ive ruled out getting an aem/injen intake. i will either be gettin an icebox or a k&n drop-in. what i was wondering is, will dropping in a better filter and removing the resonator from the bumper make much of a difference? it seems that the comptech box is pretty much a fancy stock intake. i figure, if i remove the huge resonator out, the filter will be sucking in coldair straight from inside the bumper.

 

or you can get an icebox put a k&n filter inside,and then remove the icebox resonator for a aftermarket sound.

 

Im not sure about the difference, but i did the K&N filter approach. I attached some pvc pipes to where the horn of the comptech ice box should be. It doesnt look as cool but its a hell of a lot cheaper than the icebox. I would recomend this process if you are strapped for cash.

 

i was just curious about the difference. i did alot of searching and everyone says taking out the resonator makes a big sound difference... but i havent a clue about performance. i figure, with a k&n drop-in, the filter will flow as well as any intake filter out there... and from the looks of it, the icebox is nothing more than a stock intake, with a horn going into the bumper to aid in bringing in air.

if for whatever reason the icebox would perform alot better, ill buy one... money isnt an issue. its just that i dont want to waste $200 unnecessarily.

 

got any pics of ur setup? i have a k&n drop in right now as well and was considering a comptech icebox, but i agree, the comptech icebox is a sealed unit that pulls air from the bumper area just like removing the resonator. the only difference i see is the icebox has a cone inside.

 

Ill try and take a pic since it is difficult after i replaced the bumper...Ill try and find some time...

 

Never used the comptech but I do use the K&N drop in filter. You can hear the engine sucking in air and the rev is a bit more defined. I did not even remove the resonator so that would probably make it sound even better.

 

though this sounds like a ghettofication, it is pretty practical since it does the same as an expensive ass CT IB. i have the icebox with the K&N filter which works and sounds even better.

 

The resonator is actually engineered into the intake to help with power at certain RPMs. I'm not all that familiar with acoustics and pressure waves (been a while since physics) but as the valves open and close on the engine, pressure waves are created inside the intake tubing. At a particular engine RPM, these waves have a particular frequency. If you can 'tune' the intake to resonate at certain RPMs, then the pressure waves of air in the tubing can effectively be amplified to 'squeeze' more air into the engine. For example, when the intake valves are open, slightly lower pressure will be found in the intake manifold verses when the valves are closed, the pressure will be slightly higher. Now picture this low to high pressure occuring in pulses. These pulses occur at a set frequency corresponding to engine speed. If you can "tune" these pulses properly, you can use the pulse waves to increase power. This only can occur during a limited range of RPMs however, unless a variable length intake tube is used. This is done on some higher end sport bikes. I'm not sure at which RPMs are chosen for this resonance to occur in the Acura intake, if chosen properly there should be a couple ranges of RPMs that will resonate. Whether or not comptech engineered this into their intake, i'm not sure, but I know that it is a possibility, and quite probable as well. Might be worth trying to get a Comptech technical person on the phone to inquire about this prior to deciding whether to stick with the stock airbox w/K&N or go with the Icebox. I haven't actually seen an airbox, but the "horn" that is being described sounds like it may have to do with resonance as I discussed above.

 

This is a related article: I may be off a tad on my previous description, the article talks about variable lenth intake runners, but uses the principle of resonance. I believe you can also use the resonator in the airbox to create a similar effect, but like I mentioned before, wave mechanics is not my expertise. Here's the article, found on howstuffworks.com

" The intake system on a four-stroke car engine has one main goal, to get as much air-fuel mixture into the cylinder as possible. One way to help the intake is by tuning the lengths of the pipes.
When the intake valve is open on the engine, air is being sucked into the engine, so the air in the intake runner is moving rapidly toward the cylinder. When the intake valve closes suddenly, this air slams to a stop and stacks up on itself, forming an area of high pressure. This high-pressure wave makes its way up the intake runner away from the cylinder. When it reaches the end of the intake runner, where the runner connects to the intake manifold, the pressure wave bounces back down the intake runner.

If the intake runner is just the right length, that pressure wave will arrive back at the intake valve just as it opens for the next cycle. This extra pressure helps cram more air-fuel mix into the cylinder -- effectively acting like a turbocharger.

The problem with this technique is that it only provides a benefit in a fairly narrow speed range. The pressure wave travels at the speed of sound (which depends on the density of the air) down the intake runner. The speed will vary a little bit depending on the temperature of the air and the speed it is moving, but a good guess for the speed of sound would be 1,300 feet per second (fps). Let's try to get an idea how long the intake runner would have to be to take advantage of this effect.

Let's say the engine is running at 5,000 rpm. The intake valve opens once every two revolutions (720 degrees), but let's say they stay open for 250 degrees. That means that there are 470 degrees between when the intake valve closes and when it opens again. At 5,000 rpm it will take the engine 0.012 seconds to turn one revolution, and 470 degrees is about 1.31 revolutions, so it takes 0.0156 seconds between when the valve closes and when it opens again. At 1,300 fps multiplied by 0.0156 seconds, the pressure wave would travel about 20 feet. But, since must go up the intake runner and then come back, the intake runner would only have to be half this length or about 10 feet.

Two things become apparent after doing this calculation:

The tuning of the intake runner will only have an effect in a fairly narrow RPM range. If we redo the calculation at 3,000 rpm, the length calculated would be completely different.
Ten feet is too long. You can't fit pipes that long under the hood of a car very easily.
There is not too much that can be done about the first problem. A tuned intake has its main benefit in a very narrow speed range. But there is a way to shorten the intake runners and still get some benefit from the pressure wave. If we shorten the intake runner length by a factor of four, making it 2.5 feet, the pressure wave will travel up and down the pipe four times before the intake valve opens again. But it still arrives at the valve at the right time.

There are a lot of intricacies and tricks to intake systems. For instance, it is beneficial to have the intake air moving as fast as possible into the cylinders. This increases the turbulence and mixes the fuel with the air better. One way to increase the air velocity is to use a smaller diameter intake runner. Since roughly the same volume of air enters the cylinder each cycle, if you pump that air through a smaller diameter pipe it will have to go faster.

The downside to using smaller diameter intake runners is that at high engine speeds when lots of air is going through the pipes, the restriction from the smaller diameter may inhibit airflow. So for the large airflows at higher speeds it is better to have large diameter pipes. Some carmakers attempt to get the best of both worlds by using dual intake runners for each cylinder -- one with a small diameter and one with a large diameter. They use a butterfly valve to close off the large diameter runner at lower engine speeds where the narrow runner can help performance. Then the valve opens up at higher engine speeds to reduce the intake restriction, increasing the top end power output. "

 

I went from a drop in with resonator delete to the Comptech Icebox, and the difference between the 2 was pretty substantial. I didnt notice a thing with the drop in, but definitely felt a nice power bump with the Icebox.

If you are looking for performance, go with the Icebox; no doubt about it.

 

thanks for the input... finally someone that has actually run both. btw, how was the sound difference between the two? i like the added throatiness of the stockbox minus the resonator. i hear that the icebox is very quiet.

 

the icebox is quiet but when you floor it the car produces a fairly loud, refined, authoritative sound. much like a tuned automobile would make (i.e. - BMW).

the icebox is well worth it for the performance gain. and if you plan on modding (headers, etc.) then your money would be better spent with the icebox than a drop-in k&n

SSTS

 

If you liked how that sounds, you'll love the icebox.
Its even deeper, and throatier. The Icebox is quiet for a cold air intake, but its not quiter than stock when you get on it.

 

I first took out my resonator and added an K&N filter, I noticed a difference in performance and sound for sure. then I put on the AEM V2 intake - noticed an even bigger difference in power and it was much louder. I am now back to the stock intake w/o the resonator and with the K&N filter. I think it is a good mix of some more power and sound, but not too much sound. Plus it is much cheeper than a new intake.

 

What you are talking about is the Intake manifold itself. Not the intake. and resonators. The resonators are simply put on to stop unwanted noise, thats all.

 

to anyones knowledge, has there ever been a dyno done with a drop-in? i know what the icebox makes, just curious if there are any gains to be had with a resonatorless drop-in stockbox.

 

No one that i know of has. id say a few hp, nothing as much as the icebox

 

a few hp's is still better than no gain at all.

If i don't get my AEM CAI for my TL-S, I'll just remove my resonator then.