do either of these actually work and if so, which one is better? also, can you run the 2 together? what would that do? thanks for the input.

 

Yes, they both work (according to the performance data currently available), but the jury is out on which is better. The FTRA has been out a while, and receives great praise from it's customers. There aren't enough people running the JAAM yet (it's a new product) for comparison.

Not recommended, because the 'ram air' pressure from one would be relieved by the other.

 

according to the FTRA, the hood doesnt get enough air going through it to make a difference. it says that the air goes up and over the hood and hits the windshield and misses the hood all together. but then again, thats what the company trying to sell the product is saying. just wondering if anyone had some experience of their own.

 

That's what they claimed against the BGRA. Now they have a kit of their own, it seems to suddenly be more worthwhile . Sealing the hood has proven effective, and the JAAM should be too.

 

i see where your sig says that you have the air box sealed to the hood...do you have the JAAM or something else?

 

The JAAM kit is made for all the WS6 people that want to make their hood functional. It is still limited by the design of the hood but as part of the kit install, baffles are removed, the hood is sealed to the air box and the lower nostrils are also made functional (which the BGRA kit did not do). When JAAM tested just using the upper nostrils, they did not see a significant pressure increase. They only saw an increase when all 4 nostrils were used.

If you ask which one would give you better performance, our belief is the the FTRA will perfom better due to the fact the Fbodies are bottom breathers and the kit takes air from a high pressure air source on the vehicle.

Running the two together will not yield a larger performance gain that just running one.

Thanks

 

and there's your answer gentlemen

 

I'm running a Lowes $25 seal . It effectively lowered my IATs to within a few degrees of ambient. I've considered the JAAM for a more stock look and longer lasting seal, but am waiting to see some performance data. My seals on my current setup will probably have to be changed every other year or so, but the price was right. Here's a snapshot:

 

get any HP gains from that nifty duct tape mod on the underside of the nostrils?

 

Probably not, but it was the only thing I could find on short notice to seal out the hot air.... Made me feel better

 

well Kudo's to you for your intellectual know how

 

Will the JAAM work on Firehawks?

 

I have BGRA.

Car ran 13.3 @ 107mph before BGRA. I could never do beter than 107mph.

AFTER


Car ran 13.1 @ 109 mph

 

so i might go with the FTRA since its cheaper and "works better"

 

i was running low 13s @ 105-106mph before i added the BGRA to my WS6 back just before production stoped for them. my cousin at the time was running 12.75@105-106mph with his fox body.

I added the BGRA to my car and we ended up racing on the street. i pulled him pretty bad in our 2 races. the next year i added a 3500rpm stall and ran 12.27@110mph

 

does anyone have any #s from having both and testing them? or maybe 2 of you just ran a dyno after you put them on your cars? i would like to know the actual outcome of the 2. thanks.

 

A dyno will not show the gains of the ram air pressure. It may show a slight gain due to the cooler IAT, but the real test is track time.

 

Before I got the BGRA kit, I heard that it took 2/10th off your times.

I got the kit and that is exactly what it did 13.3 to 13.1 and that was a warm day in May.



My mods: TSP 85mm lid & 85mm MAF
DD sub frame commectors
BMR parts/STB,LCA
NO HEADERS 13.1 @109mph

 

isnt the JAAM supposed to be better than the BGRA?

 

Yes. The BGRA only used the upper two nostrils. The JAAM uses all 4. Also, JAAM has improved the seal design and the parts are made stronger.