I agree that they won't surpass the corvette in terms of power, but they could always bump the corvettes power as well to keep up with the new mustang. I just hope for Ford's sake the new mustang isn't heavier. With the added weight it will have a hard time staying in front with less torque.
I would like to know as well and not familiar with them.
They're just flaps (butterfly valves) inside the intake runners that partially close at low RPM to reduce flow and increase velocity and then open fully at high RPM.
Haven't had hand on the '15 coyote yet, so not 100% its this exact style.
Some have touched on it. They make a delete kit on the 96-98 cobras that used to use this technology. It increased high rpm power but hurt low end, and didnt look great across the middle effectively making it good on the strip and sucky on the street. Too much head for 281 cubic inches. Now the next gen 4v came without those and more top end power with minimal loss in the low end due to redesign on the head. Then the 03 cobras came in and forced air down those 2 glorious intake ports and everything was right in the world. In summary I'm still not sold on the runner control because its been proven to be able to be improved on. The need for them most likely came with the larger valves. I will reserve final judgment until I see the torque curve. Hope this helped or was interesting. Just ask if you have questions I kinda am a nerd on the 4v 4.6s
Yes.
So this is for low end torque AND high end horsepower? I'm just trying to figure out why any physical restriction in the airflow pathway would be a good thing.Some have touched on it. They make a delete kit on the 96-98 cobras that used to use this technology. It increased high rpm power but hurt low end, and didnt look great across the middle effectively making it good on the strip and sucky on the street. Too much head for 281 cubic inches. Now the next gen 4v came without those and more top end power with minimal loss in the low end due to redesign on the head. Then the 03 cobras came in and forced air down those 2 glorious intake ports and everything was right in the world. In summary I'm still not sold on the runner control because its been proven to be able to be improved on. The need for them most likely came with the larger valves. I will reserve final judgment until I see the torque curve. Hope this helped or was interesting. Just ask if you have questions I kinda am a nerd on the 4v 4.6s
Edit good one tear pretty much correct. The redesign led to almost no loss of torque except just off idle and made up for it literally everywhere else. It was much better which has me scratching my head but maybe the new tech is better or maybe that comes on the DI 5.0 ;)
In this case I am unsure. In previous usage the IMRC gained low end torque over 75% of the curve.
Too much air at low engine speed, IMRC was used to restrict it at low rpm, and open up at high rpm. There is a limit to how much air an engine wants, so if you have heads that flow very well, you might be throwing more air than needed into the cylinder when not under WOT, or at high rpm.
No low end only. It hurts high end. That's why I said I'm not sold. It has benefits low to mid but restricts up top. There have been work around with different designs so that's why I'm not sure why they didn't go that route, but again I'll reserve judgment til I see dyno charts.