Question About PRM Intake
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,956
Likes: 0
From: Land of the landeaus
This will be fun....let me enjoy my time with keyboard before I call it a night.
Alex, you write in bold
They don't know any better, they just know it sounds faster than stock
If their cars were losing horsepower, the units would be gone. Simple as that.
To paraphrase from one of the UK PRM threads, "Brian Marshall said in one of his posts that of all the available CAIs they tested, the PRM made the most gain in power when dyno tests were carried out." Then again, I suppose Gerry paid him
under the table to say that.
Because people are upgrading to the V2
Note the # of V2's being resold. The disadvantages of the AEM do NOT disappear
with the Version 2. People do not spend $225 for 2 horsepower (the difference
between both versions) unless they're Tommy and then you spend $1800.
That's because they've sold less than 100 to date, how many Amuse Coilovers do you see for sale? Exactly.
You don't see Amuse coilovers for sale because nobody WANTS to sell them. For
100 intakes sold, you can only pull six or seven for resale in six months. They ain't
doorstops my friend, they remain in engine bays for a reason. Once people realize
NO intake prevents heat soak, they come to the realization that intakes are designed
for SPEED, certainly not for low-idle performance. There are no christmas trees
in front of a quarter-yard dragstrip. I guarantee you nobody at Comptech or AEM is working overtime to develop an intake that kicks ass at 800 rpms.
The resale price of an item has as much to do with original price as it does with the quality of the item, therefore this arguement rediculous.
Both AEM and PRM list roughly the same and yet, both RESALE for the
same amount of money ($125-150) which proves my point. If the PRM was so
bad, what little pre-owned ones you DO find wouldn't be selling for the same price
as the supposedly superior AEM. IOW, they perform equally as well which has
been our point all along.
The AEM was a design that was settled on after numerous prototypes and makes power because of the location of the filter. The PRM's claim to fame is the same "technology" that powers the Tornado Fuel Saver....enough said.
I responded to you on this once before but I see you must of skipped that thread. Before I repeat those comments, it is not only the location of the filter which makes
the AEM a good intake at speed. Otherwise, any of the $30 intakes sold on eBay
which place the filter in the same location would perform equally as well. To their credit, AEM understands resonance and how it relates to intake design, especially with the Version 2.
Getting back to your point, the Tornado actually DOES improve fuel economy (from what I've gathered) because in a nutshell, its airflow dynamics create a fast-burn effect in the combustion chamber. This creates finer particles (atomized fuel) which allows for better flame propagation and more complete combustion. This has little to do with intake performance which is why people who buy the little device (thinking they are going to get 6 extra horsepower) are disappointed. In fact, I challenge you to visit their homepage and show me ANYWHERE where they claim to improve horsepower. They dropped that argument (in print anyways) long ago.
The PRM, UNLIKE the Tornado, works by utilizing the venturi effect. Have you EVER driven through a mountain pass? I have. A few hundred times in Vermont. This is about a basic of an example as I can give you about how wind is affected by the narrow passage of entry. Your car will suddenly feel as if it's being pushed from behind (depending on the direction of the wind). This is as simple as I can get when describing how the PRM works. It is this very principle which contributes to Apexi, Blitz, HKS, etc filter designs where the top of the filter has a horn-like construction or decreasing radius (similar to the PRM horn).
Stop referencing Tornado nonsense that has nothing to do with intakes other than the location recommended to place the unit.
You're getting beaten up bad on this one my friend but kudos for trying.
Until you make a case as to why the intake isn't worthwhile at speed, you're on
the losing end of this debate. Mitch and I counter your comments with
FACTS and most noteably, personal observations (from others as well) and in return, we get smileys and worse, comparisons to devices which are designed to improve fuel mileage.
BTW, the PRM shown in the SRT-4 is quickly gaining popularity with those owners as well. Early reports are very favorable, especially from high-end tuners
who are pushing 350-400 horsepower out of their little terrors. As you can see,
several Audi owners (of whom I would assume like many of us, could buy any intake they choose) also prefer the PRM, as do Subaru and VW owners.
Time to ramp it up Alex...or we'll have to send in the cut man.
Alex, you write in bold
They don't know any better, they just know it sounds faster than stock
If their cars were losing horsepower, the units would be gone. Simple as that.
To paraphrase from one of the UK PRM threads, "Brian Marshall said in one of his posts that of all the available CAIs they tested, the PRM made the most gain in power when dyno tests were carried out." Then again, I suppose Gerry paid him
under the table to say that.
Because people are upgrading to the V2
Note the # of V2's being resold. The disadvantages of the AEM do NOT disappear
with the Version 2. People do not spend $225 for 2 horsepower (the difference
between both versions) unless they're Tommy and then you spend $1800.
That's because they've sold less than 100 to date, how many Amuse Coilovers do you see for sale? Exactly.
You don't see Amuse coilovers for sale because nobody WANTS to sell them. For
100 intakes sold, you can only pull six or seven for resale in six months. They ain't
doorstops my friend, they remain in engine bays for a reason. Once people realize
NO intake prevents heat soak, they come to the realization that intakes are designed
for SPEED, certainly not for low-idle performance. There are no christmas trees
in front of a quarter-yard dragstrip. I guarantee you nobody at Comptech or AEM is working overtime to develop an intake that kicks ass at 800 rpms.
The resale price of an item has as much to do with original price as it does with the quality of the item, therefore this arguement rediculous.
Both AEM and PRM list roughly the same and yet, both RESALE for the
same amount of money ($125-150) which proves my point. If the PRM was so
bad, what little pre-owned ones you DO find wouldn't be selling for the same price
as the supposedly superior AEM. IOW, they perform equally as well which has
been our point all along.
The AEM was a design that was settled on after numerous prototypes and makes power because of the location of the filter. The PRM's claim to fame is the same "technology" that powers the Tornado Fuel Saver....enough said.
I responded to you on this once before but I see you must of skipped that thread. Before I repeat those comments, it is not only the location of the filter which makes
the AEM a good intake at speed. Otherwise, any of the $30 intakes sold on eBay
which place the filter in the same location would perform equally as well. To their credit, AEM understands resonance and how it relates to intake design, especially with the Version 2.
Getting back to your point, the Tornado actually DOES improve fuel economy (from what I've gathered) because in a nutshell, its airflow dynamics create a fast-burn effect in the combustion chamber. This creates finer particles (atomized fuel) which allows for better flame propagation and more complete combustion. This has little to do with intake performance which is why people who buy the little device (thinking they are going to get 6 extra horsepower) are disappointed. In fact, I challenge you to visit their homepage and show me ANYWHERE where they claim to improve horsepower. They dropped that argument (in print anyways) long ago.
The PRM, UNLIKE the Tornado, works by utilizing the venturi effect. Have you EVER driven through a mountain pass? I have. A few hundred times in Vermont. This is about a basic of an example as I can give you about how wind is affected by the narrow passage of entry. Your car will suddenly feel as if it's being pushed from behind (depending on the direction of the wind). This is as simple as I can get when describing how the PRM works. It is this very principle which contributes to Apexi, Blitz, HKS, etc filter designs where the top of the filter has a horn-like construction or decreasing radius (similar to the PRM horn).
Stop referencing Tornado nonsense that has nothing to do with intakes other than the location recommended to place the unit.
You're getting beaten up bad on this one my friend but kudos for trying.
Until you make a case as to why the intake isn't worthwhile at speed, you're on
the losing end of this debate. Mitch and I counter your comments with
FACTS and most noteably, personal observations (from others as well) and in return, we get smileys and worse, comparisons to devices which are designed to improve fuel mileage.
BTW, the PRM shown in the SRT-4 is quickly gaining popularity with those owners as well. Early reports are very favorable, especially from high-end tuners
who are pushing 350-400 horsepower out of their little terrors. As you can see,
several Audi owners (of whom I would assume like many of us, could buy any intake they choose) also prefer the PRM, as do Subaru and VW owners.
Time to ramp it up Alex...or we'll have to send in the cut man.
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
From: Delray Beach
I must say the AEM V1 was average. It is supposed to be a CAI intake but how so if the piping is made from aluminum. I called AEM and asked them and they told me that the piping is covered with a special paint that prevents the piping from conducting heat. Maybe this is true but everytime I touched the piping it was hot not cool. It was not as hot as the rest of the parts in the engine bay but definately not warm.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 2,956
Likes: 0
From: Land of the landeaus
Originally posted by S2KSuzuka
Russ...Your serve
Russ...Your serve
Nah...I'm done trying to educate the youngin'
Even when you give him dyno results (which I have) and a plethera of satisfied owners
who HAVE dyno'd their cars with the intake, Alex still is struggling to understand the
design concepts behind intakes. Afterall, it's not HOW you design the CAI tube, it's where you place the filter.
Lord only knows what kind of mung he'd spew if he read about SpiralMax.
http://www.spiralmax.com/spiral1.htm
Come to think of it, he just removed his stock intake a few weeks ago while I'm on my ninth but of course, experience and numerous Tazzo runs with all of them cannot hope to compete in a discussion which constantly leans toward the Tornado. The product "quality by association" tactic is often used when the case to support ones counter argument is hopelessly weak. It's sort of like saying, "I won't buy milk at Publix because I bought some bad oranges there once." Alex hates the
PRM (it's almost personal, have you noticed?) but I've yet to figure out what experience he has with it to comment on the product at all. Did he cut himself on
it helping Ritchie or you install it?
Note how he conveniently trills over my mention of January's dyno pull that showed the Comptech making three horsepower. Hell, a $30 eBay intake can make
three horsepower.
You can't really argue with someone who's only card brought to the table is Tommy's dyno run with his AEM. Last time I checked, didn't Tommy dyno just
over 200hp at CarTek in January when the temps were 76-degrees and this was
WITH the Amuse exhaust AND the AEM?
Correct me if I'm wrong.
On that note, "when I saw Tommy's intake make 7 lbs of torque I knew that no other S2000 intake could do that." How so Alex? What experience do you have with the K&N Typhoon (shown to surpass those #'s on another member's dyno run last year) or the MG Racing intake, or the 15-odd others (including the HKS
system or the Roar). I told you Gerry dyno'd the AEM vs. the PRM on an S2000 (Canadian owner) who donated the car during the design stage and the PRM
gained one less horsepower (dyno noise and certainly not significant enough to draw
any conclusion from). The Injen makes as much horsepower as the AEM as did
Brandon's homemade intake. There are those who have owned the AEM who subsequently went with a snorkle (to the OEM airbox) and reported better results
from the latter offering.
At the risk of repeating myself over and over again, I'm forced to let this one die. If Ritchie is willing to sacrifice his PRM (or I'll buy it from him myself....PM me Ritchie if
you want to sell it), I'll be more than happy to use it for the next dyno pull at
Cartek. Or, I could call Gerry and see if he will mail me one.
Either way, the jury is out. Not much facts coming from the other side while
we have dyno pulls, Tazzo runs, happy owners, etc. Last time I checked, Alicia
has been doing quite well with her "piece of crap" intake during Auto-X.
Then again, we can continue to ignore all the facts (which Alex calls theories mind you) and talk about Tornados some more.
Until then, let us continue with more things that are truly funny.
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,441
Likes: 0
From: Miami Lakes
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Russ
Come to think of it, he just removed his stock intake a few weeks ago while I'm on my ninth but of course, experience and numerous Tazzo runs with all of them cannot hope to compete in a discussion which constantly leans toward the Tornado.
Come to think of it, he just removed his stock intake a few weeks ago while I'm on my ninth but of course, experience and numerous Tazzo runs with all of them cannot hope to compete in a discussion which constantly leans toward the Tornado.