My good buddy TacoBill and I were talking one day about whether or not the shaker sucks air from the scoop, even if air isn't forced in.

Everybody says it is non-functional, but I beg to differ. I have the stock intake tube going over to the stock airbox with a K&N panel air fliter. I decided to leave it this way because I like the clean look of the shaker tube coming around and joining to the stock air box, creating a "closed" system. Doug from BamaChips set up a tune for me with all of this in mind.

So, I had my Dad rev up the car as I held a tissue in front of the shaker scoop, and it clearly sucks the tissue in toward the scoop. This is just short, quick revs! Imagine the air getting sucked in during WOT.

Here is proof that I have a functional system, with cold air rushing over the nose of the car getting sucked into the engine:

 

Your a funny guy

 

Pretty cool........ I like the script you put in the front of the shaker opening.

 

Well at least you proved she sucks..... i'm just happy you didnt let her swallow!

 

^^^

 

thats a pretty weak suck coming from there. You may believe its "functional" but in reality it offers no more than aesthetics.

-Dan

 

Weak suck?

If it's moving air, it's getting air.

That's funny... here's proof it's getting cold air and I'll still have people say it's not functional.

That's what's weak!

 

I like the MACH insert...

 

 

Hate to break it to you, but when the car is moving the ram air effect of air entering will be way greater than the minimal suction so it really does not matter if it sucks or not.

 

WOW, what the hell is wrong with you people?
There was a question posed, "Does the Shaker actually suck air"? Tom takes the time to prove that it does and everyone bashes it and tries to counter with stuff that was irrelevant to the test. Sure ALL of us Shaker guys know that the Shaker is more cosmetic than performance enhancing, but it IS FUNCTIONAL. It's nice to know that in addition to the RAM AIR it will suck air as well, which was the point of this test anyway.

OK Rant is over

 

The hypothesis prior to Tom's experiment was that the ducting (with its varying diameters and bends) from the rear of the scoop to the airbox would not (or minimally) create enough negative pressure by the intake to actually draw air when revved. His experiment result just disproves alot of the misconception of the Shakers functionality... that's it.

 

Now there IS a ram air effect after all? Great!

Let me see, I'm no Physics major, but air getting forced in is going, um, yeah, in the same direction as air getting sucked in, so they kind of work together, no? I don't think they cancel each other out, or anything.

Wow, let me change my title: My CDC Shaker system sucks and blows!

Thanks!

 

I saw a picture a while back someone made of their shaker hood. Their car had been parked and covered by a light snowfall. The pic was made after starting the car, you could see the air flow had affected the snow in front of the scoop. The rest of the snow on the hood was pristine. I don't get alot of snow in my area, so i'm not familiar with what amount of force it would take to make that effect on the snow.

I would like to see someone log the air temp inside their airbox before and after installing the shaker.

 

If the shaker sucks in air, the amount of air it's able to pull in at speed will be greater.. just the fact that it pulls in air is a plus.

it's functional, but expensive.

 

That would be nice to see.

That's what I would think, too. Expensive... but worth it!

 

 

it may suck a little air through the scoop but if you open up the stock box for the flat filter there is more sucking going on from that over the Shaker.

You could get a better functional result by removing all the ducting and allowing it to do nothing more than bringing in "cold air" over the motor at speed. The Shaker (with all the ducting hooked up) still loses power over stock, how is that "functional"?



-Dan

 

Oh it DOES suck air not may. (See Tom's Video again for proof)
Do you have a dyno test or something to prove your accusation or is it just that, and nothing more than your opinion ?
Didn't someone on here already prove that it did indeed increase the HP though not by much. I sure don't recall anyone showing that it decreased HP