"COLD" air intakes??????

[Hijinx]

In my experience thus far, there's only one intake on the market that really does anything, and it's not because of the IATs. And that's only due to it being significantly shorter than any other intake. That intake is made by 2JR, and it's effects are felt in spool... Even then you can make a good case against it. My intake set up is DHM inlet, Mountune silicone, K&N drop-in, and I cut the bottom out the box out. But using my car as it currently is, is apples to oranges.

With the Cyborg in mind: Cobb vs Box Mod w/ Mountune hose vs 2JR... I ultimately fell back to the modified box. CAT is CAT is CAT.

 

[BoostBumps]

Max Allowable Load vs Intake Air Temp Compensation Multipliers

Max. Load at WOT and Closed WG Comp. (IAT)

"This compensation is applied to the result of the Max. Load at WOT and Closed WG (Table 01-15 / Optimum Power) tables as part of the calculation to create the Load Max. Achievable monitor".

 

[D1JL]

Thanks Tom,
I knew IAT had to be used for something.

So back to the original topic and questions.
If IAT is increased; how does that effect operation/performance?

This should address the issue as to whether a true CAI (outside air) vs under hood air is better.

WOW, it only took 43 posts to get here and we still really don't have an answer. lol




Dave

 

[JPGC]

Max. Load at WOT and Closed WG Comp. (IAT)

"This compensation is applied to the result of the Max. Load at WOT and Closed WG (Table 01-15 / Optimum Power) tables as part of the calculation to create the Load Max. Achievable monitor".

View attachment 7040

Yep, there it is, lol.

 

[dyn085]

So basically the car can only achieve 93% of max load, which is generally unattainable (should be set higher than what is actually achieved to avoid limitation), at 140 degrees fahrenheit via IAT as opposed to the 6 degrees of reduced timing at 150 degrees via CAT.

FMIC > intake argument

 

[JasonHaven]

Wouldn't one get both, ideally?

 

[JasonHaven]

Thanks Tom,
I knew IAT had to be used for something.

So back to the original topic and questions.
If IAT is increased; how does that effect operation/performance?

This should address the issue as to whether a true CAI (outside air) vs under hood air is better.

WOW, it only took 43 posts to get here and we still really don't have an answer. lol




Dave

This is what's been confusing me, and I was hoping to get some clarity. Not as a replacement for FMIC, but in addition to.

 

[JPGC]

In my experience thus far, there's only one intake on the market that really does anything, and it's not because of the IATs. And that's only due to it being significantly shorter than any other intake. That intake is made by 2JR, and it's effects are felt in spool... Even then you can make a good case against it. My intake set up is DHM inlet, Mountune silicone, K&N drop-in, and I cut the bottom out the box out. But using my car as it currently is, is apples to oranges.

With the Cyborg in mind: Cobb vs Box Mod w/ Mountune hose vs 2JR... I ultimately fell back to the modified box. CAT is CAT is CAT.

I like the 2JR but I may be selling mine soon. It performs well and sounds neat when you want it to. That sound does wear on you after a while driving on the interstate. It is also a pain to clean and maintain..if like me, you drive a lot. It's great for a weekend racer and someone who doesn't drive 70 plus mines daily. I'm gonna give the MAP intake a go and do some testing with it just cause, lol

 

[Hijinx]

I like the 2JR but I may be selling mine soon. It performs well and sounds neat when you want it to. That sound does wear on you after a while driving on the interstate. It is also a pain to clean and maintain..if like me, you drive a lot. It's great for a weekend racer and someone who doesn't drive 70 plus mines daily. I'm gonna give the MAP intake a go and do some testing with it just cause, lol

Definitely wore on me after a 14 hour road trip. Imagine going up into the mountains... It just went on and on and on and on and on... By the time I stopped for gas, the induction noise was all I could hear. Sold it immediately when I got home. If I ever move on from the modded stock set up, I'd go with CP-e's intake. Mostly because it's pretty. The price is staggering, though.

 

[dyn085]

Wouldn't one get both, ideally?

The OEM turbo gets maxed pretty quickly and someone could easily max it out with other parts and get virtually nothing from the addition of an intake.

My point is that those that are trying to start arguments over the type of intake used are focusing their energy in the wrong direction. There are benefits and compromises made with choosing an intake, which is no different than any other aftermarket part, but constantly complaining that one is definitively better than the other is a waste of time considering our intercooled application.

 

[JPGC]

Definitely wore on me after a 14 hour road trip. Imagine going up into the mountains... It just went on and on and on and on and on... By the time I stopped for gas, the induction noise was all I could hear. Sold it immediately when I got home. If I ever move on from the modded stock set up, I'd go with CP-e's intake. Mostly because it's pretty. The price is staggering, though.

It's nice and yes it is expensive, but is a show piece.

 

[Hijinx]

The OEM turbo gets maxed pretty quickly and someone could easily max it out with other parts and get virtually nothing from the addition of an intake.

My point is that those that are trying to start arguments over the type of intake used are focusing their energy in the wrong direction. There are benefits and compromises made with choosing an intake, which is no different than any other aftermarket part, but constantly complaining that one is definitively better than the other is a waste of time considering our intercooled application.

Exactly; CAT is CAT is CAT.

 

[JPGC]

The OEM turbo gets maxed pretty quickly and someone could easily max it out with other parts and get virtually nothing from the addition of an intake.

My point is that those that are trying to start arguments over the type of intake used are focusing their energy in the wrong direction. There are benefits and compromises made with choosing an intake, which is no different than any other aftermarket part, but constantly complaining that one is definitively better than the other is a waste of time considering our intercooled application.

Exactly.

 

[JasonHaven]

So intake shouldn't really be bothered with unless one were to go to a bigger turbo? And then if one does, does a closed/cold air have the most benefit, or does it not really matter compared to simply how much air is being pulled in?

 

[dyn085]

So intake shouldn't really be bothered with unless one were to go to a bigger turbo? And then if one does, does a closed/cold air have the most benefit, or does it not really matter compared to simply how much air is being pulled in?

These questions are actually more difficult than simple yes/no. I wouldn't consider an intake for power on the OEM turbo, but for sound/looks I would. Conversely, if I had no intention of upgrading exhaust then I would probably take the marginal gains of an intake.

On a big turbo I would be more concerned with getting as much as to the turbo as quickly as possible instead of getting the coldest possible air, again, because of the FMIC. I wouldn't intentionally try to get the hottest air and might consider heat shielding if I thought it was necessary, but my primary concern would be having an FMIC that could efficiently get my acceptable CATs.

 

[JasonHaven]

These questions are actually more difficult than simple yes/no. I wouldn't consider an intake for power on the OEM turbo, but for sound/looks I would. Conversely, if I had no intention of upgrading exhaust then I would probably take the marginal gains of an intake.

On a big turbo I would be more concerned with getting as much as to the turbo as quickly as possible instead of getting the coldest possible air, again, because of the FMIC. I wouldn't intentionally try to get the hottest air and might consider heat shielding if I thought it was necessary, but my primary concern would be having an FMIC that could efficiently get my acceptable CATs.

Thanks for taking the time to answer, and breaking it down as simply as possible. FMIC is 100% on my to-do list before next summer (along with AP3), due to feeling the effects of DC temps/humidity. I've been mixed on the intake in terms of how much of a functional benefit it has.

 

[pelotonracer2]

Let's just start with this.
It is obvious you don't know where to start but let's just clear up this point.

Superchargers and turbochargers do EXACTLY the same thing, they are just driven in a different manor.
A supercharger is normally belt driven from the crankshaft.
Whereas turbochargers are driven by an impeller in the exhaust flow.
They are both compressors and force fresh air into the intake.

To say that "turbos pull air from the exhaust side" is not only wrong, It would NOT even work.
Exhaust gas is mostly inert therefore to pull air from the exhaust, would cause the car not to run.

Now that this point has been corrected, please go on with the argument.



Dave

LOL. I didn't mean it that way as far as the exhaust side is concerned. I'm fully aware how superchargers and turbos work, having built both systems from scratch, including compressor pumps used in other applications (marine water pumps/C3 desalination pumps). I should have phrased my comment differently... I meant to say that turbos are driven by exhaust flow, not that they pull exhaust through the motor (that's just stupid). I must have wrote that before I had some caffeine. lol

But I'd have to disagree that superchargers and turbochargers do "exactly" the same thing. Yes they are both "forced induction". Superchargers build boost based on rpm (crankshaft speed) where as turbos make boost based on exhaust flow, hence why turbos have lag and superchargers don't. The result is usually a significantly different powerband delivery between the two systems (but the end result is more than one way to skin a cat). Using turbo(s) is more efficient on smaller dispacement applications than a supercharger (although there is also a big difference between a centrifugal, roots and screw type superchargers and each has it's own strengths, weaknesses and limitations).

 

[D1JL]

@ pelotonracer2
I know what you meant in your first post, I just couldn't resist.

Although you are mostly correct in your new post.
You have to admit and must know that both superchargers and turbochargers are related rely on engine RPM.
Superchargers, yes, by direct connection but turbos as well.
For without engine RPM there would be no exhaust flow and the turbo wouldn't turn.



Dave

 

[pelotonracer2]

@ pelotonracer2
I know what you meant in your first post, I just couldn't resist.

Although you are mostly correct in your new post.
You have to admit and must know that both superchargers and turbochargers are related rely on engine RPM.
Superchargers, yes, by direct connection but turbos as well.
For without engine RPM there would be no exhaust flow and the turbo wouldn't turn.



Dave

That's true too, but you get what I'm saying. LOL

 

[D1JL]

LOL


Dave