn't it?

 

Yes, but it's a direct, focused stream of air that will aid fuel atomization at small throttle angles where there is little intake air in a large volume

it's a fuel economy/emissions strategy, nothing more

 

Funny --i havent had any difference in low speed operation since i deleted mine?
If anyone is looking to maximize air flow in the lim--then removal of the jet air would something to consider.
And if yall think I am ****--you should see what i did to the VDI!!
Some more useless information
Today i got a oem scale maf reading of 334 grams/sec at 6989 rpm and 181.18 load with 9lb boost.
Thats with a stock header--no cat.
I'm happy , happy, happy.
OD

 

awesome!

Did Eric delete his in his quest for hidden power?

 

i believe he did. On his later cars. I could be wrong because if I am not mistaken no lim intake modifications where allowed. I told him to cheat He knows better

Its my understanding and I may be mistaken but the jet air only assits flow during idle and low rpm. Once the rpms are up it does nothing?
OD

 

Yes, again it is only a low engine speed economy/emission feature, but also again there's not really anything to gain performance wise by messing with it

so, you put a phenolic gasket between the engine and the LIM, but have no heat shield between the exhaust manifold and LIM? OK, then ......

 

Never played with it. I have always wondered if removal would just give air flow a tiny bit more cfm at higher rpms. I suspect it is so small and only two runners out of the total runners that it would be hard to measure.

The increased air flow at low(er) rpms to help atomize the wet injector squirts on the intake man wall makes sense. Smarter guys than me on this forum better equipped to talk about it.

No wait. Time for some fun. "I, state your name, have seen 42 hp increase with the removal of these two hollow hockey stick thingees. Therefore there is 21 hp per thingee and if you put 4 extra thingees on there and took them off you would have 21 x 6 or 126 additional hp!".

Time to go surf the "will if fit thread" and look for technical breakthroughs. Hope all is well everyone. Been busy building new cars and prepping for 2010 race season.

-E

 

And the direction of the air flow is...

 

I think yer being a bit optimistic there Eric. My tests have only shown an approximate gain of about 35hp with the removal of those jetty thingees.

 

In researching what it does...

Quote:

Improvement of the fuel flow rate and the exhaust gas emission at idling requires stable transportation of small amounts of injected fuel to spark plugs. We designed a jet air/fuel mixing system in a way that jet air was sprayed from a pipe (port air bleed) to the bottom face of the primary intake port (anti-wet port), which created an upward and accelerated air flow. The high velocity air stream prevents fuel from wetting the intake port wall and facilitates vaporization and mixing of the air and fuel. (See Fig.18)

I'm just confused on the direction - why is my brain not functioning?

 

On a slightly different note - I recently did a log to see what effect not having a check valve in jet air line (to stop back feeding into the intake) would have for a turbo setup . Made no difference whatsoever - figure that one out .....

 

The air in the jet air nozzles - looks like a push/pull setup. I have no lights on in my brain this week.

 

I have never seen it DO anything. has anyone else? I know what the manuals say....
Increased high speed flow with removal ----well it cant hurt.?
did I really need to grind down some of those internal casting marks inside the runners----well it cant hurt?
did i need to seal the vdi with jb wield and open that chamber up a little and put more overall smoothness in it-----well it cant hurt .
Wish I had a flow bench to play with. I am sure it does flow a little better. Its something to play with when you have the lim already off.
And just think of the weight savings!
I did lose one of those dang vacuum lines and it helped to clean it up some, so did the deleting of the vdi( my redline is now at 7.5K)
I can get to my fuel injectors a lot more easily now.
I have pics of my intake posted somewhere

 

and sense my idle is at 1100 rpm ----See my reasoning---i hope so my wife still cant
I was just sanding on the thing while we were watching "American Idol" last year--dont know why she didnt like that? Women.

 

Please people, do not remove the jets. Why risk your safety for a hundredth of a horsepower? FC's had a notorious problem of the fuel pulsation dampener membrane going bad, thus leaking fuel onto the intake manifold, which leaks onto the exhaust manifold, causing a fire.

Don't be another statistic for some stupid "modification".

 

it's all part of his master plan to throw everyone off track

 

Thread Titled "Help guys!"

I removed these jet things from my intake manifold and now there is fire coming from the lower engine bay!

Grreeeaaaaattttt idea.

 

RX8_DemonDevil48 told me that is why the fire comes out of the Greddy-Racing Beat Rising Sun super zoom tail pipe*

*Only approved for off-road use

 

Yeah, I dunno about the fire thing - its just a controlled vacuum leak.
I just don't see why you would remove it.

Its not a flow restriction in the non-imaginary, non-unicorn-infested world.

 

Come to Candy Mountain Charley!! Mmmmmmm Candy Mountain!

 

Except on my new oil filler neck, Mazda moved the air source from the accordion tube, which was metered, to the oil filler neck above the block. How is that metered?

 

I think that is just crankcase ventilation not jet air - not sure ...........