• Welcome to the new NAXJA Forum! If your password does not work, please use "Forgot your password?" link on the log-in page. Please feel free to reach out to [email protected] if we can provide any assistance.

Velocity stack

cal said:
or for that matter a throttle body spacer...
Click to expand...

That's pretty much what he made; a very tall one, but yes, that's what it is.

He found that it ran worse with the thing installed so now the rest of us won't need to try a very TB tall spacer.

I'm off to get a Shark and a turbonator!
 
You've made a throttle body spacer, not a velocity stack.

I would highly suggest a much better understanding of fluid flow dynamics before trying to call that a velocity stack.

If you can't understand why your's isn't, your several steps behind.

You have turbulent flow, not laminar.

That rubber boot in no way supports the decrease of your Reynolds number flowing into the throttle body.
 
voudoux said:
In my view it is a type of velocity stack,in your view it is not, I am sorry if this offended you or any one else. You do realize that the idea did not work,I am not claiming it did anything, so why is my view of my part as a velocity stack so important and disturbing?
Click to expand...

Again, a velocity stack is a defined part with certain elements. Your tube is missing those elements. The part that people are trying to explain is that your view is wrong.

Just like me looking at a cat and saying "I view that as a type of dog" would be incorrect as well.

I view the table next to me as a type of chair. It has 4 legs, chairs have 4 legs, you can sit on it, therefore it must be a type of chair. No, wait, it's a table.
 
A stool for really fat butts, not a table.

:)
 
voudoux said:
If you would read my description of how my v.s.works,when the tube is pressed into the rubber conecter( stock 4.0 throttle body to air cleaner) it forms a flare and a smooth path into the tube very similar to the lower picture(velocity stack) , not at all like the upper picture, I hope this makes sense. Google "vintage velocity stacks,images" and look at what can be called a velocity stack. The tube shown in my photos is only part of the velocity stack. Check out the stromberg 3-2s set up,the Amal and some of the straight tube slash cut types. I hope you read this and understand what I am trying to get across. Thanks
Click to expand...

You are just arguing for the sake of arguing.
While what you are using for your defense is called a velocity stack by the manufacturer they are in fact not velocity stacks. The majority of them are for a retro/vintage looking hot rods. All show and no go.

If you want to actually get into specifics the slash cut stacks on strom's and hilborns only served the purpose of getting the air intake away from the engine so they can draw in cleaner and colder air. At no point were they ever designed to straighten or increase flow. Which is why they were made obsolete in the early 60's. The Amal's main purpose was to get the air intake away from the riders leg.
Learn the history and the reasons behind advancements in technology before you attempt to defend your position. Even with a little bit of knowledge you would have realized it never would have worked before you even started.
There literally is nothing in your design that has a taper that would increase flow or smooth out the air. Which is why by your own admission it didn't work. Once you put that piece of 90° rubber on the end of your adapter you all but guaranteed that any increase or improvement in flow was destroyed.
We can discuss airflow dynamics and characteristics all you want but unfortunately with your unwillingness to listen or learn it would only be deceased equine abuse.
!!!1
 
Not to mention the parts weren't stacked up on a bench until weeks after the supposed test happened.
 
b99s8.jpg
 
Wouldn't a velocity stack be a horrible idea anyway since they don't run air filters? At least not the ones I saw for bikes didn't have any real filters and I'd suspect a filter would already defeat the purpose of the stack anyway.
 
Green XJ Jeep said:
You are just arguing for the sake of arguing.
While what you are using for your defense is called a velocity stack by the manufacturer they are in fact not velocity stacks. The majority of them are for a retro/vintage looking hot rods. All show and no go.

If you want to actually get into specifics the slash cut stacks on strom's and hilborns only served the purpose of getting the air intake away from the engine so they can draw in cleaner and colder air. At no point were they ever designed to straighten or increase flow. Which is why they were made obsolete in the early 60's. The Amal's main purpose was to get the air intake away from the riders leg.
Learn the history and the reasons behind advancements in technology before you attempt to defend your position. Even with a little bit of knowledge you would have realized it never would have worked before you even started.
There literally is nothing in your design that has a taper that would increase flow or smooth out the air. Which is why by your own admission it didn't work. Once you put that piece of 90° rubber on the end of your adapter you all but guaranteed that any increase or improvement in flow was destroyed.
We can discuss airflow dynamics and characteristics all you want but unfortunately with your unwillingness to listen or learn it would only be deceased equine abuse.
!!!1
Click to expand...

Thanks for the reply,I see you looked at vintage velocity stacks and see what all was or is called a" velocity stack" a term used very loosely, I considered my part a velocity stack for lack of a better term or name, I know it does not meet all requirements for a perfect velocity stack, but it mounts on the throttle air horn ,lenthends the distance to the 90 degree and is smoother than the rubber tube and "looks a velocity stack". So what else would you call it,it sure is not a throttle body spacer. I agree with what you say but it is just as much a velocity stack as some of the ones "Google vintage velocity stacks" shows. So Google would call it a velocity stack,Wikipedia would not or at very best a poorly designed one. Thanks again for the reply
 
You really do like to argue and not admit when wrong huh?
Google would not call it a velocity stack nor anyone else.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
voudoux said:
Thanks for the reply,I see you looked at vintage velocity stacks and see what all was or is called a" velocity stack" a term used very loosely, I considered my part a velocity stack for lack of a better term or name, I know it does not meet all requirements for a perfect velocity stack, but it mounts on the throttle air horn ,lenthends the distance to the 90 degree and is smoother than the rubber tube and "looks a velocity stack". So what else would you call it,it sure is not a throttle body spacer. I agree with what you say but it is just as much a velocity stack as some of the ones "Google vintage velocity stacks" shows. So Google would call it a velocity stack,Wikipedia would not or at very best a poorly designed one. Thanks again for the reply
Click to expand...

You are the only person in the whole world who would even remotely think what you made was a 'velocity stack'.


:flame:
 
voudoux said:
Thanks for the reply,I see you looked at vintage velocity stacks and see what all was or is called a" velocity stack" a term used very loosely, I considered my part a velocity stack for lack of a better term or name, I know it does not meet all requirements for a perfect velocity stack, but it mounts on the throttle air horn ,lenthends the distance to the 90 degree and is smoother than the rubber tube and "looks a velocity stack". So what else would you call it,it sure is not a throttle body spacer. I agree with what you say but it is just as much a velocity stack as some of the ones "Google vintage velocity stacks" shows. So Google would call it a velocity stack,Wikipedia would not or at very best a poorly designed one. Thanks again for the reply
Click to expand...

Not wanting to date myself but i did not have a need to google anything. I have personaly used Amals on race bikes and have had my fair share of flat heads with stroms.
What you made is just an adapter it isnt any different than what one would do for a cowl or snokel mod. You would have seen better results if went ahead and just ran that over to the pass side firewall and put the air cleaner in the cowl.
Throttle body spacers go under the throttle body. Useless in dry manifold fi systems.
As you have said it didnt work. The reason it didnt work is because these motors dont rev high enough and the rubber 90 and the airfilter degraded the flow to the point that even if you had a proper velocity stack on there, there wouldnt have been an improvment.
 
It's funny to me when people who've been there, done that, and on top of that, show you diagrams and give you flow dynamics reasoning...isn't enough.

A velocity stack can work, but it's not what you made, and it isn't going to do much of anything on the 4.0L due to just the general design (without a BIT of rework).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

C
Cranking Time
Replies
6
Views
79
CBJeeper
C
K
96 XJ Cable Identification
Replies
3
Views
1K
clean96XJ
C
J
2001 XJ Random Vacuum Leak Issue with Smoke Test Result...Need Advice
Replies
5
Views
2K
90xj06
9
J
Renix fuel issues maybe?
Replies
6
Views
2K
Jethrodaredneck
J
A
Renix TPS nightmare
Replies
19
Views
3K
Saudade
Saudade
Back
Top