[steve05ram360]

Yeah I would take the vane... but the question I have is why would you not use the oem hose with it?

What I think will happen with the vane in the upper hose is the air pressure turbulence in the upper hose would be reduced. I think that should increase flow, but I dont know if that will impact mpgs. If the flow increases I'd expect boost to go up under similar conditions. The TAG had ~0.5 higher boost in the flats going to work... that is the benchmark area of the drive. Using CC, every morning its the same thing... 3.3~3.5 psi of boost with vane, 3.8~4.1 psi with the tag.

Had some back country fun yesterday, 245 mi RT, held 60~62 mph, temps were warm in the 50* range and IATs in the 75~85* range. Truck got 22.64x mpg

Got to smash rock all day with the preferred hammer

 

[steve05ram360]

2nd vane install done, definitely worth it. It has more boost easier under load.

 

[steve05ram360]

turning vane update...

absolutely love the 2nd vane in the intake tube... boost pops up quick when needed and it is really nice having the additional power. However... mpg again has tanked. I had a mixed tank of 250ish miles and got a 20.2 mpg tank. I kept my foot out of it for the most part and consider it a 90~95% eco drive with approx 5% city miles. I suspect boost timing correction for the drop in mpg's and am investigating changes to the tables. Also, be reminded that the current tune has the turbo set to be laggy for the TAG tuning, I have not changed it back to what it was before where boost response was quick. The 2nd vane in the intake tube overcame the tune's change and turbo response is once again quick. Not sure what I'm going to do with it at this point, but definitely am going to work on the boost timing correction tables in an effort to see if I can bring back mpg's.

 

[VADERPOWER]

Interesting Steve. It sounds like, the 2nd vane has increased the velocity of the air intake charge in the tube, and thus the AAT sensor is adding fuel to compensate? A neat experiment would be to zip tie the sensor outside the tube so it does not read the increase and see if mpgs come up. ✌

 

[steve05ram360]

The vanes are definitely reducing the restriction at the upper elbow. I think the boost timing might be causing some issue and am going to tweek the table some to see the cause & effect. I think timing needs to be advanced a tad bit more in the 5psi & up range. Proba ly will try to get to that sunday morning...

 

[seafish]

So are you running 2 sets of vanes and the TAG, whereas OEM is only one set of vanes ?

And are the vanes you are running the large plastic insert that goes into the down tube??

If so, how did you fit TWO sets in there??

Sorry if I am misunderstanding ...TIA !!!

 

[steve05ram360]

So are you running 2 sets of vanes and the TAG, whereas OEM is only one set of vanes ?

And are the vanes you are running the large plastic insert that goes into the down tube??

If so, how did you fit TWO sets in there??

Sorry if I am misunderstanding ...TIA !!!

Yes, both inserts but no tag (tag and insert will not fit together)... I believe the 2 insert sertup will only work with the original hose that has the lower vanes in it. The older hose has a different upper section and i think the vanes wont reach up into the bend. In the upper hose, the piece fits like a glove (shown in pics)

Yes, still running the center section divider. It keeps flow laminar thru the center of the section. If you still have yours note the dimples on it. Those dimples keep flow attached to it for the length of the piece and feed the lower section.

 

[steve05ram360]

Another comment... Have not tried the dual vanes without the v4.1 air box mod yet, would expect the same change in flow but to a lesser degree. Remember the v4.1 mod his the boost controlled exhaust cutout with the velocity stack on it. The valve is the 3.5" version... This allows the box to flow more at 5-6 psi & up of boost.

And it is not an mpg mod, mpgs are down with the valve enabled, i think boost timing needs to be tweeked in the tune.

 

[steve05ram360]

Pics of the hoses... note the extended length of the center section on the bottom hose, the accordian section of the lower elbow is not present on the bottom hose. You want the bottom hose...

Lower hose with insert

upper hose with insert added, this is the airbox end

Upper hose with insert added, this is the center section end

 

[dieselenthusiast]

Back when I bought the T.A.G, it was sold as a kit (Cool Hose, TAG III, and PSM Air Intake. Here's a good read on it: TDR56_pg150-157.indd (genosgarage.com)

 

[steve05ram360]

Back when I bought the T.A.G, it was sold as a kit (Cool Hose, TAG III, and PSM Air Intake. Here's a good read on it: TDR56_pg150-157.indd (genosgarage.com)

I'm curious as to how that would perform (also the AFE intake tube) with the turning vanes in it. Vader said the vanes did not fit the AFE tube but if one were fabricated to fit, flow would go up.

When I took off my torque tube and went back to the oem tube (lower hose) there was a good bump in bottom end torque so it remained installed. IIRC the torque tube has a greater flow area over the oem tube, with that I'd expect the bottom end torque to shift back up the rpms even with the vanes (if made for it) installed. Hmmm I wonder if I could bribe @krashDH into making 2 inserts for the AFE tube to test with 😆

 

[steve05ram360]

Back when I bought the T.A.G, it was sold as a kit (Cool Hose, TAG III, and PSM Air Intake. Here's a good read on it: TDR56_pg150-157.indd (genosgarage.com)

Thanks for sharing the TDR link... I'd read that long ago and concluded only a few of the tests were climbing out of the noise, tests 22, 24 & 25. What is not discussed is what happens to the power under the peaks. Long ago I dyno'd the fuel cooler on a 1.8t VW engine & saw a 13% bump in greatest power gain in both hp/tq and 8% at the peaks. The harder part of the test was getting the engine heat soaked so the tests could be repeatable. It was far easier to heat soak the motor and look for deltas then getting the motor conditions similar from dyno run to run. It was easier to get IATs & CTs close on each run than letting it cool for the maximum output out of the engine. All this in deteriorating weather conditions. Temps went from mid 80's to low 90's by the end of the testing.

What is never discussed and hard to quantify is the effects on part throttle performance. I know from experience that the air box (AB) flow matters in part throttle performance, when the cheap AB mod was done I'd loose bottom end torque anytime the vent was open 1/2 to full open. This was a SOTP feel. The motivation for the newer versions of the mod were the performance bumps seen at high load or high speed conditions. With the V4.1 mod it is a good compromise from that original vents flow area and is seamless in operation. Back to the part throttle performance, I personally prefer all the bottom end part throttle torque I can get. Going back to the OEM hose with vane was an eye opener compared to the torque tube. For my use, it will stay in there with both vanes.

Next up is to re-tune it (TAG do-over is out the window...) and see how the boost timing correction will affect performance. I suspect the timing needs to be advanced in that table. I really want to get mpg's back up with the valve enabled. The performance boost is worth the effort.

 

[steve05ram360]

Ah, and one other thing I see, the cool hose over the AFE torque tube... the bend at the bottom of the torque tube chokes performance whereas the cool hose has a more radiused bend. If the torque tube had the vanes then it would be less restrictive in that area. Either way, I still say both would benefit from the vanes.

 

[slowmover]

Back when I bought the T.A.G, it was sold as a kit (Cool Hose, TAG III, and PSM Air Intake. Here's a good read on it: TDR56_pg150-157.indd (genosgarage.com)

Long, long time I first read that. Thanks for adding it to the thread.

.

 

[steve05ram360]

Updated tune going in, pulled boost timing a tad bit. Probably need to go the other way tho...

 

[slowmover]

“What is never discussed and hard to quantify is the effects on part throttle performance . . . “


It’s that one-third difference in FE between best & worst drivers where all else is exactly the same.

Some learn to listen to the vehicle (aware of what it’s signaling; feedback to driver), and some drivers are just numb to this. Most fall in between. It’s really hard to quantify part-throttle operation between two drivers as there’s more than one way to work a motor to the same desired end. Those differences themselves are small.

More than anything it’s the fact of having a turbocharger.

Part-throttle is a transition. The most momentary of states.

Get two identical big trucks of the same fleet loaded exactly the same each with an experienced hand at the wheel. Both are accomplished at gliding thru city traffic stoplight to stoplight without stopping. Put them together on the run and one will have to change up how he does things because his part-throttle use differs just enough from the other man they’ll be out-of-synch.

Just easing along. 5+ under speed limit. No friction with other traffic.

Can’t really test it (except perfectly closed course).

On these latest fleet trucks is an approach named by Detroit Diesel as Integrated Powertrain Management. Fly-by-Wire. The driver doesn’t really matter any more about part-throttle transitions as that’s removed from him. Given a 12-Auto & disc brakes stem-to-stern, the relations between clutch & throttle is gone from driver control, thus, about momentum.

Part-throttle is about transitory changes in momentum. Not really about travel speed.

Graphing engine load might be a lot of noise to filter . . . but it’s the indicator of how the operator is affecting momentum.

Problem is that drivers differ. There’s no set formula of exactness for success once down to part-throttle changes in traffic.

.

 

[steve05ram360]

Update... reverted back to the 23.x mpg tune I'd ran last year but tweeked it ever so slightly... that tune had the wastegate duty cycle set for faster turbo response. The tweeks included a bump in boost protection fueling, so the BPF does not kick in like it used to under heavy load, bump in cold weather IAT compensation and an ever so slight tweek in the boost timing. The timing tweek has changed the way the motor runs enough for me to now see what happened... (LOM is above what it was with previous tune however it is early on in the tank).

What I believe happened was the added airflow shortens the ignition delay which moved the LPP closer to TDC, that in turn hurts mpg's if advanced enough towards TDC. The tweeks I did on the boost timing correction table seem to have given me back the tad bit of smoke I look for on my exhaust which is an indicator that it is close to ideal. Time will tell as miles pile up on this tank...

 

[steve05ram360]

Update... Just filled up after tune tweek, 456 miles, 95% hiway withspeeds capped at 64, 22.0x mpg... Looks like i got my mpgs back...

 

[VADERPOWER]

Steve, this looks like the 2nd vanes are a success! The question is, do you think 2 vanes would help people that don't have your tuning capabilities.

 

[steve05ram360]

It is hard to say for mpg because every truck is different. Injectors, turbo size etc... remember i have the 50hp injectors ats arcflo, afe exhaust mani and the 64 mm htt turbo. For power yes without a doubt. The way the turbo spooled was noticeably better with the 2nd vane. it is a cheap enough mod to do if using a tuner.

The bottom line is (from what i have learned and read), the location of the peak pressure (lpp) directly impacts the mpgs. I have no clue as to why that is but have found every time i have pulled timing, mpg drops. My reference point is when there is a ever so slight haze in the exhaust. Once i find that and get timing set, then i shorten duration to clean up the exhaust. The hard part is getting it dialed in for a wide range of operating conditions. If we had an o2 sensor it would be easier.

The bottom line is the tube, any tube should have both vanes installed for the best flow, then the tune dialed in for the engine & its mods. What I cant state enough is the benefit of the air box mod v4.1... the way it is running now it is seamless and obvious when the valve is enabled vs disabled...