FWI installed

Ok, are you guys enlarging the fenderwell hole enough to fit the FILTER thru? Or just enough to get the 4" elbow thru? I would think the filter could be installed/accessed by pulling the fenderwell "shield" fasteners and pulling the shield back to gain access, with the tire pulled first, I suppose.

BTW, the 60deg elbow was only available in FxF so couldn't use it. I could probably pick one up from one of my vendors, but that's too much work...

1998 Riv wrote:

Or just enough to get the 4" elbow thru? I would think the filter could be installed/accessed by pulling the fenderwell "shield" fasteners and pulling the shield back to gain access, with the tire pulled first, I suppose.

You are correct. I believe, I'm the only one that can actually remove my filter from the top. Everone else is through the FW.

soon as i get mine finished i have a little treat for yall to see >: )

hurry man I wanna see!

jax95riv wrote:

1998 Riv wrote:

Or just enough to get the 4" elbow thru? I would think the filter could be installed/accessed by pulling the fenderwell "shield" fasteners and pulling the shield back to gain access, with the tire pulled first, I suppose.

You are correct. I believe, I'm the only one that can actually remove my filter from the top. Everone else is through the FW.

It would really be cool to enlarge it enough for the filter to easily fit thru, then add a sheet metal cover to go over it and screw down, that would have only a 4" hole for the elbow to fit thru. Now THAT would look clean.

1998 Riv wrote:

Ok, are you guys enlarging the fenderwell hole enough to fit the FILTER thru? Or just enough to get the 4" elbow thru? I would think the filter could be installed/accessed by pulling the fenderwell "shield" fasteners and pulling the shield back to gain access, with the tire pulled first, I suppose.

BTW, the 60deg elbow was only available in FxF so couldn't use it. I could probably pick one up from one of my vendors, but that's too much work...

I just enlarged it enough for the pipe (3.5 not 4). I have a 8" Round filter not that cone one. Just stuffed it in there but I had to take the bracket off for the bumper. I didn't take the horn out though.

You also don't need to take the tire off just cut it all the way to the left and you should be able to get in there fine. Once the fender lining is off you can put the filter in easy from bottom. But obviously it will make it easier if you take the tire off too.

ok now we pretty much have the final product

thats my solution to the minor horn problem. i never use it anyway

if any car manufacturers made intakes like this, i'd say it looks stock

6x6 filter

and BOOM the "VAJ RUMBLER intake systems"

where did you all move your horns to?

Try your horn... bet it still works.

well i know i got the other which is why i wasn't really too concerned about keeping this one on at all. ahh i love GM. they're so smart, they give you extra horns for when you screw with it

Any of you guys removing your MAF screen too? Took mine out today to have a better look at it, and I would think it is restrictive, so I left it off for now. I finally ordered a K&N cone filter yesterday, kind of hoping it will show up tomorrow, thinking about getting the 4" FWI installed before hitting the track on Sat.

The screen is there to smooth out the air flow, enabling a better read for the MAF sensor. It's supposed to help with smoother idle. For all-out performance, it makes sense to remove it. Let us know if you experience any problems.

Just remembered, I thought I read somewhere in this thread that someone was using a 90 deg bend. Is this right? If so, I have a bad feeling about doing that.

AA wrote:

The screen is there to smooth out the air flow, enabling a better read for the MAF sensor. It's supposed to help with smoother idle. For all-out performance, it makes sense to remove it. Let us know if you experience any problems.

Just remembered, I thought I read somewhere in this thread that someone was using a 90 deg bend. Is this right? If so, I have a bad feeling about doing that.

I thought everyone was using a 90deg elbow to go down into the FW opening? No?

No idle or running issues coming back to work after the screen removal, no codes. Did some reading on this on Regalgs, and the benefit seems would be only at WOT, which I will be doing on Saturday.

quote; "and the benefit seems would be only at WOT,"

That goes for 90% of the mods we do to these cars, lol.

My FWI uses only 45º elbows and straights.

It's a 90 off the filter, to a 45, straight pipe, 45, then 4" to 3" reducer if memory serves.

90º bends are bad news. I hadn't noticed all this time because it's hidden in most of the photos.

Does your filter point straight down?

Nope, it's at a slight angle. My horn was removed:

Mine is about the same as Aaron's too.

I hadn't thought of using a 45 into the filter, but that shouldn't be any problem at all to do. I'll be taking my 90 back and swapping for a 45. Looks like my filter won't be here until Friday, so I won't have time to get the FWI done for Sat a.m. I ordered from Summit Racing's Pro Shop... Nice discount, but the $9.95 handling fee sucks.

After spending some time reading up some more on FWI's, I think I'll be taking my 4" stuff back to Home Depot and replace with 3" pieces. It sounds like a 3" intake is not restrictive until you get down to maybe a 3.0 pulley setup. I know I will NOT go further than a 3.4 in my daily driver. Plus I can avoid enlarging the FW hole. I already have a 4" flange K&N showing up tomorrow, will have to see if I can efficiently transition it to 3" fittings.

Imo, I think 3" is a bit too small, Dave. Is 3.5" pipe avail? ZZP did some flow tests a while ago. Results were interesting:

4" dia pipe x 26" long = 220 CFM
4" dia pipe x 26" long w/90º bend = 183 CFM
4" dia pipe x 9" long + K&N = 227 CFM
3.5" diam pipe x 7" long + K&N = 181 CFM

It shows how important intake diameter is, and how bad 90º bends are. 3" could be too restrictive, especially when you add the bends and length of a FWI.

Leave the screen in, you won't notice any difference in power. You probably won't get accurate MAF readings. If you have an option on not using a 90 degree bend, go with that route instead. If you are happy with the way it is with the 90 and you don't plan on modding very far, then just leave it alone. If you are looking for every little bit of hp, then change to a 45 or just go with a CAI. If you seal it and insulate it, it will stay around the same temperature as the FWI would get. Don't go 3 inch for the pipe. That would be smaller than the opening diamater on the throttle body. It is interesting to see that other people are finally changing out their intakes.

I already put the maf screen back in. Wouldn't make enough diff to be worth the potential issues with erratic sensor readings.

I did pick up 3" parts at noon today also, but did not yet return the 4" stuff. 98Riv, are you sure the TB opening isn't 3"? I have a 3" rubber coupling that very easily fits over the TB intake. Now I didn't measure the TB opening, but there is a significant raised rib on the outside of the TB intake, but my 3" coupling fits on it quite easily. It's a nice snug fit. Have you guys measured the ID of the TB opening? I test fit the rubber coupling and a 3" 45deg elbow, and I'm really liking the way it appears it would fit in there. The 3" parts are a much cleaner look, and the short 3" rubber coupling is MUCH less obvious than that huge 4x3 rubber reducer I picked up. Now I'm NOT saying that looks matter here! Function is what is important of course. But there is some very believable information on clubgp about when a 3" FWI is really needed. Of course a 3" will not flow as much as a 4", but will my setup NEED the flow of a 4" intake? I have my doubts. This is a DD with mild mods coming, at best, and not likely to see smaller than a 3.6 pulley. There will be no headers, no cam, no rockers. If I ever did decide to go further with mods (I won't) another $30 will get me a 4" intake instead, and I'll already have a 4" K&N to use. I found a very sleek 3" to 4" pvc adapter to fit to the 4" filter that's coming in tomorrow.

ALL that being said, I will be doing some further research on the 3" vs 4" issue. Someone on Regalgs had posted the link to the thread on clubgp regarding 3" being good down to around 3.25-3.0. Maybe I can find it again.

I measured the TB once; I'm pretty sure it was 3.5" dia. Looks DO matter, though. This is why I went with the 3.5" tube instead of 4", because I think bumping the dia up with adapters in plain sight is kinda odd looking, although 4" most certainly flows better.

3" wouldn't be a problem so much with a CAI, because it's a short run to the air source. But a FWI is a pretty long tube to run with 3" dia. It would probably be more restrictive than the stock air box, imo.

ZZ Performance has been in the game a long time. Here is their advice regarding intake design:

"We can safely say that there is no such thing as 'too much flow' unless it drastically affects velocity. Believing that your intake system 'flows enough' because you are not drawing in a large amount of air is a fallacy. Designing an intake based on 'enough' rather than 'optimum' is obviously not the way to go."