(http://www.envyperformance.com/images/products/intake/aemcoldair.jpg)
AEM @ £265
PPE Which we all know about
Summit like this:
(http://www.cruisenorthwales.com/forum/index.php?act=Attach&type=post&id=39912)
£150
Summit like this with pipes etc
(http://www.quikshiftracing.co.uk/Images/Products/Taipan%201.jpg)
The Quikshift Racing Taipan intake systems have been designed to give the ultimate in air induction technology. Cold air fed directly from the front of the vehicle is channelled into a genuine carbon fibre chamber encased with polished aluminium end plates. The cold air is drawn into the unique inverted stainless steel filter maximising airflow. The Taipan has the capabilities to unleash real power gains whilst retaining a distinctive induction note.
£150
Pesonally I think the PPE or Pelican Racing mod are still the best bets.
If you must do HOT AIR INDUCTION
go PPE
will you mother let you do this though?
I'm being serious by the way, I remember you told me she wouldn't allow you to sell the wheels when you wanted to upgrade?
Erm........
o..........k tbh i just didn't wanna sell them.
Here is the link for all to view:
m http://www.mr2roc.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t ... ght=wheels (http://www.mr2roc.co.uk/viewtopic.php?t=354&highlight=wheels) m
I wouldn't expect snide comments like this from admin.
I was actually refering to an conversation we had offline, rather than that link, but hey, as I said I was being serious no snideness intended. s:roll: :roll: s:roll: Apologies if it came across that way.
If you really didn't want to sell them then thats cool, just going on what you told me.
Anyway as I said to answer your question the PPE is teh only one that has dynoed any power, the AEM and similar even teh Apexi (much as it's popular) are really more for noise than show. Not thats that is necessarily a bad thing. depends what your after.
Quote from: "markiii"Anyway as I said to answer your question the PPE is the only one that has dynoed any power
I'm pretty sure several ppl at SC have dynoed AEM for 2-3hp increase. There were several dynos before the crash/hack, enough to convince me that it's more than just a dyno error.
And IIRC, someone in here (during the Yahoo list time?) has dynoed an Apexi with +3hp...
trouble with the SC results if I remember correctly is that no-one did a baseline first, 2-3bhp over stock could be down to so many things other than the AEm, even dyno errors.
First time I've heard of teh APexi making power, but if anyone has dyno results I'd be intrigued to see them.
LeeUK has the apexi. I was following him the other day and you can REALLY hear it under throttle.....seems to pick up a little quicker as well although it might just be mine isn't picking up as fast as it used to.
the apexi noise is gorgeous I agree. pick up, tends to relate to throttle response and there I can beleive it makes a difference.
experiment with the pocketlogger shows there is increased airflow, but the temperature goes up, hence better response but no increase in power as one cancels out the other. Of course on a cold day you may get the beneift without the disadvantage. On a warm day you lose teh cooling effect of teh stock box. Hence teh theoretical benefit behind the inlet duct
also worth considering is that a long inlet tract is supoposed to benefit bottom end torque whereas a short one is supposed to benefit top end power.
hence why teh PPE makes power at the top end, and the AEM, APEXi should keep it at teh bottom if they make any.
Quote from: "markiii"If you must do HOT AIR INDUCTION
go PPE
PPE is one of the few Cold Air induction kits. It has a heat shield behind the battery and draws air from the passenger intake.
true, if you can get the heatshield on, which lokign at your may be interesting.
I read a report some where once and all were tested and bearing inmind no one wants debrie sucked in there engine the apexi filter was significantly better than the others. s:wink: :wink: s:wink:
no doubt about it DAZ, intake location aside Apexi make the absolute best filters.
shame they don't make a panel.
Too lazy to dig up the link, but it's in mkiv.com under tech articles...
could it be that difficult to get an Apexi filter sat out in the cold air stream...you know, get a different hose made up?
I don't think so People just have to make an effort depends on how enthusiastic people are. s:D :D s:D
After reading air-inlet pipe options, I decided to try by-passing the venturi pipe, leading into the air filter box. I simply replaced that curved black plastic venturi-shaped tube, leading into the air-filter box with 3" flexible clothes dryer hose. `glad I did.
A half-dozen "poor-man's dyno" runs verified that the time has dropped 0.18 seconds from an average of 8.17 seconds to 7.99 seconds!
Furthermore, these new times were recorded with a Full tank; my records show that the previous times were recorded with 1/4 tank of gas. So, call it a 0.2 second improvement, which, I think, IS significant (about 4 hp at my 2,440 pound running weight).
What's more, I could easily feel the difference ... it was definitely pulling quite noticeably stronger from 5,500 - 6,500 rpm. The rest of the range felt more torquey, too. And, although 6,500 - 7,000 rpm is not included in the "poor-man's dyno" run, mine now pulled just as strongly to the redline fuel cutout; it used to die noticeably after 6,500 rpm. So, that venturi pipe definitely costs some horsepower (in my mind) ... especially since these improvements were recorded with a showroom stock car (i.e. with no low-restriction muffler, header or cpu-chip diddling).
Last, but not least (? ... for the audiophiles in the audience), the sound was quieter and deeper.
The above times were recorded at 35 degrees with a showroom stock 2003 (with ~35 pounds removed from no spare, jack kit or plastic tire cover). These times were recorded with the previous CAI (also 3" flexible clothes-dryer hose) from the left-side body vent to the stock inlet, below and in front of the fuse box.
These were, no doubt, the cheapest horses I'll get out of the beast! s:P :P s:P
I have designed an intake that allows you to switch back and forth between a "racing" configuration (which helps out quite a bit at higher RPMs due to the shortness of the tube) and an AEM-like configuration. At first I was going to do something fairly complicated, having a butterfly valve opened/closed at two different RPMs, but simplified it to be manually reconfigured for street (low to midrange RPMs for the most part) or racing (mid to high RPMs). I made and tested a prototype, which performed well. The "racing" configuration is basically a "Pelican Racing" design, but with the addition of a resonant chamber (which will have a different volume in the next version).
In the "racing" configuration I broke the N/A record for 1/4 mile in the Monkeywrench database, which was not a huge improvement over my previous best time (a few tenths IIRC), but it was nice to see it work. This was without even having a heat shield, an optimal length, or a couple of other improvements. I was actually dissappointed for a little while because I had higher hopes, but with the upcoming improvements it should be something that I feel others would be quite happy with.
The other configuration, which utilizes the longer tube (also with a small resonant chamber), should be as good as if not better than the AEM (an improvement over stock in midrange RPMs).
To switch between configurations you will have to move the MAF (there will be two different MAF mounting points, one will always be capped off) and also cap off either the short tube or long tube at a "Y".
My prototype is cobbled together out of parts from the stock intake, a rubber Y, and some aluminim tubing, but a guy on SpyderChat known as CeeDapp (Corky), who also makes nice antiflex plates (I have one of the first ones), is going to be making one out of aluminum for me with better fit and finish (professionally welded, probably anodized aluminum or perhaps powder coated). I think it is going to be the best intake out there. You will be able to use any air filter with a 3 inch collar. I found one that works well and only costs $30 (HR Racing). It is quite similar to the Apexi... same size and shape and a funnel at the end.
Corky will set the pricing (it will be his product, not mine, I'm not doing this for $$), but I think it will end up being about the same price as an AEM.
---
Something related: Corky and I codesigned a battery box for the Hawker Genesis G13EP (13 Amp Hour) lightweight battery. He is selling them now. I think the price is $35. You can mount this battery (saves about 16 lbs compared to stock) either where the stock battery is or in a lower position (provided you don't have SMT). The battery box is a little lighter than stock, but the main advantage is to very securely mount the little battery. The alternatives are to modify stock parts (drill a hole, cuts some more threads on a rod) or cobble something together yourself and hope it passes tech at an autocross.
Relocating the battery will be required for this new type of intake because part of the intake will be in the area occupied by the stock battery. Same story there... I don't have a financial interest in it... just trying to design some things to improve the car. Corky's topic (where he is selling the battery boxes) is called "Lightweight Battery Box" I think. Also see my topic "Relocating the Lightweight Battery". There will be more pictures soon.
Folks, note that the topics Beanie mentions in his post above are over at Spyderchat (http://www.spyderchat.com), before anyone mentions that they can't find them here s:wink: :wink: s:wink:
Note about 2/3 down this article ( m http://www.mr2roc.org/content/articles/essen/essen.php (http://www.mr2roc.org/content/articles/essen/essen.php) m )
TTE (Team Toyota Europe) copied my "clothes-dryer CAI" idea s:D :D s:D ... for the air-filter-to-wheel-well induction !!!
Quote from: "MikeCoughlin"Note about 2/3 down this article ( m http://www.mr2roc.org/content/articles/essen/essen.php (http://www.mr2roc.org/content/articles/essen/essen.php) m )
TTE (Team Toyota Europe) copied my "clothes-dryer CAI" idea s:D :D s:D ... for the air-filter-to-wheel-well induction !!!
Hmm - or maybe you copied them - the turbo kit that the intake pipe is part of has been under development for nearly 3 years.
Myself and Mark have also got H&S to produce a stainless replacement for the restrictive part fitted as standard (we now have orders for 30+ of these on a recent GB) - this alone should produce better results than clothes-dryer hose, as it won't be producing the turbulence that the ridges in the hose will cause.
Oh - and I forgot to mention - the pipe doesn't exit into the wheel well - there is a fabric tube that goes over the top of the wheel arch, and re-enters the engine bay just behind the battery.
just to clarify, the pipe is not something H&S sell normally. It's only available due toi teh quantity.
So when do I see some input on teh GB WE'RE organising then ? :-) :-) :-)
Quote from: "markiii"So when do I see some input on the GB WE'RE organising then ? :-) :-) :-)
You mean the one where for some reason I lost my intake pipe after we removed it and handed it to Ian to use as a pattern (which is why Toyota now have a black '2 minus it's intake pipe) whilst talking to them about the exhaust they had produced for Grant. The resulting prototype which also then mysteriously appeared on your car s:? :? s:?
Is that the GB you're referring to Mark s:?: :?: s:?: s:P :P s:P
the one where teh intake pipe came out of my loft you mean? That was the prototype? In that case yes :-) :-) :-)
the GB is a different matter :-) :-) :-)
Quote from: "SteveJ"Oh - and I forgot to mention - the pipe doesn't exit into the wheel well - there is a fabric tube that goes over the top of the wheel arch, and re-enters the engine bay just behind the battery.
Right, that's where the first part of my "clothes-dryer CAI" goes i.e. between the stock inlet in front of and below the fuse box and the driver-side air inlet vent.
No one should expect any more than 3, perhaps 4HP, from any NA intake on this engine. There are small gains to be had for a reasonable amount of money. I've seen the dynos (independent testing). There are pros and cons of different designs.
My intake is coming along pretty well. The prototype had a problem and is in revision. The guy who does the aluminim work (CeeDapp on SpyderChat) is making a replacement for the only stock part that I'm using. Meanwhile, I have something that works really well, but still uses the stock part (the short section of tubing where the MAF mounts).
The final design is basically an Erector Set type thing where you can quickly reconfigure the parts to optimize performance at different RPM ranges. Originally there were only two possible configurations but I just realized there will be a third. These are:
1. "Street" configuration (similar to AEM) -- for low to midrange RPMs. The tube will be shorter than AEM's, the air filter located higher, and the resonator will be there, too.
2. "Racing" configuration (short, straight tube (Pelican Racing design) with the addition of a resonator which sits in a rubber Y -- for midrange to high RPMs with decent performance at lower RPMs.
3. Pelican Racing design configuration (no rubber Y or resonator) -- you are all familiar with that. You will not have to cut up your stock intake, though.
The rubber Y also makes the sound less shrill (absorbs higher frequencies), at least in the "Racing" configuration, which is all I have tested thus far. I'll keep you posted. You've been a lovely audience. s:wink: :wink: s:wink:
I've been watching your work on Spyderchat Beanie..fantastic initiative! Looking forward to seeing the final thing! Hows's it sound at the moment?
Oh, thank you so much for the words of encouragement. I've really explored quite a bit of options. First it was going to be something that automatically switched intake tracts at two different crossover RPMs (one when increasing, the other when decreasing), but I found that to be just too darned complicated and expensive.
It sounds really good. A sound clip would be possible, but you'd hear the TRD header and TM exhaust, so I'm not sure anyone would pick up the intake noise. When you start up or shut down the engine you hear it because of the change in pressure, like an AEM except not as much of that (although the long tube, when connected, will probably sound very much like an AEM, given that the tube length is about the same and diameter is identical). You also hear it under heavy accel. It is quieter than the homemade Pelican Racing one I had on before.
Check out the Street/Racing Intake topic on SC. I added a heat shield and am not sure if it helps any. There is something different (maybe just the sound), but I can't even be sure if it is better this way. It makes sense to me that the air would be a few degrees cooler, but airflow would have to be impeded somewhat. I doubt the intake air is cooler by enough to make even 1/2 HP more, so it could very well be a wash (not make any difference at all).
It will be maybe 2-3 weeks before I can do more testing. Corky is busy making more antiflex plates and battery boxes and I have to go away for a bit.
Yeah I saw that thread Beanie..looking very promising indeed. Are you planning on going commercial with these or planning on doing a write up as per Hong did? I'd be very interested either way!
Just a quick question, you say the MAF in the 'street' configuration will be placed on the long intake tract. How close is it to the actual filter? The reason I ask is that some people here have stated that with the Apexi they experience 'lag' between when the throttle is pressed and when the car accelerates. I was thinking that maybe this was because air took longer to reach the MAF from the filter than in the original OE configuration. Hence the time delay or lag. Just wondered if your design suffered from this problem?
Quote from: "MRMike"Are you planning on going commercial with these or planning on doing a write up as per Hong did?
I have been writing it up as I go and soliciting input (just like this). I do not have any financial interest in anything I design for the car. It is just a hobby. The Lightweight Battery Box: I designed it, Corky built a prototype, (Corky then improved upon it... which he might also do with this for all I know), I tested and documented it, and he is selling them. He also does this kind of thing as a hobby. Nobody is going to make a whole lot of money selling aftermarket parts for this car, I don't think. I have someone lined up to do independent testing when I am satisfied with it. If it works well, I imagine Corky will start selling the kits. Our arrangement is for me to pay for parts and he donates his labor, which I think is a good deal for everyone. Another thing to consider is that it will be a kit and there is nothing to prevent anyone from modifying it, in fact I would encourage tinkering. You can use whatever air filter you want, for example.
Quote from: "MRMike"Just a quick question, you say the MAF in the 'street' configuration will be placed on the long intake tract. How close is it to the actual filter? The reason I ask is that some people here have stated that with the Apexi they experience 'lag' between when the throttle is pressed and when the car accelerates. I was thinking that maybe this was because air took longer to reach the MAF from the filter than in the original OE configuration. Hence the time delay or lag. Just wondered if your design suffered from this problem?
There are two kinds of "lag". In any tube, it will take longer for the pressure to change than in a shorter tube of the same diameter. More on tube length in a minute. The other kind of "lag" is the time delay between the time the airflow sensor detects (at the MAF) and when the signal makes it to the ECU and is processed... we need not worry about that.
The pressure change lag is a trade-off. I had an AEM on my car before and I can't say that I noticed a lag before the car
started to accelerate. My long tube will give the whole intake tract (including the rubber piece and so forth after that) about the same length as the AEM... a little shorter. You want the tube to be longer for normal driving, which is low- to mid-range RPMs, because of the resonant frequency. Speaking of frequencies, the Heimholtz resonator will be present in both configurations (different location, though).
As far as the distance of the MAF from the filter goes, what is critical is for the MAF to be located a ways down a smooth straight tube so there is minimal turbulence, otherwise the ECU will not be able to accurately measure airflow, the A/F ratio will be wrong, and the car will not run well at all. You may even get a CEL. Supposedly the Pelican Racing intake, which has the MAF very close the the throttle body, does not cause a CEL. That is probably because of two things. One, it is a straight shot and the airflow is nice and smooth. Two, it utilizes a stock intake part that has vanes inside (one inch before the MAF) to smooth the air. I tried my intake with the stock MAF mount in that same location and a long tube hooked up and there was way too much turbulence... duh!... because of the bend in the tube right before that. That's the reason for having a second MAF mounting point, just for the longer tube. It will be in about the same location relative to throttle body and filter as on the AEM.
I think I got lucky on the "racing" configuration. There is some theory behind it, of course, and I did the trial-and-error work, but hit upon something that works very well. We'll just have to see how the "street" configuration works.
Very interesting reading Beanie, ultimately it goes to show how good the standard set up actually is, and the amount of time and dedication it takes to make 'real' performance gains. Looking forward to hearing about the 'street' configuration sometime soon!
Update:
http://www.spyderchat.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=11224&start=15
Too tired to install just yet.
Quote from: "Beanie"Quote from: "MRMike"Just a quick question, you say the MAF in the 'street' configuration will be placed on the long intake tract. How close is it to the actual filter? The reason I ask is that some people here have stated that with the Apexi they experience 'lag' between when the throttle is pressed and when the car accelerates. I was thinking that maybe this was because air took longer to reach the MAF from the filter than in the original OE configuration. Hence the time delay or lag. Just wondered if your design suffered from this problem?
There are two kinds of "lag". In any tube, it will take longer for the pressure to change than in a shorter tube of the same diameter. More on tube length in a minute. The other kind of "lag" is the time delay between the time the airflow sensor detects (at the MAF) and when the signal makes it to the ECU and is processed... we need not worry about that.
The pressure change lag is a trade-off. I had an AEM on my car before and I can't say that I noticed a lag before the car started to accelerate. My long tube will give the whole intake tract (including the rubber piece and so forth after that) about the same length as the AEM... a little shorter. You want the tube to be longer for normal driving, which is low- to mid-range RPMs, because of the resonant frequency. Speaking of frequencies, the Heimholtz resonator will be present in both configurations (different location, though).
As far as the distance of the MAF from the filter goes, what is critical is for the MAF to be located a ways down a smooth straight tube so there is minimal turbulence, otherwise the ECU will not be able to accurately measure airflow, the A/F ratio will be wrong, and the car will not run well at all. You may even get a CEL. Supposedly the Pelican Racing intake, which has the MAF very close the the throttle body, does not cause a CEL. That is probably because of two things. One, it is a straight shot and the airflow is nice and smooth. Two, it utilizes a stock intake part that has vanes inside (one inch before the MAF) to smooth the air. I tried my intake with the stock MAF mount in that same location and a long tube hooked up and there was way too much turbulence... duh!... because of the bend in the tube right before that. That's the reason for having a second MAF mounting point, just for the longer tube. It will be in about the same location relative to throttle body and filter as on the AEM.
I think I got lucky on the "racing" configuration. There is some theory behind it, of course, and I did the trial-and-error work, but hit upon something that works very well. We'll just have to see how the "street" configuration works.
A little contribution to discussion. I recently installed a PPE intake that use s a smaller piping than stock one and no vane. Running with stock ECU and pocketlogger together a wideband O2 sensor there isn't a cell light, but i have a little bogging and hesitation at low RPM . My pocketlogger says A/F ratio is too rich in closed loop and short table values are always negative. In open-loop values are 12,5-12,7 at WOT ( slightly rich).
Also with Apexi Power FC, i have to take off a 5% of fuel when airflow levels are medium or low and rich A/F ratio at part throttle.
I would think that you would have just that... bogging and hesitation at low RPM due to no vanes and also worse performance than stock at low to midrange RPM due to short length.
I'm testing a short tube (replacement for stock part), same inside diameter as stock, but for now, w/out vanes. Corky wants to know if vanes are really necessary (it is harder to make the part with vanes). Yeah, they are going to be an improvement, absolutely. They are there for a reason. I may have some results by the end of the day... taking a break from the Florida heat.
By the way, I took your advice earlier and set all my airflow values to 94%... seems to make a very slight difference for the better (hard to tell). I looked at O2 levels after disabling closed loop and values were closer to what I want.
---
EDIT: I think I said this earlier, but I cut up my AEM and used a short length of it (about 10") as a "short ram" intake and the car ran, but had the problems you mentioned. The AEM is smaller inside than stock and has no vanes.
Everyone are going to have to wait, as will I, for test results. SOMEBODY did something wrong. I'll not reveal what it was or who that SOMEBODY is because SOMEBODY may be embarassed. Also, SOMEBODY may think it is the other SOMEBODY's fault. s:wink: :wink: s:wink: It can be fixed and it is going to work like a champ.
Hello again Beanie..I noticed on the Spyderchat thread you mentioned
"They say that you have to lower the intake temperature by about 10 degrees F in order to get 1 HP out of it"
Have you got this data, or was it just something you remembered?
Also really interesting to see effectively how much air the filter draws from the straight throught tube you've installed in the wing. How long was it on there to get that dirty? Given that so much air seems to be drawn from there, have you not thought about a pipe with an enlarged end that would effectively cover the filter?
Really interesting read yet again Beanie
The filter was there for a few months. I'm concentrating on getting more cool air to the filter because pipe length and diameter and filter are pretty much perfect. Trying to eliminate or mitigate the increase in intake air temp that happens when sitting still or moving slow. Installed large fan under decklid, but need a shroud. Thinking about other options, like a powerful fan that would actually suck air from side vent and direct it at filter. Hard to make something like that.
10degF cooler gives about 1HP is just a rule of thumb. I think it is accurate. Have you noticed the difference? I certainly have in every small car I've owned. 10degC (about 18degF) is what I'd like to see... and what I think is very possible with the right kind of fan and duct.
Quote from: "Beanie"10degF cooler gives about 1HP is just a rule of thumb. I think it is accurate. Have you noticed the difference? I certainly have in every small car I've owned. 10degC (about 18degF) is what I'd like to see... and what I think is very possible with the right kind of fan and duct.
Yes I certainly notice a difference. I posted before about performance loss in the heat, seemingly the GTECH showed a 10HP loss in a 13 degree difference in ambient temp. I have no idea about the internal temps. Grant noticed similar losses.
My reason for asking for specifics was that I was thinking of ways of lowering the intake temp, and I wanted to see how much of a temp reduction I would have to get for it to have any effect on performance. Seems the most efficient way by far, is by using NO2, something I'm loathed to do.
I was also then thinking, now this sounds crazy, and all common sense dictates it won't work, about lining the inlet pipe with Fridge freezer elements. But given the speed at which air must pass down this tube, there is no way I feel you could get significant temperature drop.
Noticed you mentioned that with your intake in the 'race' setup the only problem you have found is standing heat dissipation. You could perhaps fashion a small box with freezer elements that surrounds the filter in the race config, to prevent heat build up at slow speeds. Then again given the results you found with the Heat shield, this may prove ineffective.
So ultimately that is the reason I enquired about the exact temp difference you would have to effect in order to gain performance, I'm very tempted to give the freezer elements a go in the inlet pipe I talked about before, if only to quell my own curiosity.
Quote from: "MRMike"seemingly the GTECH showed a 10HP loss in a 13 degree difference in ambient temp.
That is hard to believe. I'm not saying impossible, but wouldn't that be nice if it were true because it is fixable.
Quote from: "MRMike"lining the inlet pipe with Fridge freezer elements. But given the speed at which air must pass down this tube, there is no way I feel you could get significant temperature drop.
No way is right. Too much airflow to cool effectively.
Quote from: "MRMike"You could perhaps fashion a small box...
I think the best thing to do as far as shielding goes is to do two things: (1.) wrap the intake pipe in lots of insulation and (2.) try to wall off the left 1/3rd of the engine bay. There are a lot of hoses and things to the left of the engine, though. I'll probably get around to making something that would work around the hoses, a vertical piece of aluminum.
I've posted some more info about fans on SpyderChat (topic starts with "Cooling fans"). To save duplication, I'll just post over there for a while.
Quote from: "MRMike"I posted before about performance loss in the heat, seemingly the GTECH showed a 10HP loss in a 13 degree difference in ambient temp. I have no idea about the internal temps. Grant noticed similar losses.
This thread will help:
m http://www.spyderchat.com/phpBB/viewtop ... t=misnomer (http://www.spyderchat.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=10511&highlight=misnomer) m
Note: Engine bay temps might reach 120 - 150 degrees F. Even if outside temp is 90 degrees, getting air from outside the engine bay (the drag racers' definition of CAI) can make a 60 degree difference.
So, it's
critical to pick up intake air
outside the engine bay. This is why all those cone filters, which take air from
within the engine bay are a bunch of junk!
With my racing intake, I see about 50C (122F) on my FC Commander when in stop-and-go traffic when the outside air temp is in the mid 90s. Cruising on the highway, it drops down to around 38C (100F)... not much warmer than it is outside! This is because I:
- removed plastic belly pan in the rear
- removed the "drip pan" thing under the slots in the rear
- have a hose routing cool air from the side vent to the filter (which evidently helps some)
This is WITHOUT any fans working. There is a whole lot of airflow through the engine compartment at speed. Ever look under your car? Lots of spaces.
The problem with putting the filter in a cooler place is that the intake tract becomes longer, so the resonant frequency is lower and it is more restrictive than you want unless you are going for low-end torque. These factors make a big difference. It isn't all about temperature!
All I'm trying to do with the fans is make a good thing better by mitigating heat build up, to reduce the amount of time it takes to get the air temp back down where it should be.
I'm trying to have it all. Two configurations, each one as good as I can possibly make it. One for puttering around town, one for racing, with both of them better overall than stock. What's not to like? Prefer the longer intake with cooler air? Fine with me.
Quote from: "Beanie"The problem with putting the filter in a cooler place
Oh, I didn't mean to imply that the filter needs to be in a cooler place ... only that the filter's
air souce needs to be from a cool place (i.e. outside the engine bay).
For example, if using one of those cone filters, it's important to have the filter covered in some container, which grabs air from ducting, leading to outside the engine bay.
Thus, the stock filter, which
IS contained in a plastic box is pretty good - as long as one continues the ducting to outside the engine bay air. Again, that "Misnomer: CAI vs HAI thread goes much further into this.
Completely enclosing the air filter and adding more tubing, so the tube is nearer to outside air, is pretty much the same thing as adding more tubing and putting the filter on the end. That is what you are overlooking, apparently.
You should really TRY a different intake. You seem to like experimenting. I've tried a lot of different things, which is how I got to this point.
Quote from: "Beanie"Completely enclosing the air filter and adding more tubing, so the tube is nearer to outside air, is pretty much the same thing as adding more tubing and putting the filter on the end.
No ... the latter would leave the filter exposed to the outside elements, which is
not what I'm saying at all.
I was talking about performance, not dirt.
You really should try a different intake. I was a little skeptical about the AEM, but saw the dynos that were done at a shop in Atlanta. The guy who showed me the results was Charlie Shatzen (spelling?), who makes the Team Moon exhausts. He doesn't sell intakes. He was telling me that the AEM and Injen are not much better than stock, how the stock intake already was a CAI. There was a 2HP gain. That small a difference is hard to measure, as there is some deviation from one run to the next. They did multiple runs and the dyno compensates for ambient temps. There was even a huge fan in front of the car (they did this with my Team Moon dynos, too). I decided 2HP in the midrange was worth it and bought an AEM. It really is a little better than stock, especially when you wall off the area the filter sits in. I estimate +3HP for most temperatures.
Later on I decided I had nothing to lose and made a Pelican Racing intake. There is a significant improvement at higher RPMs... I was very surprised.
All I'm trying to do (and so far, succeeding) is making each of these (shorter and longer) approaches to intake design better, fixing their weaknesses as best I can, plus making something that can be either one in about two minutes using just a screwdriver. Bonus: having basic parts to let others play around with, possibly improving on what I did.
Check this out: http://www.gomiata.com/racbeatin.html
"Despite its higher intake temperatures, it remains the power king of the temperature-corrected dyno tests."
I won't be posting very often over here for a while. Too many car boards, not enough time. There is a topic on that new site (socalspyders.com) called "Modular Intake News" under the 1ZZ NA forum. That's where I'll post the latest developments on that from here on.
Cheers to all my mr2roc.org/com friends here, especially those who have visited the new Southern California board.
Oh, one more topic over there may be of interest: "Karma Plus" in the Newbie Zone gives you a chance to get a free steering wheel badge (only one problem, though, it says "MIDSHIP RUNABOUT" instead of "MR2 ROADSTER") and possibly a Spider theme nose badge (no wording) that goes with the steering wheel badge.
I tested the prototype of the "racing" configuration today... success! I received the two modified tubes from Corky/CeeDapp, but have only installed and tested the short one. (I'm very busy.)
http://www.socalspyders.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=242
"street" configuration (long tube) also works as expected, maybe a little better. No dynos or anything yet, but my calibrated posterior says it performs at least as well as an AEM.
- not as prone to swamping (filter is a few inches higher)
- don't have to remove rear bumper to install it... or change filter
- quieter (I think.. cannot remember well enough to say for sure), which makes sense due to resonator
- and of course you can switch over to the "racing" configuration quite easily
Check out the link in the previous post for more info. Interesting: someone else making an intake (for forced induction application) came to the same conclusion about pipe diameter and vanes being critical.
I just gave Corky the green light. The ball is in his court now (to make more, do dynos, whatever).
We are going to improve the street configuration. It will be better and actually cheaper to make.
However, the design of the racing configuration is set in stone. A short video of the prototype is available for download on socalspyders.com. http://www.socalspyders.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=242&start=66
BCH Racing Intakes are now available as a DIY kit on Spyderchat. Corky (CeeDapp on Spyderchat) is selling the parts he made for me in a group buy and the rest of the parts are up to you.
It is similar to a Pelican Racing design, but better in several ways. Please read the PDF for more information. http://home.comcast.net/~kevinbeane/BCH_Racing_Intake.pdf
A dyno will be done soon.
I'm dissappointed but not all that surprised that all 10 of the first offering have not been snatched up. Some factors that I think contribute to the slow start are:
- no dyno yet
- not cheap (it will cost about $230 USD to put one together, which places it in between an AEM and a PPE in price... closer to an AEM)
- requires some work to put together
- requires Lightweight Battery Box or some other means of relocating stock battery (a good mod in itself)
- not the best time of year to be selling them (getting close to Christmas, some people putting their cars up for the winter)
I think the dyno will show a 4-6HP gain (max) with an improvement from as low as 3000RPM all the way to redline. What it won't show is the much improved throttle response. The sound is awesome, too, if I do say so myself.
Anyway, Corky and I put a lot of time, money, and effort into this and I'd like to see him recoup some of his investment. I'm just doing it for the fun of it, to improve my car (mission accomplished on both of those counts), and to do something for other MR2 Spyder owners. I would be very pleased if it became a successful product. I think Corky would be paying himself about a nickel an hour if he sold all 10 of the first batch.
By the way, the best place to reach me is via PM here or on Spyderchat if you have any questions.
===============================================
Spyderchat appears to be down today, perhaps "Closed for the Holidays" or due to power outage (East Coast storms last night). I'll post this here, then. I tested an AFE filter today. Why AFE? It is very similar to a K&N (oiled) but has better materials. The end is closed, unlike the kind I have been using (Spectre), which has an inverted cone in the end. The AFE and K&N probably provide better filtration and will last longer, but cost about 2.5 times more. I was interested in what difference in the end of the filter would make (they are the same in all dimensions).
Results:
- Sound is quite different. AFE is quieter and the "growl" or "howl" of the Spectre is missed. Note: that growl/howl corresponds to acceleration I can feel with the Spectre. Exhale sound when engine is shut off is much quieter.
- Power vs RPM is not as smooth. There are some little bumps, but it is hard to tell if they are above or below the level of the Spectre.
- Power does not appear to be as good as the Spectre. It doesn't seem like the engine is as willing to rev.
I tested with the tube as long as it will go and as short as it will go. Longer is better with both filters. I didn't do any G-Tech testing... this was all "driving feel" or "butt dyno", which I have confidence in, since I drive this car every day.
Beanie,
I'm interested in the BCH intake, I just need to know the following:
I want to keep the stock battery, can I relocate it using corky's battery box? I need to keep stock for cold starting ability in Blighty + my wife drives the car daily so I need to have reliability if she leaves phone on charge, stereo on etc. Ideally I'd prefer not to relocate it but I guess it's necessary to fit the intake.
Is it much louder than stock, I do currently have a H&S twin exhaust so unless it's really loud it shouldn't be a problem.
Since you want to keep the stock battery, you could relocate it up front. Corky makes a special front mounting solution for the lightweight battery that all fits under the spare, but not the stock battery. I'm going to do a PDF on that fairly soon, actually, just as a favor to him. He could a mounting solution for the stock battery, I'm sure. Here's a idea, though. If you are concerned about the G13EP not having enough starting power, you could go to a larger one. This would also require a custom mounting solution.
Loudness: Well, it is louder than stock, but it isn't a sound you are likely to object to. I'd say it is quieter than an AEM. Once I get my camcorder mount made I'll make another video or two (top up, top down). The last one I made had pretty much just wind buffeting noise. I hear the Team Moon single above the intake, if that gives you an idea. The sound is quite pleasing to my ears. There is an exhale sound when you turn the car off, like an AEM but louder because it isn't back there in the bumper.
can you post the instructions on relocating the battery.....i've been able to figure everything out except for relocating the ground.... s:( :( s:(
kev
(http://www.spydermagazine.com/files/lwbb_gnd_opt2.jpg)
This is what I did for the lower mounting position. This shows a laydown style box but it will work for the other style, too. I just used a dremel to remove the paint underneath where that terminal is. The wire came from here I think -->
(http://www.spydermagazine.com/files/lwbb_gnd_opt1.jpg)
that's exactly what i ended up doing! s:) :) s:) except that with the battery in an upright position things get pretty tight in there (i damn near welded the box to the chassis s:lol: :lol: s:lol: )
one question though, i didn't bother to sand the surface since i noticed that the stock grounding point is painted as well, please don't tell me i have to yank the cables off again! (see the above mentioned welding event)
kev
The bolt will provide good continuity, but I'd sand the paint later on for a better ground.
BTW, put the positive lead on first with the negative one taped up in case it decides to brush against the neg. post and you'll be less likely to arc somewhere.
Quote from: "Beanie"The bolt will provide good continuity, but I'd sand the paint later on for a better ground.
BTW, put the positive lead on first with the negative one taped up in case it decides to brush against the neg. post and you'll be less likely to arc somewhere.
the battery was already connected, i was trying to hook the threaded rods for the clamp and something touched the positive terminal, now i've got two nice scorch marks, one on the clamp itself and one where the rods hook onto the bottom..... s:D :D s:D
after that, i became very weary of having the battery where it is....that great big opening right above it seemd to call out to my tools and my flashlight!! s:lol: :lol: s:lol:
i've still got to hook up the vacum line, but it's too late to get the hose now, i'll get to it tomorrow........but the first official BCH test drive has been made, i'll post comments after a much needed shower and a bite to eat.......
kev (whoosh)