# What is this part for??



## Pelican18TQA4 (Dec 13, 2000)

There's a discussion going on in the MkV R32 forum (3.2 VR6 in the new R32 has a part very similar to this) about the tube that runs along the lefthand side of the engine that goes into the firewall. I've tried with all my might to tell everyone on the discussion that it's there to introduce some induction sounds from the intake to the cabin, but some are insisting that's it's for the CCV. I know for a fact it's for the former but I can't find actual written reference to it anywhere. Anyone know where to find proof to put the rumors to rest??


----------



## [email protected] (Aug 25, 2001)

*Re: What is this part for?? (Pelican18TQA4)*

As per the GTI DVD, its the speaker that amplifies engine noise into the cabin


----------



## Pelican18TQA4 (Dec 13, 2000)

*Re: What is this part for?? ([email protected])*

I thought I heard it on the DVD, but I wasn't sure. Thanks!


----------



## sarge1 (Oct 14, 2003)

*Re: What is this part for?? (Pelican18TQA4)*

What is the reason for wanting to introduce sound of the engine in the car? they put soud insulation al over and then let the sond come in why?


----------



## PD Performance (Jul 1, 2004)

*Re: What is this part for?? ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_As per the GTI DVD, its the speaker that amplifies engine noise into the cabin

It is actually quite humorous to hear if you compare it to say an A3 that does not have it.
The sound difference is very noticeable between the two and the noise maker in the GTI sounds complete stupid... its like v-tech whine when you were the engine without it.
Good news is you can get the pipe leading up to the TB for an A3 and eliminate that. I forget the price. It was under 100 bucks.


----------



## cabracco85 (Apr 24, 2002)

*Re: What is this part for?? (PD Performance)*


_Quote, originally posted by *PD Performance* »_
Good news is you can get the pipe leading up to the TB for an A3 and eliminate that. I forget the price. It was under 100 bucks.

Do you have a part number for it? I would like to delete this too.


----------



## PD Performance (Jul 1, 2004)

*Re: What is this part for?? (cabracco85)*

not on me, I have an extra one in my toolbox at the dealer. I can check monday.


----------



## Pelican18TQA4 (Dec 13, 2000)

*Re: What is this part for?? (PD Performance)*

Really, you guys don't like the intake noise? The 2.0T without it, in my opinion, has little character at all in regards to its sound.


----------



## PD Performance (Jul 1, 2004)

*Re: What is this part for?? (Pelican18TQA4)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Pelican18TQA4* »_Really, you guys don't like the intake noise? The 2.0T without it, in my opinion, has little character at all in regards to its sound.

Have you driven an A3 without it and a GTI/GLI with it... Its rather kind of silly.
And its probably 15% the volume of the whole intake system.. So its gonna cause more lag (harm) then good.


----------



## Pelican18TQA4 (Dec 13, 2000)

*Re: What is this part for?? (PD Performance)*

I have driven an A3 2.0T. I actually find the "complaints" about this piece a bit disheartening. VW worked really hard to make the new GTI a driver's car with character, after years of having an all but lifeless GTI, and hear we are and there are people complaining that VW is just silly by adding this part.


----------



## PD Performance (Jul 1, 2004)

*Re: What is this part for?? (Pelican18TQA4)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Pelican18TQA4* »_I have driven an A3 2.0T. I actually find the "complaints" about this piece a bit disheartening. VW worked really hard to make the new GTI a driver's car with character, after years of having an all but lifeless GTI, and hear we are and there are people complaining that VW is just silly by adding this part.

But have you driven the GTI and heard the comparison? I"ve never bought a car for the sound of the engine.. and yes I own a VR6 (2 actually)
think about it.. They added a part purely for noise.. Its actually contradicting their whole unpimp your auto marketing campaign.


----------



## alfzong (Jan 13, 2005)

Ricers.


----------



## Forge US (Jul 31, 2002)

*Re: (alfzong)*

VW's ETKA parts program calls this part a "sound amplifier", and as it so happens, there is no electrical connection to it whatsoever, and as such, it is something that will likely be bypassed by our intercooler hose/pipe kit when we release it eliminating the extra unnecessary piping volume!


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

i wouldnt mind getting rid of it too. my car attracts too much attention when i floor it. i like exhaust alone, its loud enough without that extra noise.


----------



## feuerdog (Feb 11, 2002)

See also: http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=2458054
Chris from PD Perfomance asked me to post this for you guys:
1K0-145-770-K
This is the A3 2.0t intake/IC tube part#.


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

*Re: (feuerdog)*


_Quote, originally posted by *feuerdog* »_Chris from PD Perfomance asked me to post this for you guys: 1K0-145-770-K This is the A3 2.0t intake/IC tube part#.

Dang that is CHEAP!! Thanks for the part number. I'm mulling over if i want it. If its a 10 min swap job maybe i just get one for later. I might change my mind every few weeks.
1K0145770K $33.65 
Cooling - Intercooler - Air pipe 
Air pipe - 2.0 liter 2006


----------



## .:R:. (Mar 3, 2005)

*Re: (feuerdog)*

?Is this right? I fell used like a hore







It's just for sound?? Somebody make a swap and check a dyno.......Here's a link for the A3 part.
http://www.worldimpex.com/sear...4&y=9


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

except that impex is like $10 more than the 1stvwparts price i posted.
im ordering one now for future. Cuz prices will go up once they get popular.
I just ordered one for $33 + ship. I'll get a pic, but it wont be here for prob a week.



_Modified by placenta at 9:10 AM 3-20-2006_


----------



## Mono1 (Feb 22, 2006)

*Re: What is this part for?? (Pelican18TQA4)*

Why is this a bad thing? I think the car sounds pretty good under load.


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

i do too. for now.. but it attracts a lot of attention. I might get tired of it later.


----------



## Mono1 (Feb 22, 2006)

*Re: (placenta)*

I guess I just don’t think it’s very loud. I came from a Mustang GT with a full aftermarket exhaust. The exhaust on the mustang combined with the ridiculous road noise from the tires made that car incredibly loud. I think my GLI is quiet as a mouse compared to my old ride. I guess it’s all relative.


----------



## Go4Broke (Nov 19, 2004)

*Re: (placenta)*

I just ordered one too. Thanks for the reference to 1stvwparts.com... I wouldn't have known where to get it. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

cool. ya i prob wont install it, ill just save it for a rainy day. i dont like everyone knowing when im trying to pass. And it definetly gets raspy when the RPMs get high.


----------



## feuerdog (Feb 11, 2002)

Personally, i'm just gonna find a way to block/restrict it internally. I don't need to buy more parts.
My first thought was the jam a racquetball up in there,....or cap the "Y" pipe. But I haven't got around to anything yet.


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

True, there will always be people that will go the ghetto rigged route.


----------



## aqn (Nov 20, 2001)

_Quote, originally posted by *sarge1* »_What is the reason for wanting to introduce sound of the engine in the car? they put soud insulation al over and then let the sond come in why?









I don't know why VW did it, but I am glad they did. The sound is
*great*! I rather like knowing I'm driving a *car* as opposed
to driving a washing machine.

_Quote, originally posted by *PD Performance* »_It is actually quite humorous to hear if you compare it to say an A3 that does not have it.
The sound difference is very noticeable between the two and the noise maker in the GTI sounds complete stupid... its like v-tech whine when you were the engine without it.


_Quote, originally posted by *PD Performance* »_Good news is you can get the pipe leading up to the TB for an A3 and eliminate that. I forget the price. It was under 100 bucks.

Has anybody removed the tube and see if it is actually *open* to the
intake tract? Maybe it's capped at the intercooler/MAF end as well, and
therefore adds no volume to the intake tract?
It may does a better job of transmitting sound if it's closed off at both
ends, kinda like a drum. (I'm not an acoustic engineer so I'm merely
pulling that one out of my @ss.







)

_Quote, originally posted by *Pelican18TQA4* »_I have driven an A3 2.0T. I actually find the "complaints" about this piece a bit disheartening. VW worked really hard to make the new GTI a driver's car with character, after years of having an all but lifeless GTI, and hear we are and there are people complaining that VW is just silly by adding this part.


_Quote, originally posted by *PD Performance* »_But have you driven the GTI and heard the comparison? I"ve never bought a car for the sound of the engine.. and yes I own a VR6 (2 actually)

I wouldn't buy a car *just* for the sound of the engine, but all else
being equal, I'd pick the car that sounds better.

_Quote, originally posted by *PD Performance* »_think about it.. They added a part purely for noise.. Its actually contradicting their whole unpimp your auto marketing campaign.

Yeah, I gotta admit the sound tube *is* a bit pimpy. It's kinda like
when people were slapping exhaust on their VR6 with no other mods, even
though that mod does jacksh!t on a VR6, just to get an aggressive-sounding
exhaust note. If the sound tube adds to the intake tract's volume, I will
agree that it is pimp-y, as it adds no performance, only aural pleasure.
OTOH, the "pimp-y" mod of 17" wheels on my GTI VR6 was one of the
*most* satisfying mods ever. The big-wheel look just completed that
car. I never regreted the mod, knowing all the while that it saddled
the car with 45+ lbs. of hoop at each corner.

_Quote, originally posted by *placenta* »_i do too. for now.. but it attracts a lot of attention. I might get tired of it later.

How can it attract attention if it resonates sound *into* the cabin?
I have driven with the windows down and I can't hear any kind of intake
roar from the outside of the car. Besides, what about your exhaust sound
when you get on the loud pedal? Your exhaust sound would attract way more
attention. It's not like the tube makes noise like an open-element K&N
air filter...


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

exactly. IN the cabin, the intake noise drowns out the perfect exhaust noise in higher rpms. I want to hear my smooth toned exhaust, not the raspy harsh intake roar.


----------



## Misano (May 29, 2003)

*Re: (aqn)*

I have removed the pipe on a Jetta GLI and replaced it with one from a A3 , the vehicle had better boost responce .
There was even a increase in boost on the top end, with the stock pipe around 6600RPM the boost was about 1570 MB, with the A3 pipe it was 1620MB.
It is possible it affected the boost on the low end, i will have to go back and check the log


----------



## PD Performance (Jul 1, 2004)

*Re: (feuerdog)*


_Quote, originally posted by *feuerdog* »_Personally, i'm just gonna find a way to block/restrict it internally. I don't need to buy more parts.
My first thought was the jam a racquetball up in there,....or cap the "Y" pipe. But I haven't got around to anything yet.

dude you can have the one I bought.... what do I need it for... dimensions of your stock one are the same as the A3 I can jig off that one.


----------



## PeteA3 (Dec 3, 2005)

*Re: (Misano)*

The GLI was running 22.7 psi and then 23.5 psi? What else is done to the GLI to run so much peak boost?


----------



## PD Performance (Jul 1, 2004)

*Re: (PeteA3)*


_Quote, originally posted by *PeteA3* »_The GLI was running 22.7 psi and then 23.5 psi? What else is done to the GLI to run so much peak boost?

I run boost levels like that.. you can do it with a chip.


----------



## bhvrdr (Jan 26, 2005)

*Re: (PeteA3)*


_Quote, originally posted by *PeteA3* »_The GLI was running 22.7 psi and then 23.5 psi? What else is done to the GLI to run so much peak boost?

He stated it was at 6600rpm so I think Anthony was posting his actual vag com numbers that include ambient pressure which is about 980mbar give or take depending on altitude of the car. cheers! Mike


----------



## Go4Broke (Nov 19, 2004)

*Re: (feuerdog)*


_Quote, originally posted by *feuerdog* »_Personally, i'm just gonna find a way to block/restrict it internally. I don't need to buy more parts.
My first thought was the jam a racquetball up in there,....or cap the "Y" pipe. But I haven't got around to anything yet.

I was thinking about filling the stock pipe with that "Great Stuff" expanding foam spray. But I decided to just go with the A3 pipe.


----------



## PeteA3 (Dec 3, 2005)

*Re: (bhvrdr)*


_Quote, originally posted by *bhvrdr* »_He stated it was at 6600rpm so I think Anthony was posting his actual vag com numbers that include ambient pressure which is about 980mbar give or take depending on altitude of the car. cheers! Mike

980mb or roughly 14psi sounds right...

_Quote »_I run boost levels like that.. you can do it with a chip.

I'm chipped too, but peak around 18psi...


_Modified by PeteA3 at 4:34 PM 3/20/2006_


----------



## feuerdog (Feb 11, 2002)

*Re: (PeteA3)*


_Quote, originally posted by *PeteA3* »_
I'm chipped too, but peak around 18psi...


Which chip?....
Revo allows boost adjustment, among other things. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif

_Quote »_I was thinking about filling the stock pipe with that "Great Stuff" expanding foam spray. But I decided to just go with the A3 pipe.

Interesting choice. I'd be worried about heat and vibration degrading the foam. 
If I don't take Chris's part, i'll just wait for a full aftermarket IC/intake pipe replacement kit.



_Modified by feuerdog at 9:25 PM 3-20-2006_


----------



## meanvw (Jan 1, 2005)

*Re: (feuerdog)*

A couple of extra pictures of where this pipe ends up. I measured all the pipes associated with this and there's a total of 54 inches of tubing that's all got to be 1" or better in diameter. 


















_Modified by meanvw at 6:57 PM 3-20-2006_


----------



## bhvrdr (Jan 26, 2005)

*Re: (PeteA3)*


_Quote, originally posted by *PeteA3* »_980mb or roughly 14psi sounds right...
I'm chipped too, but peak around 18psi...

_Modified by PeteA3 at 4:34 PM 3/20/2006_

The 980mbar is the amount you subtract to get the boost the turbo is making. cheers! Mike


----------



## Misano (May 29, 2003)

*Re: (meanvw)*

The passat has the same pipe as the A3, it runs about $35


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

mine arrives tomorrow. I'll get a pic tomorrow night.


----------



## papaskot (Aug 2, 2004)

i figure this is just like a cai on my 1.8t It doesnt do much of anything other than hearing the engine, and turbo. VW saw how many people were using CAI and felt we wanted more engine noise. IMO


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

ya true. im on the fence on this. the noise gets a LITTLE loud when im flooring it. I'd prefer to hear exhaust only, the stock exhaust tone is phenominal.


----------



## GRB (Aug 24, 2003)

*Re: (placenta)*

Newsflash people... Volkswagen is not the only car company doing this. And this is not the first example of engineers looking for a certain sound out of an engine. I've driven the VW 2.0T and it doesn't sound like it has an intake at all.


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

I wont really know what it adds until I drive my car WITHOUT it. Then I can try and determine the difference. I agree itys not really an intake sound.. but its something.. maybe a raspy sound..


----------



## PD Performance (Jul 1, 2004)

*Re: (placenta)*


_Quote, originally posted by *placenta* »_I wont really know what it adds until I drive my car WITHOUT it. Then I can try and determine the difference. I agree itys not really an intake sound.. but its something.. maybe a raspy sound..

Its their v-tec sound.. not sure who they wre trying to draw in with it.. when they are bashing people who would normally like the sound in their commercials


----------



## addicted_to_dub (Mar 9, 2006)

I was just about to post asking about this since I just noticed it on my GTI. Thanks for figuring it out guys http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

PIC of the NON-noise maker part which comes on Audi A3s.


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

PS this tube doesnt hold boost. The clamps def arent air tight.


----------



## PD Performance (Jul 1, 2004)

*Re: (placenta)*

which clamps aren't air tight.
Those spring clamps shown in the pics above can hold more then the screw clamps sometimes.


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

all the air hoses are loose. if you've seen the connection and it definetely is boosted, ill believe you. But i found those hose ends very loose to be able to hold 14-16psi.


----------



## PD Performance (Jul 1, 2004)

*Re: (placenta)*

how are they loose.. do you not see the spring clamps in the pictures above.
Also the post by misano from greedspeed where he said tht he changed the pipe out and saw an increase in boost?
How do you think it works if boost doesn't enter the pipes..


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

point me to that thread. I searched all his posts, and couldnt find it. Only the one about swapping pipes. 
until theres pics of the 3 leg pipe to look at, i wont know how it does it. but it surely cant have any open air under dash to leak boost.


----------



## PD Performance (Jul 1, 2004)

*Re: (placenta)*

take your mouse... now you have two options
put it on the bar at the right and slide it up
or you can take the arrow on the top and just hold that down till the screen moves up
THE PICS ARE ON THIS PAGE!!


----------



## CandywhiteGTi (Feb 2, 2006)

eff an exhaust I want to hear intake. I don't like fart cans too much anyways. An exhaust note on a 4 banger isn't that great unless it's a motorcycle. At least intake noise is actually caused by the engine and not by a muffler. It is kinda ricey if it's just for sound, but I'm not taking it off just to add an intake later and get the same sound.


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

*Re: (PD Performance)*


_Quote, originally posted by *PD Performance* »_take your mouse... now you have two options
put it on the bar at the right and slide it up
or you can take the arrow on the top and just hold that down till the screen moves up
THE PICS ARE ON THIS PAGE!!

Man you dont read enough, do you. I want to see the conection point of the 3rd leg on the T side. Not the noise side. Thanks for the mouse lessons asshat.


----------



## PD Performance (Jul 1, 2004)

*Re: (placenta)*


_Quote, originally posted by *placenta* »_
Man you dont read enough, do you. I want to see the conection point of the 3rd leg on the T side. Not the noise side. Thanks for the mouse lessons ******.

You honestly think they are gonna use heavy duty clamps in the pic shown above and then use anyting less closer to the pipe by the throttle body.
If they were gonna require something that could hold more pressure it would be closer to the TB.. not furthest away.

You have your theory.. the rest of us will go on what is actually there


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

*Re: (PD Performance)*

since no one could pony up the pic i wanted, i took it myself.
This is the 3rd pipe out in the GTI style boost pipe. The hose that goes on this fitting has the heavy duty spring clamp. Is a lot stronger than it looks, given the blood on my knuckles. The other side of that hose doesnt SEEM quite as good. Its a very loose clip style with a snap in type pipe copnnector. I guess it can get air tight or it wouldnt work very well.








I dont think I'll put in my plain piupe yet, but I'm thinking about it. I went up a hill against a Boxster today and stayed even. But my car was so loud it was embarrasing. It was cool, but if there was a cop around, fuggetabouttit.


----------



## papaskot (Aug 2, 2004)

*Re: (UncannySkill)*


_Quote, originally posted by *UncannySkill* »_Newsflash people... Volkswagen is not the only car company doing this. And this is not the first example of engineers looking for a certain sound out of an engine. I've driven the VW 2.0T and it doesn't sound like it has an intake at all.

im not saying it sounds like an intake, im saying its the same idea as adding an intake on the 1.8t. NEWSFLASH: noone said vw was first/only company to do it....


----------



## QGMika (Jul 25, 2002)

*Re: (placenta)*


_Quote, originally posted by *placenta* »_
I dont think I'll put in my plain piupe yet, but I'm thinking about it. I went up a hill against a Boxster today and stayed even. But my car was so loud it was embarrasing. It was cool, but if there was a cop around, fuggetabouttit.

I thought people agreed on the fact that the pipe only produces more INTERIOR noise.....


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

could be. I havnt had anyone drive my car yet so i could listen.


----------



## GRB (Aug 24, 2003)

*Re: (DSG604)*


_Quote, originally posted by *DSG604* »_I thought people agreed on the fact that the pipe only produces more INTERIOR noise.....
That's why this whole thread is getting stupid. The pipe is to enhance the sound INSIDE the car not OUTSIDE.


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

thats pretty cool then. Cuz i like the sound myself. I just dont want to draw attention. I'll keep it as is for now.


----------



## 18TurboS (Mar 14, 2002)

It won't draw any attention from anyone unless they are sitting inside the car with you. If it ain't broke, don't fix it, mine is staying in


----------



## TDR (Mar 28, 2006)

*Re: (18TurboS)*

Here in Japan, our GTIs don't have that... I'd like to hear the effect of the sound-tube.


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

heres a good writeup someone did (not me) which explains how removing this could not cause boost peak psi to increase.
*****************
Big Bird went to the back yard to lounge by the pool. Elmo and Snuffy came along and wanted to float in the water so Big Bird got some pool toys and an air pump to blow them up.
In Elmo's little tube donut, Big Bird pumped 20psi to fill the toy and send Elmo on his way. Snuffy's giant raft also got a lot of air pumped in to fill it up. How much air pressure? Another 20psi.
It isn't the pressure that increases or decreases with the application of this Audi part, it's the volume of air that changes. No, that's not a pun for the noise but a measurement of the amount of space for pressurized air to fill. The only meaningful change in "boost" air pressure is going to be effected only by changing the properties of the compressor creating the higher air pressure to begn with; the turbo.
The argument could be made that the lesser volume of higher pressure air could be bad for the engine. But at such relatively low increases over ambient air pressure (14psi at sea level) the volume of air in this "third leg" resonator is most likely negligible. It's VW being Forge before the fact... and kinda jives with the 'no tuning required' ad campaign for the US.








*****************


----------



## PD Performance (Jul 1, 2004)

*Re: (placenta)*


_Quote, originally posted by *placenta* »_heres a good writeup someone did (not me) which explains how removing this could not cause boost peak psi to increase.
*****************
Big Bird went to the back yard to lounge by the pool. Elmo and Snuffy came along and wanted to float in the water so Big Bird got some pool toys and an air pump to blow them up.
In Elmo's little tube donut, Big Bird pumped 20psi to fill the toy and send Elmo on his way. Snuffy's giant raft also got a lot of air pumped in to fill it up. How much air pressure? Another 20psi.
It isn't the pressure that increases or decreases with the application of this Audi part, it's the volume of air that changes. No, that's not a pun for the noise but a measurement of the amount of space for pressurized air to fill. The only meaningful change in "boost" air pressure is going to be effected only by changing the properties of the compressor creating the higher air pressure to begn with; the turbo.
The argument could be made that the lesser volume of higher pressure air could be bad for the engine. But at such relatively low increases over ambient air pressure (14psi at sea level) the volume of air in this "third leg" resonator is most likely negligible. It's VW being Forge before the fact... and kinda jives with the 'no tuning required' ad campaign for the US.








*****************


The example is right.. but completely wrong for this issue.
The problem is not that you will make less boost with the noise maker (unless it is also somehow bleeding some off). The point is there is that much more volume that must fill with air before the whole system can be pressurized. Yes the turbo is compressing the air, but it also uncompresses once it gets out.. The pressure remains in the system becuase its being forced into the pipes by the turbo... By having more volume you are requiring the turbo to spin faster to get the same resultant boost pressure when you have all that volume to fill. Which can inturn actually put more stress ont he turbo.. You could in theory make more power on the same boost since it won't be as hot with the noise maker removed.
That is the problem with it.. Not that you will make more boost but you will make more boost faster and the more effcient use of the air will mean that you may have cooler charge air that will result in more power up top... Less work for the Ic also.


----------



## feuerdog (Feb 11, 2002)

It is also a matter of time, and the flexibility of the air. 
The turbo is limited to its output pressure by it's design specs, the pre turbo intake restrictions(suction), the exhaust restrictions(compression), and the post turbo restrictions(compression). The time it takes to fill(pressurize) the extra volume that this noise maker has, could cause a lower pressure measurement under short term boost periods. Also, this extra volume decreases the response of the desired pressure because of the extra flexibility that the added volume has(air is like a spring). Because extra time is needed to neutralize/charge this air space(spring), the overall directness of boost is deminished, if only for a very short period of time.
The air spring in effect dampens the boost effect, causing lower readings. It is possible.
Are we argueing extremely minor differences? Yes.
Will there be a difference, if removed? 
Probably, but it's hardly worth argueing.
Personally, i'll probably take it out eventually, but i'm not losing sleep over it at the moment. 


_Modified by feuerdog at 6:12 PM 3-28-2006_


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

The claim I heard was 1-2psi gained peak from removing this.


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

is the DSG shift burp related to this part?


----------



## PD Performance (Jul 1, 2004)

*Re: (placenta)*


_Quote, originally posted by *placenta* »_The claim I heard was 1-2psi gained peak from removing this. 

The measurement form misano on the previous page was dead on 1psi peak. With error and change in effciency you could have a realisic .5 psi ornothing change.. Its not all cut and dry especially with cars changing boost levels for every little condition.
The key is the quicker response time.. That is what you will probably "notice" but may not be able to capture exactyl when data logging due to variences in rpm when it may capture boost.
We are not talking about major gains.. But enough that it could makea difference.


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

Anther quote from the same guy after he read your stuff.
"He's right. This little plastic tube is on the intake side of things and never sees boost whatsoever... making all discussion, even mine, of boost irrelevant. I've gone back through and come to the realization this is an intake component.
This thing will rarely see anything above ambient air pressure. Probably slight vacuum most of the time as the turbo draw more and more air from the outside and stuffs it into the charged side of the intake. There may be a small amount of "boost" from a ram-air effect of the car moving through the air. But now that I understand where this piece fits in the scheme of things, it's probably harmless to swap it off if one doesn't like the noise.
Funny how the Japanese market doesn't have this part. I wonder if A3 drivers will be 'upgrading' to the GTI piece for the snorting sound?







"


----------



## PD Performance (Jul 1, 2004)

*Re: (placenta)*


_Quote, originally posted by *placenta* »_Anther quote from the same guy after he read your stuff.
"He's right. This little plastic tube is on the intake side of things and never sees boost whatsoever... making all discussion, even mine, of boost irrelevant. I've gone back through and come to the realization this is an intake component.
This thing will rarely see anything above ambient air pressure. Probably slight vacuum most of the time as the turbo draw more and more air from the outside and stuffs it into the charged side of the intake. There may be a small amount of "boost" from a ram-air effect of the car moving through the air. But now that I understand where this piece fits in the scheme of things, it's probably harmless to swap it off if one doesn't like the noise.
Funny how the Japanese market doesn't have this part. I wonder if A3 drivers will be 'upgrading' to the GTI piece for the snorting sound?







"

Well since you are not showing your source.. please go tell him he has no idea what the heck he is talking about since this part is NOT ON THE INTAKE SIDE... It is on the pressure side.. Air enters the airbox.. through the filter.. through the MAF. Into the turbo.. into the IC pipe.. into the Ic.. out of the IC and either into the engine or into this pipe.
NOT ON THE INTAKE SIDE... ITS ON THE CHARGE SIDE!!!!!!


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

im getting tired of being the middleman. I'll tell him to come here if he cares.


----------



## scotaku (Sep 3, 1999)

*Re: (PD Performance)*


_Quote, originally posted by *PD Performance* »_The example is right.. but completely wrong for this issue.
The problem is not that you will make less boost with the noise maker (unless it is also somehow bleeding some off). The point is there is that much more volume that must fill with air before the whole system can be pressurized. Yes the turbo is compressing the air, but it also uncompresses once it gets out.. The pressure remains in the system becuase its being forced into the pipes by the turbo... By having more volume you are requiring the turbo to spin faster to get the same resultant boost pressure when you have all that volume to fill. Which can inturn actually put more stress ont he turbo.. You could in theory make more power on the same boost since it won't be as hot with the noise maker removed.
That is the problem with it.. Not that you will make more boost but you will make more boost faster and the more effcient use of the air will mean that you may have cooler charge air that will result in more power up top... Less work for the Ic also.

That was me being quoted so I figured I'd chime in and agree. I went back and looked at the relation of this little resonator pipe to everything else and







ing: I realized it was on the ambient side of the intake.
Dunno if I agree that taking it off would change the supply of air to the compressor though. That'd be like Big Bird only having 40psi worth of so many cubic feet of air to use in filling up the pool toys. Since the intake is drawing from the atmosphere, it's a pretty safe assumption that the supply won't be running out. _Restricting_ the supply through straws instead of 8" ductwork changes the _rate_ at which the boost can be dispensed... more/less time to fill. So, yeah, maybe this lil' snorkel represents a choke in the intake. But it may also represent a perfectly tuned straw for sucking air out of the open.
I wonder if the GTI piece fits the A3? And if A3 drivers are looking for the snorty sound in their cars instead?


----------



## PD Performance (Jul 1, 2004)

*Re: (scotaku)*


_Quote, originally posted by *scotaku* »_
That was me being quoted so I figured I'd chime in and agree. I went back and looked at the relation of this little resonator pipe to everything else and







ing: I realized it was on the ambient side of the intake.
Dunno if I agree that taking it off would change the supply of air to the compressor though. That'd be like Big Bird only having 40psi worth of so many cubic feet of air to use in filling up the pool toys. Since the intake is drawing from the atmosphere, it's a pretty safe assumption that the supply won't be running out. _Restricting_ the supply through straws instead of 8" ductwork changes the _rate_ at which the boost can be dispensed... more/less time to fill. So, yeah, maybe this lil' snorkel represents a choke in the intake. But it may also represent a perfectly tuned straw for sucking air out of the open.
I wonder if the GTI piece fits the A3? And if A3 drivers are looking for the snorty sound in their cars instead?









Dude..its not on the intake side... go look at your car again.
It attached at the last possible part before the air enters the motor.. only way it could be less on the intake is if it was mounted to the tailpipe.


----------



## scotaku (Sep 3, 1999)

I haven't looked at my car and frankly, your post tone could use a temper check. By all means argue over the Internet _after I agree with you_ and take that Special Olympics Gold home for the trophy case. :tool:


----------



## crew219 (Oct 18, 2000)

*Re: (scotaku)*


_Quote, originally posted by *scotaku* »_I haven't looked at my car and frankly, your post tone could use a temper check. By all means argue over the Internet _after I agree with you_ and take that Special Olympics Gold home for the trophy case. :tool:

Oh sheesh. Chris wasn't giving you any attitude. Loosen up man . . . . this ain't PW with AA breathing down your neck.
Dave


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

Thats how he is. I'm used to it.


----------



## PD Performance (Jul 1, 2004)

*Re: (scotaku)*


_Quote, originally posted by *scotaku* »_I haven't looked at my car and frankly, your post tone could use a temper check. By all means argue over the Internet _after I agree with you_ and take that Special Olympics Gold home for the trophy case. :tool:

dude you never agreed with me.. you are still incorrect in your last post since you were saying it was on the INTAKE.. which it is NOT.
You were having someone else come on here and post telling me I am wrong then you get all upset becuase you are corrected.. get over it.


----------



## PD Performance (Jul 1, 2004)

*Re: (placenta)*


_Quote, originally posted by *placenta* »_Thats how he is. I'm used to it.

If you posted actual information that was correct and related to the topic no one would have to post the correct information.. You'd have a problem apparently with anyone doing it.. Its not just how I am.. Its just that the wrong information was being posted and sorry after correcting someone that many times it may start to sound like its not a friendly reply.. again get over it.


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

*Re: (PD Performance)*


_Quote, originally posted by *PD Performance* »_
dude you never agreed with me.. you are still incorrect in your last post since you were saying it was on the INTAKE.. which it is NOT.
You were having someone else come on here and post telling me I am wrong then you get all upset becuase you are corrected.. get over it.

Slow down, sailor. No one had me come anywhere and post anything. He knew nothing about it until I told him. I was just adding more theorys to this thread so you could shoot them down.


----------



## PD Performance (Jul 1, 2004)

*Re: (placenta)*


_Quote, originally posted by *placenta* »_
Slow down, sailor. No one had me come anywhere and post anything. He knew nothing about it until I told him. I was just adding more theorys to this thread so you could shoot them down.









You are making no sense.. you quoted someone from another source twice.. just to get me to correct it.. But then you got upset about me correcting it???
You are making absolutely no sense.. Thanks for adding nothing and actually just making things more confusing and complicated in this thread.


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

i posted someone elses thoughts to get an opinion on it here because I thought they weren't a member of this forum. 
I added some pics btw. 
I dont have a business to gain customers for here, thats why i dont need to be as careful as someone such as yourself does in replies. Talk in CAPS a few more times while you're at it.


----------



## scotaku (Sep 3, 1999)

*Re: (placenta)*


_Quote, originally posted by *placenta* »_Thats how he is. I'm used to it.

Said the random golfmkv.com'er I've never seen before on either boards.
PD, as a forum vendor, you just might want to consider the impression you're leaving on _potential customers_ with the remarks you make and the patent "correction" you dole out. It means nothing to me, but dude, it might mean something to someone tempted to click on your site link after one of your posts.


----------



## PD Performance (Jul 1, 2004)

*Re: (scotaku)*


_Quote, originally posted by *scotaku* »_
Said the random golfmkv.com'er I've never seen before on either boards.
PD, as a forum vendor, you just might want to consider the impression you're leaving on _potential customers_ with the remarks you make and the patent "correction" you dole out. It means nothing to me, but dude, it might mean something to someone tempted to click on your site link after one of your posts.

There has been alot of talk in the press lately that being infamous can be more profitable then being famous.
Same holds true for this industry... You may not have liked my approach but at least I have looked under the hood before posting (you said you went and looked) and I was posting the correct information from the beginning. I am sorry if you don't appreciate my help and you take it as offensive to you when someone has to repeatedly explain to you how a sytem works why you tell them they are wrong and have no actual experience with it.. But eventually you have to just suck it up.. As my GF says (she is a therapist).. you have to own your feelings. If you tookmy posts the wrong way.. That was you, there was nothign in my intentions to be negative towards you just my point was not being taken after numerous attempts to explain how it works.
If you feel the need next time to correct someone at least do the proper research and understand how something works. I even complimented your initial response adn said it was a good example, just not correct for this instance.


----------



## PD Performance (Jul 1, 2004)

*Re: (placenta)*


_Quote, originally posted by *placenta* »_i posted someone elses thoughts to get an opinion on it here because I thought they weren't a member of this forum. 
I added some pics btw. 
I dont have a business to gain customers for here, thats why i dont need to be as careful as someone such as yourself does in replies. Talk in CAPS a few more times while you're at it.

I said the same thing over and over and over again and YOU (there's your caps) chose to keep replying with incorrect information quoted from another board. 
You said you don't need to be careful but you do. There is no reason for you to be quoting misinformation into a discussion then bailing out that its not yours. That is fine that you quoted it.. but when you are told its wrong you need to suck it up.. I don't need to be anymore careful as a vendor then you do as a regular poster. I may have more to lose theoretically but I'm not sure how being right is bad for business.


----------



## Pelican18TQA4 (Dec 13, 2000)

*Re: (PD Performance)*

C'mon guys, please don't turn this thread into an argument over semantics. Technically PD, you're incorrect, this tube is found on the intake side as it's certainly not found on the exhaust side. I know, you mean that it's not on the intake side of the compressor, but again, this is semantics. Let's please keep this discussion to the topis of the original post.


----------



## PD Performance (Jul 1, 2004)

*Re: (Pelican18TQA4)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Pelican18TQA4* »_C'mon guys, please don't turn this thread into an argument over semantics. Technically PD, you're incorrect, this tube is found on the intake side as it's certainly not found on the exhaust side. I know, you mean that it's not on the intake side of the compressor, but again, this is semantics. Let's please keep this discussion to the topis of the original post.

Semantics yes you would be correct in regards to intake and exhaust.. however I didn't say it as on the exhaust side.
Referring to it as intake or exhaust exclusively confuses matters though so it is important to kind of not reference it as part of the intake, since that is what the latest confusion is about.
There is no real way to sum it up with a generic term can't even say boost and vacum since both theoretially could be under boost and vacum.
your post really only actually further complicates things and in your attempt to make it sound like the rest of us were the bad guys only added to the mess.


----------



## feuerdog (Feb 11, 2002)

We should be able to at least agree that taking it off would/could be beneficial.


----------



## Forge US (Jul 31, 2002)

*Re: (Pelican18TQA4)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Pelican18TQA4* »_C'mon guys, please don't turn this thread into an argument over semantics. Technically PD, you're incorrect, this tube is found on the intake side as it's certainly not found on the exhaust side. I know, you mean that it's not on the intake side of the compressor, but again, this is semantics. Let's please keep this discussion to the topis of the original post.

You keep saying that these are symantics, when in actuality, all of the things you mention are very specific in nature and vary greatly in how they would affect the part in question in this thread.
I don't care if anyone agrees or disagrees with me, but here are some facts:
*This pipe in question here, that runs to the "sound amplifier", as it is called by ETKA, is on the compressor side of the turbo, after the intercooler, and therefore, it sees boost pressure. Period*
Yes, this pipe is on the intake side of the ENGINE, but not of the turbo. If this pipe were on the intake side of the turbo, it would be connected to the engine cover/intake system in some way, of which it is not.
Since this pipe sees boost pressure, it's volume must be filled by that pressure before that pressure will reach the intake manifold. That extra volume will therefore cause some increase in lag (theoretically in this case as it has not been measured yet).
Once someone can confirm this, we will then know for certain one way or the other whether or not this is a worthwhile modification. Until someone does some imperical testing, there is no need to continue to argue.
Let's see who's the first to post some logs. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## QGMika (Jul 25, 2002)

*Re: ([email protected])*

this diagram might help some people understand that that pipe sees boost pressure:








and compare it to this...


----------



## Forge US (Jul 31, 2002)

*Re: (DSG604)*

Right. This pipe connects to the intercooler piping right next to the location of the N80 valve in the larger of the two pictures you posted!


----------



## iThread (Sep 27, 2005)

Soooo, if I'm reading this correctly that "noise pipe" might also make a suiteable location to tap in for a bost gage? Since it's plastic it would be easy to tap and work with I'd imagine.
Thoughts?


----------



## feuerdog (Feb 11, 2002)

*Re: (thread)*


_Quote, originally posted by *thread* »_Soooo, if I'm reading this correctly that "noise pipe" might also make a suiteable location to tap in for a bost gage? Since it's plastic it would be easy to tap and work with I'd imagine.
Thoughts?

Wouldn't it be a more accurate reading closer to the actual manifold?


----------



## iThread (Sep 27, 2005)

*Re: (feuerdog)*


_Quote, originally posted by *feuerdog* »_
Wouldn't it be a more accurate reading closer to the actual manifold?

Dunno, I've never installed a boost gauge before.


----------



## Forge US (Jul 31, 2002)

*Re: (feuerdog)*

It would not read manifold pressure/vacuum, so while it may still show a certain amount of vacuum at idle and pressure during boost, it will not be that of the manifold readings which is typically the recommended source for a gauge.


----------



## iThread (Sep 27, 2005)

Thanks Mike, I appreciate it.


----------



## Electron Man (Sep 21, 1999)

*Re: (PD Performance)*









From what I can tell, this part is Volkswagen Engineerings answer to the blow-off valve (not same function as BOV, but same effect).
Anyone remember back in 2000 when the transverse 1.8Ts came out. Those who put BOVs on their cars were







. (Brrrrrr, Whoooosh, Brrrrr) Now almost everyone wants to get rid of the factory supplied noise maker.
Have they all turned 30 while I wasn't looking?


----------



## Go4Broke (Nov 19, 2004)

*Re: Noisemaker*

I received my A3 pipe today and installed it. TIP: Install it from underneath the car. Trust me. Remove the flat black air dam "shelf" under the motor and everything is VERY easy to access. I had to learn the hard way. 
I noticed a DEFINITE seat-of-the-pants difference with the stock noisemaker removed and the A3 pipe installed. Best $38 I've spent on the car so far. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## RyanL06GTI (Jan 19, 2006)

*Re: Noisemaker (Go4Broke)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Go4Broke* »_I received my A3 pipe today and installed it. TIP: Install it from underneath the car. Trust me. Remove the flat black air dam "shelf" under the motor and everything is VERY easy to access. I had to learn the hard way. 
I noticed a DEFINITE seat-of-the-pants difference with the stock noisemaker removed and the A3 pipe installed. Best $38 I've spent on the car so far. http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif 

so does it sound any different?


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

*Re: Noisemaker (Go4Broke)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Go4Broke* »_I noticed a DEFINITE seat-of-the-pants difference with the stock noisemaker removed 

sweet review.


----------



## meanvw (Jan 1, 2005)

*Re: Noisemaker (placenta)*

Just a picture of the stock pipe removed from a GLI.
I would also agree there seems to be some gain in power and throttle response.


----------



## Go4Broke (Nov 19, 2004)

*Re: Noisemaker (meanvw)*

And that picture doesn't even include the plastic resonator tube or the foam-tipped "amplifier" that attaches next to the firewall. Heck, there's nearly another two feet of tubing not shown in that picture!


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

anyone thats installed the quieter part have any opinions on how the noise changed, and at what ranges?


----------



## Mr.Veedubya (Sep 25, 2004)

*Re: (placenta)*

Can it be added to an A3?


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

you kidding right? this part is what comes on an A3.


----------



## Mr.Veedubya (Sep 25, 2004)

*Re: (placenta)*

I thought it said that the part was not active on the A3. Ive driven a GTI back to back to my A3 and the GTl definetly sounded better and louder.


----------



## Forge US (Jul 31, 2002)

*Re: (SpoolinFSI)*

I think you've missed the point entirely.
The GTI will be louder because it has the "sound amplifier" coming off of the upper intercooler pipe before the throttle body.
The A3 does not have this part.
The idea is that by having the extra piping to this sound amplifier in place on the GTI, there is an increase in lag.
By switching to the A3 pipe that bypasses this "amplifier", the lag should theoretically decrease, but obviously the car will seem quieter because you are bypassing the "sound amplifier".


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

I'll try mine sometime probably, but for now the sound isnt bothering me too much. except when i rev to 6500rpms....


----------



## daigo (Nov 2, 2004)

*Re: ([email protected])*

Wish I had this "sound amplifier" on my GTI. I wanna know how does this pipe ends from throttle to bulkhead? Does it go inside the cabin?


----------



## Go4Broke (Nov 19, 2004)

*Re: (daigo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *daigo* »_Wish I had this "sound amplifier" on my GTI. 

If you have a MkV GTI, then you DO have the sound amplifier, unless you've removed it, like I did.

_Quote, originally posted by *daigo* »_I wanna know how does this pipe ends from throttle to bulkhead? Does it go inside the cabin?

No. It stops at the firewall, directly above the cabin air vent. That's how the sound actually enters the cabin, through the air vent. I've removed the entire assembly, including the end piece above the air vent. If someone asks me nicely enough, I suppose I could post a picture of the entire assembly.










_Modified by Go4Broke at 9:35 AM 4-5-2006_


----------



## Mr.Veedubya (Sep 25, 2004)

*Re: ([email protected])*


_Quote, originally posted by *[email protected]* »_I think you've missed the point entirely.
The GTI will be louder because it has the "sound amplifier" coming off of the upper intercooler pipe before the throttle body.
The A3 does not have this part.
The idea is that by having the extra piping to this sound amplifier in place on the GTI, there is an increase in lag.
By switching to the A3 pipe that bypasses this "amplifier", the lag should theoretically decrease, but obviously the car will seem quieter because you are bypassing the "sound amplifier".

No I understand, I wanted the noise bc I love the sound of the GTI compared to the A3. Although all this talk of it actually reducing performance I probably wont do it.


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

*Re: (Go4Broke)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Go4Broke* »_If you have a MkV GTI, then you DO have the sound amplifier, unless you've removed it, like I did.


Only US cars get the sound amplifier. He's in Japan.


----------



## Forge US (Jul 31, 2002)

*Re: (placenta)*

There are photographs around of some European (probably German Spec.) GTI's that do also have the sound amplifier.
We know UK cars (most anyway) do not have it as our own GTI in the UK doesn't, but there were some photos of cars at the Worthersee event that had them.


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

so its a big mix of euro designs.


----------



## Forge US (Jul 31, 2002)

*Re: (placenta)*


_Quote, originally posted by *placenta* »_so its a big mix of euro designs.

Right, but that means your statement that only US cars get the "amplifier" isn't true.
I'll see if I can find the pictures.
My point is just that it would be nice to know exactly which cars (US, UK, German, Japanese, etc.) do or don't have this "sound amplifier".


----------



## Go4Broke (Nov 19, 2004)

*Pic*

Okay, so I UNDERestimated how big this thing is... Much longer than two feet:


----------



## feuerdog (Feb 11, 2002)

Yeah,......that's gettin' yanked. I'll get all the sound I need from the exhaust.


----------



## daigo (Nov 2, 2004)

*Re: Pic (Go4Broke)*

WOW! its so long!! Now I want to attach this onto my GTI.


----------



## Go4Broke (Nov 19, 2004)

*Re: Pic (daigo)*


_Quote, originally posted by *daigo* »_WOW! its so long!! Now I want to attach this onto my GTI.

$50 plus shipping sound about right? I have no idea how much it would cost to send this to you in Japan, but my guess is that if I sent it U.S. Mail Parcel Post it wouldn't be too much. I actually sold a cold air intake to a guy in Sweden last year, and the shipping was only 20-30 bucks. My U.S. ZIP code is 46112, if you'd like to look into it. Shoot me a PM if you're interested.
Sorry to whore in your thread, OP.


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

*Re: Pic (Go4Broke)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Go4Broke* »_
$50 plus shipping sound about right? I have no idea how much it would cost to send this to you in Japan, but my guess is that if I sent it U.S. Mail Parcel Post it wouldn't be too much. I actually sold a cold air intake to a guy in Sweden last year, and the shipping was only 20-30 bucks. My U.S. ZIP code is 46112, if you'd like to look into it. Shoot me a PM if you're interested.
Sorry to whore in your thread, OP.









estimating a 10 lb package to Japan.. quite pricey.. 
Global Express Mail™ (EMS) (Calculate Guaranteed Date) 3 - 5 Days $60.75
Airmail Parcel Post 4 - 10 Days $56.20 
Economy (Surface) Parcel Post 4 - 6 Weeks $33.00


----------



## daigo (Nov 2, 2004)

*Re: Pic (Go4Broke)*


_Quote, originally posted by *Go4Broke* »_$50 plus shipping sound about right? I have no idea how much it would cost to send this to you in Japan, but my guess is that if I sent it U.S. Mail Parcel Post it wouldn't be too much. I actually sold a cold air intake to a guy in Sweden last year, and the shipping was only 20-30 bucks. My U.S. ZIP code is 46112, if you'd like to look into it. Shoot me a PM if you're interested.
Sorry to whore in your thread, OP.









$50 and shipping is better worth a try. If you accept paypal, thats great. That will be 30-40 I assume. depends on package size or weight. 
I have to open and check if I could attach it without any extra effort to fit in.


----------



## daigo (Nov 2, 2004)

*Re: Pic (placenta)*


_Quote, originally posted by *placenta* »_estimating a 10 lb package to Japan.. quite pricey.. 
Global Express Mail™ (EMS) (Calculate Guaranteed Date) 3 - 5 Days $60.75
Airmail Parcel Post 4 - 10 Days $56.20 
Economy (Surface) Parcel Post 4 - 6 Weeks $33.00 

Thx for the info. I'll challenge this "Rice" mod


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

no ones posted any actually sound difference opinions, at least no clips. which i guess would be useless anyway. I want to hear the difference myself. So maybe ill put in my A3 pipe this weekend.


----------



## .:R:. (Mar 3, 2005)

*Re: (placenta)*

Ture or false??
The A3 pipe will fit correct and air tight??



_Modified by thread at 4:31 PM 4-18-2006_


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

it fits correct and tight.
I just swapped mine in last 30 mins. Took overall about 30 mins. Some of the clamps are hard to get to. Just have a clamp on each end of that, a nut and a bolt holding the pipe in place, and the sensor in the pipe. Make sure you unclip the sensor before you try pulling the GTI pipe out. The connector comes off like butter if you use a mini flathead on the clip on it. I couldnt get it off without pressing that clip in properly. 
Havnt drove it, no big deal. I'll just see how it sounds in the next couple days. I only removed the top 90 degree hose, and left everything else in place for now. I need to make sure I like it before I rip the entire system out. You dont even have to take the rest of the piping out anyway, no reason to.


----------



## .:R:. (Mar 3, 2005)

*Re: (placenta)*

http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif Thanks placenta... http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

*Overview:*
Well..... Unless someone is really obsessed, it prob isnt worth the trouble. No, i dont have boost logs and charts, I dont feel the need to get that level of information for my own decision. So from just a normal driving point of view.. 
*Noise:*
Some noise is gone. It's hard to pinpoint exactly what is gone. There is still some intake noise, but the exhaust is now hearable in the high rpms to 6k+, where before I swapped the pipes, all you really hear is front roar. The exhaust doesn't sound quite as good to me now that I can hear it fully. I think the very nice tone in this car is attributed to both the intake noise tube combined with the exhaust. They go well together to produce a sharp crisp tone. It just didnt sound as good to me with this noise-less pipe. 
*Power:*
The power is fairly impossible to quantify from just a driving perspective. That means its very hard to tell. I dont think the car "felt" any faster. I dont have a gauge to see if the boost climbed to spec .5 seconds faster either. 
*Conclusion:*
I will be putting the GTI pipe back in for now. I didn't see enough benefits to taking it out, and I definetely lost some tone which I enjoyed. Since I saw no useable power increase or spool up, there is no reason for me to keep the A3 pipe in. (I dont plan to sell it, I may change my mind someday again..)


----------



## feuerdog (Feb 11, 2002)

You shouldn't GAIN any power, you will simply reduce the time to reach full pressure. The difference is felt as "throttle response", not actual power.


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

I worded it fuzzy. But I felt no faster response personally.


----------



## mikerosoft (Mar 20, 2004)

*Re: (placenta)*

You guys are great.


----------



## feuerdog (Feb 11, 2002)

*Re: (mikerosoft)*


_Quote, originally posted by *mikerosoft* »_You guys are great.

We try.


----------



## gtiiiiiiii (Mar 6, 2004)

*Re: (feuerdog)*

Lol, I always laugh my arse off at anything having to do with increased spool time on a k03....
It seriously is like watching a monkey fook a football








Try spooling a t4 then start talking about decreasing spool time.
Removing this pipe does nothing but remove the weight and make it quieter inside. It's not like the air inside that pipe moves, it stays still for the most part other then the vibrations that travel through the tube to make noise. I do agree it's a very odd thing to add it just for noise, but don't people buy forge spacers etc to add noise?
So all in all, if it was an option there's no way I'd choose to have it, but since it's on I don't think I can warrant taking the time/spending the money to remove it all for what? A possible .003 second spool time increase?


----------



## MeanGreenTDi (Mar 20, 2000)

*Re: (gtiiiiiiii)*

I installed the A3 pipe today. Engine noise was increased inside the cabin because of the gaping hole in the firewall where the pipe went. I plugged this hole with a piece of foam but have not tried the car, yet.
As for how it felt, the throttle response felt crisper but that was it. Like I posted somewhere else in these forums, I'll forego some noise if my wife thinks I'm not driving agressively (my hearing will thank me!).


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

man you installed my pipe fast dude. I never thought that of firewall hole issue.. Shame on me. I never got to hear it properly quiet. Anyways, glad it went to use instead of sitting in my garage for months.


----------



## Mad Dragon (Aug 20, 2001)

*Re: (gtiiiiiiii)*


_Quote, originally posted by *gtiiiiiiii* »_Lol, I always laugh my arse off at anything having to do with increased spool time on a k03....
It seriously is like watching a monkey fook a football








Try spooling a t4 then start talking about decreasing spool time.
Removing this pipe does nothing but remove the weight and make it quieter inside. It's not like the air inside that pipe moves, it stays still for the most part other then the vibrations that travel through the tube to make noise. I do agree it's a very odd thing to add it just for noise, but don't people buy forge spacers etc to add noise?
So all in all, if it was an option there's no way I'd choose to have it, but since it's on I don't think I can warrant taking the time/spending the money to remove it all for what? A possible .003 second spool time increase?
Seriously. The air in an intake is moving at several hundred miles per hour. I doubt a 2-foot length of tubing is going to make a noticable difference in anything, other than in-cabin sound.


----------



## aqn (Nov 20, 2001)

_Quote, originally posted by *Mad Dragon* »_Seriously. The air in an intake is moving at several hundred miles per hour. I doubt a 2-foot length of tubing is going to make a noticable difference in anything, other than in-cabin sound.

The air in the tube does not move much if at all: it's a close ended tube.
The contention has been that the air in the tube represent an extra volume
that the turbo will also have to compress in order to increase the intake
boost pressure.
The ratio between the volume of the intake system from the turbo to the
intake valves and the volume of the tube represents how much more air must
be pumped to achieve the same intake pressure if the tube wasn't there.
(At the same temperature, volume and pressure increase linearly with
respect to each other i.e. P = VT.) Removing the tube reduces the amount
of air that has to be compressed, theoretically improving response.
However, let's try some numbers: the tube looks like it's about 5 feet
in length and 2 inches in diameter. That's about 3 liters worth of volume.
At 1800 rpm (torque peak) the engine is pumping *at least* 30 liters
of air per scond (30 revs per seconds; two liters every two revs). That's
about 10 times the volume of that tube.
But since this is a turbo'ed engine, it is pumping more than just its
displacement. How much more? My guess is that since the engine makes
the same kind of power/torque as the 2.8L VR6, it is probably moving the
same amount of air and fuel, meaning, about 3 liters worth, or 50% more
than its displacement.
So the 30 liters now become 45 liters. That's 15 times the volume of the
tube. The question now becomes: with that much air being pumped,
would reduce the intake manifold's volume by 3 liters make a difference?
By the same calculations, at idle (800 rpm), the engine is moving about
20 liters per second, or about four times the volume of the tube. I'm
begining to think that one *should* be able to feel a difference if
the tube wasn't there...


----------



## WillieF (May 13, 2006)

*Re: What is this part for?? (aqn)*

Wow. That was quite some read!!!
Forgetabout performance. 
After eliminating the pipe and replacing with A3 part, and properly plugging firewall hole, Is sound reduced to cabin???
I know I'm old. My kids tell me all the time. Old and fat. For some wacky reason, I enjoy a quite ride. I don't mind the "bonus" sound feed to the cabin from that pipe (just like I don't mind seeing fat chicks in spandex), but if getting rid of it quiets the cabin, well I'm busting some knuckles soon as the part gets here.
Somewhere in this thread I saw a simple post - "*****". Man, one word, so true!! That stupid sound tube could wreck vdub's entire marketing schtick... (the ***** got added when I posted. -aroni, san fanscico treat, is what I typed. 5 letteres. starts with r, ends with r and has ice in the middle that's some parental control's we got here.)


_Modified by WillieF at 5:25 PM 5-27-2006_


----------



## WillieF (May 13, 2006)

*Re: What is this part for?? (WillieF)*

rice r. *****. r icer. rice r. r ice r.
check check


----------



## WillieF (May 13, 2006)

*Re: What is this part for?? (WillieF)*

that is hilarious!!! doesn't like *****. Carlin needs to modify the list... (told you I was old.)


----------



## BumbleBeeJBG (Apr 30, 2006)

*Re: (feuerdog)*

http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif Ordered the Audi pipe. Something so cheap the effects my driving experiance, I'll at least swap it out and see which one I like better! (can always sell the part I choose to ditch for $10)


----------



## placenta (Jun 3, 2003)

*Re: (BumbleBeeJBG)*


_Quote, originally posted by *BumbleBeeJBG* »_ http://****************.com/smile/emthup.gif Ordered the Audi pipe. Something so cheap the effects my driving experiance, I'll at least swap it out and see which one I like better! (can always sell the part I choose to ditch for $10)

I got the same full price selling my Audi pipe after I had tested it. Dont rip yourself off.


----------



## iCody (Feb 27, 2004)

*Re: (placenta)*

I don't know if this has been mentioned, but if I remember correctly there are other car manufacturers that do this. I'm fairly sure Jaguar does, and I have a sneaking suspicion about Maserati. 
And I dont' think anyone calls a Jaguar rice-y.
Cody


----------



## hughdogg (Apr 23, 2001)

*Re: (iCody)*

BMW does it with the Z4. Not a fan of the idea.


----------



## Rabbit88 (May 15, 2006)

*New perspective, ENGINE FEEDBACK NOISE-MAKER*

Not a rice cooker. This pipe filters into the cabin direct audible response from your throttle. Stop crying Japan, samurai haters.
I can't think of a Japanese manufacturer that's done this. If that means anything, it means Japan doesn't bother. Which is good for reputation in some people's opinion in this thread, which makes VW look cheesy.
But again, my take is that it's a definate benefit. It's the kind of audible response the 1.8T DID NOT have until you added an aftermarket diverter valve and intake.


----------



## bripab007 (Jul 7, 2006)

Honda does this with the 3.0L V6 Accord coupe model.


----------



## Twelvizm (Apr 12, 2004)

*Re: (bripab007)*

Anyone have the p/n for the non-GLI 2.0FSI firewall block-off plate?


----------

