KillertC.com/GSCMotorsports.com Scion tC Intake Test !!!!
11-10-2005, 02:22 PM
#41
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Western Massachusetts
Posts: 222
it makes me think that i should switch my injen intake to the cai version. would putting a different filter on the intake have an effect? i bought the same size injen filter however the diameter at the top is going to be 4 inches instead of 5 inches. does anyone know if this will effect anything?
11-10-2005, 02:29 PM
#42
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Englishman in New Jersey
Posts: 640
Personally, I wouldn't do anything until we all get these results straight.
I still don't buy the whole turbulent air concept, it doens't make sense.
The pipes aren't that big, MAF's tend to work by having a 'sccop' that sticks out into the middle area, air is passed into that scoop and passes over a heated wire, the air cools it down and the MAF is able to read that temp difference. (that's a real basic example).
Personally, I don't buy that adding extra piping makes the air less or more turbulent, or that even if it did, it would affect the MAF readings that much.
I wish they'd tested with just the stock air box removed, so no filter at all.
I still don't buy the whole turbulent air concept, it doens't make sense.
The pipes aren't that big, MAF's tend to work by having a 'sccop' that sticks out into the middle area, air is passed into that scoop and passes over a heated wire, the air cools it down and the MAF is able to read that temp difference. (that's a real basic example).
Personally, I don't buy that adding extra piping makes the air less or more turbulent, or that even if it did, it would affect the MAF readings that much.
I wish they'd tested with just the stock air box removed, so no filter at all.
11-10-2005, 03:03 PM
#45
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Shreveport, LA
Posts: 1,167
I second limey.
Rather than spend $200, I hacked the airbox, insulated the exterior, and dropped in a K&N.
Its just hard to believe that a K&N lost power when compared to that diaper of a stock filter.
Rather than spend $200, I hacked the airbox, insulated the exterior, and dropped in a K&N.
Its just hard to believe that a K&N lost power when compared to that diaper of a stock filter.
11-10-2005, 05:54 PM
#48
Member
SL Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 52
When you do your next test, it would be interesting to see stock vs. stock air filter without charcoal filter and K&N drop-in without charcoal filter.
Also, could you lay the K&N drop-in graph over the stock graph? It might have lost a little peak HP, but it looks like overall there was a gain. The Torque curve definitely looks better from the K&N drop-in.
Also, could you lay the K&N drop-in graph over the stock graph? It might have lost a little peak HP, but it looks like overall there was a gain. The Torque curve definitely looks better from the K&N drop-in.
11-10-2005, 06:38 PM
#49
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 268
Originally Posted by Limey
OK could someone explain HOW and WHY the SR version of the injen performed so much worse that it's CAI sister.
The only difference is a foot of curvey pipe.
How in technical terms could this affect the A/F mix, how could it affect the MAF.
Surely once the air reaches the SR position in the pipe it's the same air doing the same thing. It's just airflow in a pipe, right.
It doesn't make any physics sense, atleast not to me.
The only difference is a foot of curvey pipe.
How in technical terms could this affect the A/F mix, how could it affect the MAF.
Surely once the air reaches the SR position in the pipe it's the same air doing the same thing. It's just airflow in a pipe, right.
It doesn't make any physics sense, atleast not to me.
Your comments about the ECU may very well be true, but regardless, if the ECU was given the same amount to adjust to each, assuming equal continual adjustment between them all over an extended period of time, the Injen will still come out on top. It’s hard to say if they gains in power would be equal for them, but it’s hard to say they wouldn’t be equal too. We don't know enough about the ECU.
11-10-2005, 07:22 PM
#50
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Englishman in New Jersey
Posts: 640
Originally Posted by Thrawn
I would guess that "foot of curvey pipe" along with the remaining piping was designed with a properly tuned length to give the best flow characteristics, while the SRI form is just there as an option. I suspect it would have been hard to tune them both properly.
R&D probably involoves: Where can we put the filter so it's a CAI, how do we connect that filter to the engine with the least amount of curves and the least amount of install effort, and ideally using pipe that's on other cars to minimize production costs.
11-10-2005, 08:07 PM
#52
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 573
If you know about air flow you would know that how the air enters the engine is important. Obviously the short ram filter is sitting to close to the MAF sensor and causing it to get false readings. The MAF is reading way more air then is actually entering the car.
When the CAI part is installed the air is less disturbed and flows pass the MAF uniformly. There is just to much air turbulence in front of the MAF in short ram configuration.
Intakes aren't all just pipe and filter. Air flow is the most important thing. If the MAF can't read the air flow correctly the ECU can't adjust the fuel curve accurately. If you look at the Injen AFR graph it is very smooth, which tells me that the air passing by the MAF is very uniform and easy to read.
On my personal note. I think this test is very valid. I have seen these types of results from K&N before and that is why I got the Injen for my car.
When the CAI part is installed the air is less disturbed and flows pass the MAF uniformly. There is just to much air turbulence in front of the MAF in short ram configuration.
Intakes aren't all just pipe and filter. Air flow is the most important thing. If the MAF can't read the air flow correctly the ECU can't adjust the fuel curve accurately. If you look at the Injen AFR graph it is very smooth, which tells me that the air passing by the MAF is very uniform and easy to read.
On my personal note. I think this test is very valid. I have seen these types of results from K&N before and that is why I got the Injen for my car.
11-10-2005, 08:11 PM
#53
Senior Member
Scikotics
SL Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Nor-Cal Scikotics
Posts: 1,811
Originally Posted by Limey
Originally Posted by Thrawn
I would guess that "foot of curvey pipe" along with the remaining piping was designed with a properly tuned length to give the best flow characteristics, while the SRI form is just there as an option. I suspect it would have been hard to tune them both properly.
R&D probably involoves: Where can we put the filter so it's a CAI, how do we connect that filter to the engine with the least amount of curves and the least amount of install effort, and ideally using pipe that's on other cars to minimize production costs.
11-10-2005, 09:11 PM
#54
Senior Member
SL Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Miami Beach, FL
Posts: 345
Awesome tests, I believe the difference in between the intakes as to do with the A/F ratio (between the metal piping intakes and not the stocker with box). Thats pretty neat though, i still wonder if the power changes when the ECU adjusts after driving for a few days.
I see the AW header there, Im guessing it was done with that on. Was the rest of the exhaust stock?
I see the AW header there, Im guessing it was done with that on. Was the rest of the exhaust stock?
11-12-2005, 03:30 PM
#58
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: charleston, SC
Posts: 14
Originally Posted by XD40tC
If I sent you my Umnitza intake would you test it for me? Could I trust you? lol
Also I will put the K&N Drop in and the stock air box test up today. just got to get to the office to get to the computer.
We are going to do one more test hopefully next weekend. We have one injen axel back exhaust to test against stock and also a new exhaust. Vibrant is sending us there new header back exhaust to test fit and to make some power runs with it. if the exhaust performs as well as i anticipate should be quite a hit. If anyone has a Megan exhaust or an exhaust we can get with the quickness we will throw it on too.
A little for shadow on the Vibrant. it is a header back exhaust which has a race cat in line in what i beleave to be a 2.5" or 2.75" pipe going all the way back.
Just so every one knows we are shooting for 170-175whp with just a few mods. Here is a list of items we will be running or trying...
Injen Intake CAI
GSC Ported T-Body
Alphaworks Header
Vibrant or Injen Exhaust which ever makes more power.
and a S-AFC 2 if the Air fuel starts to get out of wack but we will see what happens.
11-12-2005, 04:53 PM
#60
Senior Member
Scikotics
SL Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Nor-Cal Scikotics
Posts: 1,811
Originally Posted by Batjew
awsome, if that setup can hit 170 before the SC, I'd be happy and will totally go that path, GSC FTW. that Vibrant sounds sick, any idea what the cost is?