Vibrant StreetFlow Intakes
May-28th-2002, 10:51 AM
#16
Protege Newbie
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Orlando Fl.
Posts: 24
I would be interested in the polished version of this intake. Anymore info you can provide would be wonderful. But for 130 bones sounds like a good deal to me. 
Please keep me informed to when you will be ordering them.
Nick
Please keep me informed to when you will be ordering them.
Nick
March-12th-2003, 12:01 PM
#17
Bruce Leroy
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 788
Ok, so this thread is super old, but I've recently begun thinking about getting an intake again (must be the thought of Spring approaching combined with the sweet smell of a tax refund).
I looked at a website for a local company and they are selling the Vibrant tube for $87.00 or the "Street Flow Intake Kit" for $130.00. These are CDN prices! Oh...and I just phoned another store and they have the kit for $121.98 CDN!!
Does anybody have any experience w/ these intakes? I'm really, really considering one now!!
I looked at a website for a local company and they are selling the Vibrant tube for $87.00 or the "Street Flow Intake Kit" for $130.00. These are CDN prices! Oh...and I just phoned another store and they have the kit for $121.98 CDN!!
Does anybody have any experience w/ these intakes? I'm really, really considering one now!!
March-12th-2003, 01:25 PM
#18
Show Layne some respect
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Long Island,NY
Posts: 2,458
Wow 
this is old!
After months of dealing with backorders and empty promises from several wholesalers, I gave up on ever getting any of these Vibrant kits - sorry to all who were interested.
Intakes are basically all the same, IMHO - a tube and a filter. What else is there?
I bought one of those cheapo eBay intakes a few months ago, and quite frankly I'm going to be removing it soon. I'm a little sick of the sound of it (though it IS nice and throaty), and it seems to constantly need re-adjustment to keep from contacting the brake master cylinder.
I'm going back to quiet, stealth mode.
My gas mileage has definitely suffered as well - a LOT. On pure highway driving, it seems to improve nicely, but driving slower than 55 MPH, I am eating the gas for sure. IMO, all of these intake tubes are too damn big, and this causes lots of air turbulence at lower RPMs. I can feel it, and I can hear it, and I don't like it. And my gas mileage tells the story. If someone made a kit that was the same size (or close) as the throttle body opening, I'd consider it. But all these big-tube kits are not great for daily driving, unless that driving is 90% done at highway speeds (higher RPM operation). Again, just my opinion - the only facts I have are my gas mileage, and the sluggish (more sluggish than stock, if you can imagine that) low RPM response.
~HH
this is old!After months of dealing with backorders and empty promises from several wholesalers, I gave up on ever getting any of these Vibrant kits - sorry to all who were interested.
Intakes are basically all the same, IMHO - a tube and a filter. What else is there?
I bought one of those cheapo eBay intakes a few months ago, and quite frankly I'm going to be removing it soon. I'm a little sick of the sound of it (though it IS nice and throaty), and it seems to constantly need re-adjustment to keep from contacting the brake master cylinder.
I'm going back to quiet, stealth mode.
My gas mileage has definitely suffered as well - a LOT. On pure highway driving, it seems to improve nicely, but driving slower than 55 MPH, I am eating the gas for sure. IMO, all of these intake tubes are too damn big, and this causes lots of air turbulence at lower RPMs. I can feel it, and I can hear it, and I don't like it. And my gas mileage tells the story. If someone made a kit that was the same size (or close) as the throttle body opening, I'd consider it. But all these big-tube kits are not great for daily driving, unless that driving is 90% done at highway speeds (higher RPM operation). Again, just my opinion - the only facts I have are my gas mileage, and the sluggish (more sluggish than stock, if you can imagine that) low RPM response.
~HH
March-12th-2003, 01:54 PM
#19
Bruce Leroy
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 788
Well, I wasn't able to find out much info, but from the few people that have installed in in Toronto, they say that it is shaped a little bit differently than the Ractive and Ebay ones such that it doesn't rub on the brake master cylinder. I think I'm gonna go with this one
Edit: Interesting info on the sluggishness though...I'll have to see what others around here have been noticing too. Thanks!
Edit: Interesting info on the sluggishness though...I'll have to see what others around here have been noticing too. Thanks!
March-12th-2003, 02:26 PM
#21
Bruce Leroy
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 788
Sorry..not from Vibrant....unless the 2.0L intake could somehow fit on the 1.6L
www.vibrantperformance.com
www.vibrantperformance.com
March-12th-2003, 02:50 PM
#22
Protege Enthusiast
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 240
Originally posted by hihoslva
Wow this is old!
After months of dealing with backorders and empty promises from several wholesalers, I gave up on ever getting any of these Vibrant kits - sorry to all who were interested.
Intakes are basically all the same, IMHO - a tube and a filter. What else is there?
I bought one of those cheapo eBay intakes a few months ago, and quite frankly I'm going to be removing it soon. I'm a little sick of the sound of it (though it IS nice and throaty), and it seems to constantly need re-adjustment to keep from contacting the brake master cylinder.
I'm going back to quiet, stealth mode.
My gas mileage has definitely suffered as well - a LOT. On pure highway driving, it seems to improve nicely, but driving slower than 55 MPH, I am eating the gas for sure. IMO, all of these intake tubes are too damn big, and this causes lots of air turbulence at lower RPMs. I can feel it, and I can hear it, and I don't like it. And my gas mileage tells the story. If someone made a kit that was the same size (or close) as the throttle body opening, I'd consider it. But all these big-tube kits are not great for daily driving, unless that driving is 90% done at highway speeds (higher RPM operation). Again, just my opinion - the only facts I have are my gas mileage, and the sluggish (more sluggish than stock, if you can imagine that) low RPM response.
~HH
Wow
this is old!After months of dealing with backorders and empty promises from several wholesalers, I gave up on ever getting any of these Vibrant kits - sorry to all who were interested.
Intakes are basically all the same, IMHO - a tube and a filter. What else is there?
I bought one of those cheapo eBay intakes a few months ago, and quite frankly I'm going to be removing it soon. I'm a little sick of the sound of it (though it IS nice and throaty), and it seems to constantly need re-adjustment to keep from contacting the brake master cylinder.
I'm going back to quiet, stealth mode.
My gas mileage has definitely suffered as well - a LOT. On pure highway driving, it seems to improve nicely, but driving slower than 55 MPH, I am eating the gas for sure. IMO, all of these intake tubes are too damn big, and this causes lots of air turbulence at lower RPMs. I can feel it, and I can hear it, and I don't like it. And my gas mileage tells the story. If someone made a kit that was the same size (or close) as the throttle body opening, I'd consider it. But all these big-tube kits are not great for daily driving, unless that driving is 90% done at highway speeds (higher RPM operation). Again, just my opinion - the only facts I have are my gas mileage, and the sluggish (more sluggish than stock, if you can imagine that) low RPM response.
~HH
March-12th-2003, 07:11 PM
#24
Show Layne some respect
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Long Island,NY
Posts: 2,458
I really believe that the size of the tube is the most important factor. Perhaps the Injen uses a smaller diameter tube, which results in less turbulent and speedier airflow at low RPM. This would solve the gas mileage issue.
But I have definitely heard reports of other (probably ALL) intake brands hitting the master cylinder. The solutions have ranged from re-positioning the tubing, to cutting a hair off the end that mounts to the throttle body. With tolerances so tight, some people will have the problem, and others won't, I suppose.
I dunno - I just don't care enough to fix it - I'm just ready to take it out completely. The quiter engine is what I think I like - so out with the new, in with the old.
~HH
But I have definitely heard reports of other (probably ALL) intake brands hitting the master cylinder. The solutions have ranged from re-positioning the tubing, to cutting a hair off the end that mounts to the throttle body. With tolerances so tight, some people will have the problem, and others won't, I suppose.
I dunno - I just don't care enough to fix it - I'm just ready to take it out completely. The quiter engine is what I think I like - so out with the new, in with the old.
~HH
March-12th-2003, 09:19 PM
#25
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: GA
Posts: 45
Hey Hiho,
I had my name on the Vibrant list over at MP5online. I'm interested in your comments on the intakes. It seems to me that you're probably spot-on. The Injen looks too long, maybe good for top end, not for bottom end. Have you looked at the HKS. It seems to use only one tube to mount to the maf, and the way they show mounting it leaves the stock snorkel to feed it some cool air. It doesn't look great, but performance is more important to me.I'm also concerned about short rams because of Racing Beat's experience on the MP3 with underhood heat. I'm still going to have to be convinced there's something better than stock with a K&N.
I had my name on the Vibrant list over at MP5online. I'm interested in your comments on the intakes. It seems to me that you're probably spot-on. The Injen looks too long, maybe good for top end, not for bottom end. Have you looked at the HKS. It seems to use only one tube to mount to the maf, and the way they show mounting it leaves the stock snorkel to feed it some cool air. It doesn't look great, but performance is more important to me.I'm also concerned about short rams because of Racing Beat's experience on the MP3 with underhood heat. I'm still going to have to be convinced there's something better than stock with a K&N.
March-12th-2003, 11:44 PM
#26
Protege Enthusiast
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 240
Originally posted by hihoslva
I really believe that the size of the tube is the most important factor. Perhaps the Injen uses a smaller diameter tube, which results in less turbulent and speedier airflow at low RPM. This would solve the gas mileage issue.
But I have definitely heard reports of other (probably ALL) intake brands hitting the master cylinder. The solutions have ranged from re-positioning the tubing, to cutting a hair off the end that mounts to the throttle body. With tolerances so tight, some people will have the problem, and others won't, I suppose.
I dunno - I just don't care enough to fix it - I'm just ready to take it out completely. The quiter engine is what I think I like - so out with the new, in with the old.
~HH
I really believe that the size of the tube is the most important factor. Perhaps the Injen uses a smaller diameter tube, which results in less turbulent and speedier airflow at low RPM. This would solve the gas mileage issue.
But I have definitely heard reports of other (probably ALL) intake brands hitting the master cylinder. The solutions have ranged from re-positioning the tubing, to cutting a hair off the end that mounts to the throttle body. With tolerances so tight, some people will have the problem, and others won't, I suppose.
I dunno - I just don't care enough to fix it - I'm just ready to take it out completely. The quiter engine is what I think I like - so out with the new, in with the old.
~HH
March-12th-2003, 11:46 PM
#27
Protege Enthusiast
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Orange County, CA
Posts: 240
Originally posted by Pro_fan
Heh....Or sometimes you overpay for a name.
Heh....Or sometimes you overpay for a name.
March-13th-2003, 01:56 AM
#28
Bruce Leroy
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 788
Originally posted by Scarmiglio
$200 is hardly overpaying for a quality piece. Lots of guys on this board pay $100 for cheap crap short rams that heat soak in the first 10 minutes and don't do much except make noise. The Injen is dyno proven to make 4-5 whp. Find me one other cold air intake for the 2.0L for less $$ that is worth a ****.
$200 is hardly overpaying for a quality piece. Lots of guys on this board pay $100 for cheap crap short rams that heat soak in the first 10 minutes and don't do much except make noise. The Injen is dyno proven to make 4-5 whp. Find me one other cold air intake for the 2.0L for less $$ that is worth a ****.
I believe the AEM Short-Ram intake has been shown to post similar gains. TheMAN has a post on the differences (or lack thereof) b/n the styles of intakes.
March-13th-2003, 04:56 AM
#29
Show Layne some respect
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Long Island,NY
Posts: 2,458
Originally posted by thewrench
I'm still going to have to be convinced there's something better than stock with a K&N.
I'm still going to have to be convinced there's something better than stock with a K&N.
I'll find out some more info when I can.
~HH
March-13th-2003, 08:19 PM
#30
Protege Newbie
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Vancouver Canada
Posts: 29
Originally posted by Pro_fan
I haven't seen one, that's for sure. And $200 US is far more than I'm willing to pay for any intake.
I believe the AEM Short-Ram intake has been shown to post similar gains. TheMAN has a post on the differences (or lack thereof) b/n the styles of intakes.
I haven't seen one, that's for sure. And $200 US is far more than I'm willing to pay for any intake.
I believe the AEM Short-Ram intake has been shown to post similar gains. TheMAN has a post on the differences (or lack thereof) b/n the styles of intakes.
Those cheap eBay intakes do have a wider tube and this will affect low-end torque. Some people will complain their gas mileage has suffered. Mine did...at first. All it takes is a change in driving style. My car is a lot happier cruising at 3000-3500RPM. I've raised my shift point in each gear so the engine doesn't lug in the next higher gear.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
sldoyeamazda32009
Mazda3/Mazdaspeed3
8
July-12th-2009 12:42 AM
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)