# Intakes for TT RS



## Quisp (Mar 18, 2012)

Was looking around and not seeing many intakes for the TT RS. Does anyone have something other than the factory intake, and how do you like it?


----------



## JohnLZ7W (Nov 23, 2003)

Quisp said:


> Was looking around and not seeing many intakes for the TT RS. Does anyone have something other than the factory intake, and how do you like it?


I think the only one I've seen available is from ITG.


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

Pipercross.

http://www.thettshop.com/latest.asp?cat=5008&product=600729


----------



## lpriley32 (Jul 28, 2012)

R5T said:


> Pipercross.
> 
> http://www.thettshop.com/latest.asp?cat=5008&product=600729


i have ssen that pipercross before but I can't find it on the actual pipercross site. Is it just a filter from them and a universal hose or is it an actual complete kit from them?


----------



## blackout-rs (Jul 5, 2012)

http://www.thettshop.com/latest.asp?cat=5009&product=600729

Has anyone tried it?


----------



## hightechrdn (Dec 9, 2011)

blackout-rs said:


> http://www.thettshop.com/latest.asp?cat=5009&product=600729
> 
> Has anyone tried it?


Wow! Looks like a little over $500 for a simple intake kit with no custom, complex parts like molded boxes, carbon fibre, etc? A welded (aluminum?) pipe, a sheet metal shield, and a filter... Not good value for the money. 

I realize that the TT-RS market is a relatively low volume market and R&D costs must be recouped, but they can't have any money tied up in tooling, molds, or other expensive setup costs. 

Rant over  

I am glad to see products out in the market, even if pricing isn't ideal.

I just ordered a replacement panel filter from AFE for the stock box. Went with the 7 layer model as I didn't want to risk additional dirt making it into the engine. Should provide a little more flow than stock, at least if data from AFE can be believed.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

The ITG is also rubbish IMHO.
And looks very much like a DIY job.


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

*HPerformance.de* for TT RS.


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

And just a upgrade pipe with OEM airbox. (TT RS and RS3)


----------



## J662 (Dec 8, 2011)

The stock one is already adequate. There's marginal benefit to upgrading as the difference would be more aesthetic then functional.


----------



## Marty (Jul 14, 2000)

R5T said:


> And just a upgrade pipe with OEM airbox. (TT RS and RS3)


I like how it's called an "upgrade." For all you know, it could actually be a "downgrade" performance-wise. 

Just because it replaces a stock part, it doesn't mean it's an "upgrade."


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

I still think the OEM pipe is the best choice because it is plastic and absorb less heat then aluminum or steel. 
Also a small diameter means faster air flow, what means less time to heat up above the hot turbo.


----------



## Quisp (Mar 18, 2012)

Even if the stock one was remade in carbon fiber it would be a small improvement because carbon fiber has less heatsoak than plastic or metal. Ideally the air should come from outside of the engine compartment so that is is not preheated by the engine. On my BMW the intake I had used a second air source that had a pipe coming up from the wheel well area. The air was cooler since it was nowhere near the engine. The airbox on the TTRS is big but the connection to it from the front of the car is strange. The rubber gasket that connects the two pieces is not very snug. I realize it needs to have some flex so it doesnt break when engine moves around but there is a gap and that cant be good. I also noticed that the pipe coming out of the box seems bigger than the one coming in. Might have been my eyes and I didnt measure it. 
Maybe carbonio will come out with someting. If you get an exhaust I would think that an intake would help get the most out of it.


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

By the HPerformance you could see the second air feed.


----------



## Southshorettrs (Jul 15, 2012)

QUISP I know exactly what you are saying about that rubber piece connecting the two boxes. I have tried getting to get it more snug but its just not happening. There definitely needs to be flex and give there but the gaps and loose fitment are a bit strange. It's like they pulled some random piece out of a bin and said, hmm that's close enough and should do. 

In all my experience with CAI for cars the design from the factory is truly what is best. That's not to say tuners can't give them a little extra benefit. I know on my e90 M3, I first went with AFE intake and I had more lights going off on my dash and poor fitment becuase it replaced the entire air box. I ended up putting the stock intake box back in and went with a Dinan charge pipe and filter. Although you didn't get the "intake sound", which I could care less about. It did give more cold air and better flowing filter into the intake plenum, while retaining stock air box. 

I know that's a different vehicle, but like in of the posts in here, create the intake out of carbon fiber with same diameter piping. I mean there are so many high end cars that use carbon fiber air boxes. They obviously create them for more than just looks in a Ferrari 16M, new M5, 911 turbo, etc..I don't need or expect ECU tune gains but some is good and data that shows that it is better for the engine and I'm all in! 

If they make it and its effective by showing the improvements of more dense cold air we will surely buy...I know I would!


----------



## Quisp (Mar 18, 2012)

I had The Dinan intake on my 335i. That was the first one I saw that didnt get the air from inside ther engine compartment which on the 335 had limited air coming in. I thought the idea made a lot more sense because if you want cooler air then you dont want the air next to the engine with 2 turbos, has to come from outside the engine area. It was a pain in the ass to work on because it was in an already crowded area by the oil cooler but it worked.Theonly thing I might change about the stock intake is the opeing that the air comes in at the front, I would see if that couldnt be a little larger opening and possibly the shape of the box. I took the air filter out to see hwo itlooked and noticed a dead spot in the box where "stuff" was collecting. Actually maybe it is better that it collected there than go through.


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

So what kind of claims are companies making for ttrs intakes and where are people actually measuring?


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

Quisp said:


> Maybe carbonio will come out with someting.


Yeah, it's possible. We've conducted several tests over the past 6 months.


----------



## Marty (Jul 14, 2000)

[email protected] said:


> Yeah, it's possible. We've conducted several tests over the past 6 months.


TTRS Carbonio teaser! Nice. Care to share some teaser results?


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

[email protected] said:


> Yeah, it's possible. We've conducted several tests over the past 6 months.


Why not put up the 2 bigger pictures.


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

The biggest restriction of the OEM airbox are the air intake of the box and the exit of the airbox.
The airbox it self is more then OK.


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

R5T said:


> Why not put up the 2 bigger pictures.


It's a teaser. I'm not ready to share all the info yet. :laugh:


----------



## Quisp (Mar 18, 2012)

The box is very big but the air flow into the box seems pretty limited and any setup that pulls air from in the engine compartment may bring in more air but it will be hot air. This car runs hot and not sure that using that hot air is the best thing to do. Going to look at the stock air intake opening and see what is around it. I have an idea but need to see if there is room for it.
If an aftermarket exhaust is on the car will the stock intake provide enough air for engine with the exhaust oir is it be ing limited somewhat byt the intake? Would the limited amount of air create any troublesfor the engine(misfire, run rich, hesitation)?


----------



## JohnLZ7W (Nov 23, 2003)

Afaik, the apr stage 3 car is using the stock air box. I doubt that an exhaust is going to cause the engine to need that much more air. 
I imagine there will be some gains to be had with an intake but will mostly be cosmetic and added noise.


----------



## 311-in-337 (Feb 19, 2003)

[email protected] said:


> Yeah, it's possible. We've conducted several tests over the past 6 months.




I hate your face.  

lol  Whatever it looks like.


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

311-in-337 said:


> I hate your face.
> 
> lol  Whatever it looks like.


Thank you and here you go. :laugh:

https://www.google.com/search?q=ari...DQ&biw=768&bih=928&sei=VtbZUJLvGoHO9QS55IGQDQ


----------



## 996cab (Aug 13, 2011)

[email protected] said:


> Yeah, it's possible. We've conducted several tests over the past 6 months.


Arin, when can I buy one?


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

996cab said:


> Arin, when can I buy one?


I'm not sure yet. We have new components in casting for the stage 3 system and we'd like to test and confirm compatibility and necessity before moving forward. The final product will consist of the same weave pattern as the oem components.

We've spent quite a bit of time testing intake designs. This includes even testing with and without filters of varying sizes and styles and SLAed ideal entrances, etc. My question above has some reasoning behind it. We've tested it all, so I'm curious what others are actually 'claiming'...


----------



## 996cab (Aug 13, 2011)

[email protected] said:


> I'm not sure yet. We have new components in casting for the stage 3 system and we'd like to test and confirm compatibility and necessity before moving forward. The final product will consist of the same weave pattern as the oem components.
> 
> We've spent quite a bit of time testing intake designs. This includes even testing with and without filters of varying sizes and styles and SLAed ideal entrances, etc. My question above has some reasoning behind it. We've tested it all, so I'm curious what others are actually 'claiming'...


Arin,
Thx for the response and a Merry X'mas to you.

Am not remotely interested/bothered/concerned/fussed/turned on/have a desire in the performance aspects...I just like the OEM 'look' if the Carbon weave would match the OEM. So, can I have mine now please...if there is a gain then well...ain't I just about the luckiest TT-RS owner around...

When can I buy one?


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

996cab said:


> Arin,
> Thx for the response and a Merry X'mas to you.
> 
> Am not remotely interested/bothered/concerned/fussed/turned on/have a desire in the performance aspects...I just like the OEM 'look' if the Carbon weave would match the OEM. So, can I have mine now please...if there is a gain then well...ain't I just about the luckiest TT-RS owner around...
> ...


As soon as I know I'll report back. :thumbup:


----------



## 996cab (Aug 13, 2011)

[email protected] said:


> As soon as I know I'll report back. :thumbup:


Gr8 & thx...


----------



## Quisp (Mar 18, 2012)

OK, has anyone else taken the llittle lid off the box just in fron of the airbox behind the radiator above the rubber connecting area? Wow that is a bizarre little setup in there. I am surprised that any of the air from the front intake actually makes it to the airbox. First the air enters over the radiator and go up where it hits another 90 degree turn that takes it over a curve wing that send it down to an area that is partially open across the top but has a curve going down to a slot( to let water drain)blocking most of it. There are 3 90 degree changes, 2 curved suirfaces redirecting the air away from the air box and out of the intake, one short ridge that further blocks the airflow and an opening that is much smaller than it looks from the outside. It does not look like it would be good for smooth airflow and definitley impedes tha amount of air. Take a look, and feel around in there. You will be surprised at how may things are in there.


----------



## Southshorettrs (Jul 15, 2012)

Quisp said:


> OK, has anyone else taken the llittle lid off the box just in fron of the airbox behind the radiator above the rubber connecting area? Wow that is a bizarre little setup in there. I am surprised that any of the air from the front intake actually makes it to the airbox. First the air enters over the radiator and go up where it hits another 90 degree turn that takes it over a curve wing that send it down to an area that is partially open across the top but has a curve going down to a slot( to let water drain)blocking most of it. There are 3 90 degree changes, 2 curved suirfaces redirecting the air away from the air box and out of the intake, one short ridge that further blocks the airflow and an opening that is much smaller than it looks from the outside. It does not look like it would be good for smooth airflow and definitley impedes tha amount of air. Take a look, and feel around in there. You will be surprised at how may things are in there.


Good little notes on the box and I could not agree more how bizarre and how many right angles are in that box. Very strange and I understand that is probably been a lot of R and D into the function and form of the air intake box. 

I would to see an actual diagram displaying the amout of cold air volume getting into the vehicle.


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

The Carbonio makes that mess a straight shot into the air box.


----------



## i0n (Oct 29, 2012)

Quisp said:


> First the air enters over the radiator and go up where it hits another 90 degree turn that takes it over a curve wing that send it down to an area that is partially open across the top but has a curve going down to a slot( to let water drain)blocking most of it. There are 3 90 degree changes, 2 curved suirfaces redirecting the air away from the air box and out of the intake, one short ridge that further blocks the airflow and an opening that is much smaller than it looks from the outside. It does not look like it would be good for smooth airflow and definitley impedes tha amount of air.


I don't think you should think of it as air trying to push its way through the pipe and into the engine, but rather as the engine sucking air through the pipe like a straw. My shop vac has a hose and makes the same amount of suction whether I have it curled up or perfectly straight. It's only when I change the diameter of the pipe (by bending the tube until it collapses in on itself) that the amount of suction noticeably decreases.

Chances are that the stock pipe is near perfectly sized for the vacuum that your engine creates. The diameter isn't so large that the air moves too slowly, absorbs too much heat from the engine bay, and insufficiently cools the engine. But, the diameter also isn't too small such that the engine can't pull enough air through the pipe fast enough.

Your stock intake also incorporates safety features that help remove unwanted substances from the intake air (like excess water) and allow the engine to continue operating even if the intake is clogged (e.g., with snow), which is something that most aftermarket intakes do not take into account.

So, in my opinion, I would stick with the stock intake. However, if you're upgrading your turbocharger and the engine needs to be able to draw in a significantly larger quantity of air, by all means upgrade the diameter of your intake. Otherwise, I think the stock intake is plenty adequate and far safer from a daily driver point of view.


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

Quisp said:


>


There is already a alternative part for that, made out of carbon Fiber.


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

Installed on a RS.


----------



## Quisp (Mar 18, 2012)

ahhh, i was not aware there was one for the ttrs. Is it just a duct or are there things on the inside that would impede the flow of air like the stock one?
I understand that there are reasons for the slot to let debris and water out of the intake. 
I also know that the enging will suck the air in but what about the idea of ram air or something like that? I used ot have bikes and they had some pretty big intakes that they were calling ram air. The speed of the bike would push the air in instead of the exhaust having tio suck it in. Woldnt it help to have the air coming in that way?
I saw that there is a side intake on the airbox that opens to the engine bay. woouldnt it be better if most of the air came from outside of the engine area rather than the second spot. Ideally we want the cooler air to be the majority of the air going in but in the current setup there is probably a great deal of air coming in through the second area. I cant say what percentage because I dont know but the second spot is not obstructed.
I live in Arizona so engine temp is a concern and I am new to Audi so I am also trying to learn about the engine which is why i ask so many questions.


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

In my part of the world we have autumn/winter/spring with lot of rain and snow (if we are lucky enough in jan/feb/Mar).
So in that case you need al the water (snow) blocking you can get.
And with ice cold winters it can be of help the engine suck also heated air from the engine bay.
In my part of the world i would only change (at most) the panel filter inside.

And power wise, i don't see the point in buying a 340/360 hp car and try to get 500-600 hp out of it.
If i want 500-600 hp i would by a car with that amount of power to start with.

With al the speed traps we have, i can loose my drivers licence with our Grocery car.


----------



## hightechrdn (Dec 9, 2011)

R5T said:


> In my part of the world we have autumn/winter/spring with lot of rain and snow (if we are lucky enough in jan/feb/Mar).
> So in that case you need al the water (snow) blocking you can get.
> And with ice cold winters it can be of help the engine suck also heated air from the engine bay.
> In my part of the world i would only change (at most) the panel filter inside.
> ...


I can see your point about the snow, but not the statement about buying a 500-600hp car. Getting 600hp for not too much more than the price of a 360hp car is the dream of many sports car enthusiasts, speaking figuratively of course. I for one couldn't afford a 500hp+ car new off the showroom floor unless I went with a Mustang GT500 or ZL1 Camaro. Neither of those meets my expectations for interior quality for example. So for not much more, I can build a TT-RS which will match their stock HP and still have all of the other Audi qualities, limited availability, etc.

My opinion of course...


----------



## lpriley32 (Jul 28, 2012)

hightechrdn said:


> I can see your point about the snow, but not the statement about buying a 500-600hp car. Getting 600hp for not too much more than the price of a 360hp car is the dream of many sports car enthusiasts, speaking figuratively of course. I for one couldn't afford a 500hp+ car new off the showroom floor unless I went with a Mustang GT500 or ZL1 Camaro. Neither of those meets my expectations for interior quality for example. So for not much more, I can build a TT-RS which will match their stock HP and still have all of the other Audi qualities, limited availability, etc.
> 
> My opinion of course...


My thoughts exactly...I may not go Stage 3 while this is my DD but possibly someday. Until then I can make a few minor tweaks (dp, exhaust, intake, ecu tune) and add an additional 70 or so hp...and still enjoy the style and finish of my vehicle.


----------



## JohnLZ7W (Nov 23, 2003)

Quisp said:


> I also know that the enging will suck the air in but what about the idea of ram air or something like that? I used ot have bikes and they had some pretty big intakes that they were calling ram air. The speed of the bike would push the air in instead of the exhaust having tio suck it in. Woldnt it help to have the air coming in that way?


Ram air is pretty much useless on a turbocharged car since it depends on forcing the air all the way to the throttle body. With a turbocharger you've got a major impediment to flow and of course the turbo is forcing the air into the cylinders anyway. You do want to make sure the turbo has an ample supply of air and having a straighter path will generally help.



Quisp said:


> I saw that there is a side intake on the airbox that opens to the engine bay. woouldnt it be better if most of the air came from outside of the engine area rather than the second spot.


Audi may have designed the intake to pull warm air to meet certain requirements for emissions or driveability related to cold starts or driving in colder climates. RS4 owners have removed the flaps in the intake manifold thinking that removing that restriction would improve performance and found out that they really do make a difference in cold start conditions and are worth the performance tradeoff.


----------



## Quisp (Mar 18, 2012)

I lived in upstate New York and PA for 25 years so i am familiar with that weather. I traded it for Haboobs and Monsoon.
Did not know that about ram air, like i said I am learnig as i ask questions and I do appreciate the patience everyone has for the questions.
I agree with Hightech. I like the stylijng of this car and there is none like it in any hp range so I am trying to make the best of it I can without doing any harm to it. 
It has always been my understanding that getting cool air to a turbo engine is a good thing. I did not think about the hot air for starting or emissions. I do not think i am going to start carving up the intake. I justy thought it was interesting how twisted the path of airflow is. Again that seems to contradict what I thought about intakes, least amount of bends and avoid 90 degree or more. Like exhaust, the straighter the better and the air filter dirt shoudl be fairly even across the filter with not drastic clean or dirty areas because that is a sign of bad flow through the filter in the box.
Time to leanr new tricks i guess.
R5T, where did you see that intake and is that bobbys rahals signature?


----------



## tdi-bart (Feb 10, 2011)

i am skeptical, there won't be any big improvements for the RS

ram air is good maybe for NA cars, turbo cars do the sucking, honestly i don't think it matters how many curves, bends or slots there are in the intake. if it were water flowing through it, then yes, but this is air we are talking about lol

the key is that there are no volumetric restrictions

i also agree, the colder the air the more power as a result of air getting more dense the colder it gets, so think of it as more air going into the engine

just like noone has proved any power/acceleration benefits of a bigger FMIC on this car, yes lower intakes, but that did not convert to anything substantial

i do 120+ mph on a daily basis anyway, so i am not too concerned with cooling/intake problems above those speeds anyway


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

Quisp said:


> .....R5T, where did you see that intake and is that bobbys rahals signature?


The intake cost € 179,- and is made by this German Company: http://www.nlcarbon.de

The Signature is from "Walter Röhrl".


----------



## Quisp (Mar 18, 2012)

OOops, sorry. I know bobby rahal is involved BMW ALMS racing so I though it might have been his signature.
So with airflow the bends do not make much of a difference as long as the volume is the same going in and coming out? Dont the bends and curves create turbulence which would then impede the movement of the air?
I have read that with exhuasts you try to avoid shrp bends so I thought it was the same with intakes. 
Want to keep a closed box if I do get something. I have seen the cone filters with open boxes in the engine bay on BMWs and that never made much sense. Sucking all the air from the engine bay instead of outside.
I would think that upgrading the exhaust and intake would be the ideal way since they would benefit from each other and in combination provide better flow from in to out. I guess it would depend on the pairing and the dimensions of the pipes and volume of air mmoved by each.


----------



## jpkeyzer (Aug 24, 2011)

R5T said:


> The Signature is from "Walter Röhrl".


*Watch this fancy footwork!!*

Now you understand what made Walter Röhrl so brilliant!


----------



## hightechrdn (Dec 9, 2011)

R5T said:


> The intake cost € 179,- and is made by this German Company: http://www.nlcarbon.de
> 
> The Signature is from "Walter Röhrl".


Do you happen to have a link to purchase the intake piece? I checked out the their website, but don't see an online store/checkout capability. My German is fairly rusty, so I could have missed it....


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

hightechrdn said:


> Do you happen to have a link to purchase the intake piece? I checked out the their website, but don't see an online store/checkout capability. My German is fairly rusty, so I could have missed it....


It seems the only way is to contact them with this: http://www.nlcarbon.de/pages/kontakt.php


----------



## 311-in-337 (Feb 19, 2003)

*Revo intake...*

Looks like Revo has an intake available...


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

311-in-337 said:


> Looks like Revo has an intake available...


Looks like the pipercross with a different filter text. 

http://www.thettshop.com/latest.asp?cat=5008&product=600729


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

Still think some kind of GruppeM RS4 RAM system is the way to go.


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)




----------



## Quisp (Mar 18, 2012)

The last one is more along what i was thinking. 

I did not know he was a rally driver. I think that those are probably the most skilled drivers in any racing (and the craziest) the fans are insane too the way they are on on the road and jump out just before he hits them.

Doesnt look like Gruppe M is working on anything for the ttrs. WIll have to wait and see what comes with the new year, maybe something new will show up


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

I had contact with GruppeM in the past, but they said not having plans to develop something for the TT RS.
Don't know if they have change there point of view on this in the meantime.


----------



## 311-in-337 (Feb 19, 2003)

R5T said:


> Looks like the pipercross with a different filter text.
> 
> http://www.thettshop.com/latest.asp?cat=5008&product=600729



I thought this was the Pipercross...


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

311-in-337 said:


> I thought this was the Pipercross...


The filter is, the piping not.


----------



## Southshorettrs (Jul 15, 2012)

This design from Pipercross or Revo still does not seem like a solid solution as the filter is completely exposed and it is just sucking hot air most importantly. The Gruppe M is enclosed and is getting the air outside the engine bay. This is completely unrelated but in M3 I have intake scoops behind the kideby grilled to get the most cool air outside the engine bay. Granted my SC in the car has the air filter located in the driver side intake scoop where the stock air intake box would use to get cool air into the vehicle. The filter is exposed to the elements, but the idea for this intake on the TTRS is to try and extract as much air outside the engine bay. Even a larger OEM carbon fiber box where the original is could be increased in size and the diameter piping may be marginal increased as well.

I am sure APR has the most knowledge in this department and it would be great if you could get solid gains, but most importantly for myself is more dense cold air that is free of debris and if it just so happens to be made out of beautiful carbon I think a lot of us are sold!


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

There is one APR picture missing and that is the other side of that carbon lid part.
I like the way it's so far, but the importend question is: what do they do with the lower OEM entrance of the OEM air-box.
If there is a feed to it from the other/under side of that carbon lid part it would mean that the open filter inside get air from top and bottom side.
If they close of the bottom OEM air-box entrance then the air will only come from the top side.


----------



## Quisp (Mar 18, 2012)

It looks like the APR goes straight from the front of the car to the lid of the airbox since it is all one piece. That eliminates most bends and internal obstructions but also changes the air in the box. Where there was two flows coming in from the bottom of the box and mixing before there will now be a cooler flow across the top and the hotter air coming in from the bottom. Two different channels of air with two temps as they go through the filter I dont know if this has any effect on anything(probably not unless there is a sensor of some kind near the filter)\


R5T, the carbon intake that you have in the autographed picture, is it like the stock one internally or not so many obstructions? Also is there a slot for debris and water to come out before the air box similar to the stock one? I looked at their site and it was hard to tell from there..


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

Quisp said:


> R5T, the carbon intake that you have in the autographed picture, is it like the stock one internally or not so many obstructions? Also is there a slot for debris and water to come out before the air box similar to the stock one? I looked at their site and it was hard to tell from there..


That one is a closed scoop all that go through ends up in the air box.


----------



## Quisp (Mar 18, 2012)

I know it has ben said that the ram air effect is not really important in these types of engines but I came across this 10 page book that is about the engine which seems to say that Audi designed part of the system to create air flow "in the ram air pressure range". It also says they were going for high efficiency and throughput but with the the bends and internals it doesnt seem very efficient.

"The design of the intake system focused primarily on high efficiency and throughput. With maximum air throughput rates of up to 1000 kg/h, the maximum possible cross-sections within the installation space were utilised and the shortest and most direct possible air routing was achieved
]The fresh gas side essentially comprises the following assemblies, 
-cold air intake including water separator, 
-connection to front endair filter with pulsation damping,
-compressor intake system with wastegate feed
-compressor
-pressure pipe upstream of charge air cooler
-charge air cooler with plastic boxes
-pressure pipe and throttle valve assembly with integrated wastegate valve
-intake manifold with tumble flap system.
As well as optimising these particular assemblies, another aim was to optimise the flow to the compressor wheel on the intake side. Optimisation of the intake system by means of CFD delivered a flow control system enabling stable operation close to the compressor’s pump limit,By being installed in the lower part of the front end, the charge air cooler could be moved entirely into the ram pressure range. This enabled the external charge cooling air mass flow to be maximised, which delivered degrees of freedom in the inner lamination. Despite the internal flow derestriction which this provided, resulting in a pressure loss from the entire system of just 135 mbar at maximum throughput, cooling efficiencies of > 80 % were achieved at full load.
The intake manifold is designed as a two-part low-pressure sand-cast component comprising the intake arm gallery and the air collector. The pneumatic flap system built into the intake arm gallery, in conjunction with the tumble inlet duct, provides the necessary charge motion for optimum mixture homogenisation"

If anyone is interested here is the link for the pdf about the engine, veru interesting(what i understood of it) 
http://www.jlosee.com/images/TTRS/PDF/l5ttrs.pdf


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

R5T said:


> There is one APR picture missing and that is the other side of that carbon lid part.
> I like the way it's so far, but the importend question is: what do they do with the lower OEM entrance of the OEM air-box.
> If there is a feed to it from the other/under side of that carbon lid part it would mean that the open filter inside get air from top and bottom side.
> If they close of the bottom OEM air-box entrance then the air will only come from the top side.


It gets air from both entrances.


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

Very interesting to hear.


----------



## JohnLZ7W (Nov 23, 2003)

Quisp said:


> By being installed in the lower part of the front end, the charge air cooler could be moved entirely into the ram pressure range. This enabled the external charge cooling air mass flow to be maximised, which delivered degrees of freedom in the inner lamination.


This is saying that the intercooler benefits from being in the ram air flow, not the intake itself. They're also saying that the current airbox design allows the compressor to operate at near its limit so I'm not sure how much can be gained by modifying the airbox.


----------



## Marty (Jul 14, 2000)

JohnLZ7W said:


> This is saying that the intercooler benefits from being in the ram air flow, not the intake itself. They're also saying that the current airbox design allows the compressor to operate at near its limit so I'm not sure how much can be gained by modifying the airbox.


"Ram air" increases effective atmospheric pressure feeding the intake, similar to driving your car in high elevations vs lower elevations. There is no question that there is a benefit here, even with turbocharged cars.

You can use Bernoulli's principle to calculate the pressure increase due to stagnation of high sped air pretty simply: pressure increase dP = 0.5 * air density * (original air speed)^2

At 65 mph, that's just under 0.08 psi. At 100 mph that's 0.18 psi.

If we generously assume for a naturally aspirated car that power increases with ambient pressure (since intake flow is driven by the difference in pressure between the cylinder chamber and the ambient air), then the power increase would be roughly 0.08 psi / 14.7 psi = 0.5%. For a 360 hp car, that would be 2 hp at 65 mph.

Vroom vroom!


----------



## JohnLZ7W (Nov 23, 2003)

Marty said:


> If we generously assume for a naturally aspirated car that power increases with ambient pressure (since intake flow is driven by the difference in pressure between the cylinder chamber and the ambient air), then the power increase would be roughly 0.08 psi / 14.7 psi = 0.5%. For a 360 hp car, that would be 2 hp at 65 mph.
> 
> Vroom vroom!


But the cylinder pressure wouldn't be 14.7 psi for our cars, I'm honestly not sure how much boost a stock TTRS runs but as that number increases the overall increase in power should get diminish.


----------



## Marty (Jul 14, 2000)

JohnLZ7W said:


> But the cylinder pressure wouldn't be 14.7 psi for our cars, I'm honestly not sure how much boost a stock TTRS runs but as that number increases the overall increase in power should get diminish.


Yes this is why turbocharged cars are less impacted at high altitudes (they just "pump harder"). But pumping harder makes the compression less efficient, and the result is hotter air at the same output pressure (which means less air mass).

So there is still a benefit (although it's small in either the NA or turbo case).


----------



## JohnLZ7W (Nov 23, 2003)

Marty said:


> Yes this is why turbocharged cars are less impacted at high altitudes (they just "pump harder"). But pumping harder makes the compression less efficient, and the result is hotter air at the same output pressure (which means less air mass).
> 
> So there is still a benefit (although it's small in either the NA or turbo case).


But really for a turbocharged car all you are pressurizing with ram air is the airbox and anything before the turbo. So the ram air can help feed the airbox denser air but not the engine itself. It can help the turbo stay fed with air but if the turbo is already getting sufficient air then is there any real increase in power?


----------



## Quisp (Mar 18, 2012)

Perhaps this picture which was with the write up would help somehow.


----------



## Quisp (Mar 18, 2012)




----------



## Marty (Jul 14, 2000)

JohnLZ7W said:


> But really for a turbocharged car all you are pressurizing with ram air is the airbox and anything before the turbo. So the ram air can help feed the airbox denser air but not the engine itself. It can help the turbo stay fed with air but if the turbo is already getting sufficient air then is there any real increase in power?


You can view the turbo has a pump that takes air from the low-pressure (airbox) side, and boosts it up to a higher pressure on the output side. This pumping process also heats up the air. 

If the low-pressure side starts out at higher pressure, the turbo has to do less pumping work to hit a certain high pressure output target. This results in the output air being lower temperature than it would have been if the turbo had to work harder.

But again, ram air in either the turbo'd or naturally aspirated case is a small pressure bump as calculated above...


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

[email protected] said:


> Yeah, it's possible. We've conducted several tests over the past 6 months.


Bigger pictures any time soon. ???


----------



## Quisp (Mar 18, 2012)

Although it may not give a large power increase I think that the benefit of more air and cooler air would be good and out here in the summer that is something. Reducing the workload of the pump would also seem like a benefit.
I am going to test a few ideas and see if the air temp changes significantly. Now here is the stupid question, what sensors would i want to monitor in order to see if there is a change in air temp and volume? I want to do some logging of the different possibilities and compare them.


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

I have no idea, i have not any interes in logging anything on a car.
I turn the key and put it to work, don't care how he does it, the only thing i care about is that he is working the way it should, 24/7.


----------



## JohnLZ7W (Nov 23, 2003)

I think you can log requested vs actual boost and intake air temps. R5T won't be logging anything since I really don't think they have a TT RS


----------



## Quisp (Mar 18, 2012)

I want to log to lof so i can see what effect any changes i make have on the car(good or bad). Could use butt dyno however it doesnt measure temps only hp and torque.


----------



## Quisp (Mar 18, 2012)

Had the car on a dyno today and with stcok software got 8-10 hp by allowing more air flow into the airbox by opening up the intake section a bit(not doing anything with the airbox itself just the section in front of it.) That was on a dyno with a fan so it is not the same as if the car were moving and the air hitting it at 60 mph but it does show there is some benefit, I know it is not much but still interesting.
One thing i noticed on the stock intake section was that it has crossed diagonals inside it. Like honeycombing oor cross hatching almost. I guess it is for support to prevent the tube from collapsing. I did not realize the engine sucked the air in with that much force that it woild collapse the intake if that is whast they are for.


----------



## Quisp (Mar 18, 2012)

alsoo found out that these cars run very rich in the high rpms, very. Cold see the fumes from the exhaust and got a few puffs out the back close to redline


----------



## Poverty (Feb 17, 2012)

R5T said:


> The ITG is also rubbish IMHO.
> And looks very much like a DIY job.


Oh look one of my pics of the first prototype unit to see if there were any rubbing issues. The finished product doesnt look like this


----------



## Quisp (Mar 18, 2012)

Any word on the carbonio intake?


----------



## 311-in-337 (Feb 19, 2003)

Poverty said:


> Oh look one of my pics of the first prototype unit to see if there were any rubbing issues. The finished product doesnt look like this



Can you post finished product pics? :thumbup:


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

*Forge Motorsport.*


----------



## RisR32 (Aug 31, 2005)

R5T said:


> *Forge Motorsport.*


When can I has?!?!


----------



## hightechrdn (Dec 9, 2011)

RisR32 said:


> When can I has?!?!


Yes, please!


----------



## InTTruder (Mar 28, 2006)

I've been muling about on this, and can't speak to any results except to say that surprisingly little improvement has netted so far. CFD (computational flow dynamics) helped Audi design that airbox, and SO far, it hasn't been a restriction on my Stage 2+RSC car (GO APR!). We'll see what the boffins can do!


----------



## Marty (Jul 14, 2000)

InTTruder said:


> I've been muling about on this, and can't speak to any results except to say that surprisingly little improvement has netted so far. CFD (computational flow dynamics) helped Audi design that airbox, and SO far, it hasn't been a restriction on my Stage 2+RSC car (GO APR!). We'll see what the boffins can do!


Exactly... you have real engineers designing the OEM stuff. I doubt they leave too much on the table, since reduction in losses in the air box could translate to some small mileage improvements, etc.

That being said, they do have other design constraints, such as reducing intake noise...


----------



## jaybyme (Aug 29, 2012)

I have constantly measured air intake temps over 1.5 yrs,and it's surprising what little difference a direct closed intake makes compared to the standard open intake.
I've tried a sealed carbon intake,to completely removing the air feed and removable lid of the standard system,and the differences are very small.
In actual fact,I'm sure the standard system also cools the throttle body,as with the sealed system you can feel the extra heat generated there.
If you run with the standard system,intakes are generally around +10-12c ambient,rising to max +20-25c when under full boost to 170 mph + with the Forge Ic fitted.
With the sealed intake,you might see intakes at 2c lower under wot runs,but under normal running they can be slightly higher.
I don't know exactly where the sensors are measuring from,but the seem to be highly influenced by engine bay temps and not actual air temperature.


----------



## Quisp (Mar 18, 2012)

jaybyme said:


> I don't know exactly where the sensors are measuring from,but the seem to be highly influenced by engine bay temps and not actual air temperature.


That is because almost all the air is coming from the engine bay. Veyr little actually makes it from outside of the bay.
There are trwo openings in the aiorbox, one to the front intake with a large opeing for water drainage, and one on the bottom opening directly into the bay. It has been said that the ram air effect is minimal and that most of theair is pulled thoruugh by the engine suction. If that is the case then almost all of the air would be from the engine bay.
Imagine you are drinking someting thorugh 2 straws. Both straws bring up the same amount of beverage. Now cut a hole in one of the straws above the beverage level(the front intake). This time when you drink you will get most if not all of the beverage through the straw with no holes(the bottom opeing of the airbox). If you get any beverage(outside air) through the other straw it will be very little and mixed with mostly air which comes through the hole(in our case that would be air from the engine bay being pulled back through the drain opening). If the drain opening were outside of the engine bay then it would be a little better but not much.
The drain opening in the front intake makesit impossible to create suction from the outside source of air so the engine suction would draw the air from the lower opening which is engine bay air. Any outside air that makes it to the airbox would be the result of ram air effect assisitng it past the drain opening which would not be very strong at low speeds. It seems thaat even though there is a front intake almost all of the air actually comes from ini the engine bay which explains why the air temp is so influenced by engine bay temps.


----------



## JohnLZ7W (Nov 23, 2003)

Quisp said:


> That is because almost all the air is coming from the engine bay. Veyr little actually makes it from outside of the bay.


Except for this though...



jaybyme said:


> I have constantly measured air intake temps over 1.5 yrs,and it's surprising what little difference a direct closed intake makes compared to the standard open intake.


This makes it seem like the intercooler has much more impact on IAT than the temperature of the air upstream of the turbo.
And I think you're misreading the ram air impact. IMO since there's a turbo in play the ram air effect is not going to increase power but it may influence how the air enters the airbox. As Marty has pointed out the ram air can keep the airbox full so that the turbo is not starved for air. The turbo can of course compensate, as they do at higher altitude, so there's not much impact to overall power output from the engine but you're probably more likely to be drawing air from outside the engine bay at higher speeds since the air is forced in. In fact at higher speeds there may be enough airflow in such that the openings in the airbox are intended to cool the engine bay.


----------



## jaybyme (Aug 29, 2012)

Yes I have also tried with the secondary lower intake taped over,so the only inlet was from the front grill'
Another point is,that I can set off with a cold engine and with ambient temps of -6c and the intakes are still reading warm temperatures from where the car was parked in my garage.
After 5-10 min of driving intakes will come down to about +6c over ambient,then once the engine bay is hot intakes will stay at +8c to 15c under fast driving.
The maximum intakes temps I have seen with standard intake and Forge IC are +25c,and that's flat out from 60 mph to 170 mph.Most of the time +20c is the max under full wot runs.
The increase over ambients,stay the same no mater whether it's -10c or +35c
If I can remember correctly,the Forge IC showed only small benefits at normal cruising speed,say 100 mph,but showed good improvements when driving slowly and when pushing hard.
Just as a comparison,when I used to keep readings in my Renault R26,intakes would actually start off identical or even lower than ambient temps,then under wot go to +18c


----------



## JohnLZ7W (Nov 23, 2003)

jaybyme said:


> Another point is,that I can set off with a cold engine and with ambient temps of -6c and the intakes are still reading warm temperatures from where the car was parked in my garage.
> After 5-10 min of driving intakes will come down to about +6c over ambient,then once the engine bay is hot intakes will stay at +8c to 15c under fast driving.


I think the IAT sensor is a combo sensor with the MAP sensor in the intake manifold just next to the throttle body (according to jonnyc anyway). So it's possible that the sensor is being warmed by the intake manifold which is in turn being warmed by the engine itself. A phenolic spacer could be used to insulate the intake manifold from the head and might help bring IAT down a bit.

But from your data it seems that the best opportunity for lowering IAT would be by improving IC efficiency. Airbox mods to improve airflow might not be reflected in a significantly increased peak power but may allow the turbo to spool sooner and improve midrange and throttle response.


----------



## jaybyme (Aug 29, 2012)

This could also be the reason why the standard open intake shows similar intake temps,as the intake is open at the bottom allowing cold air to blow directly onto the throttle body and MAP sensor'
You can definitely feel that the throttle body is cooler with the oem air feed.


----------



## Quisp (Mar 18, 2012)

when you had the second hole taped off and measured the temps did you have the water drain area open in the front intake area? I was not sure what you meant by closed direct intake.
On a dyno, without the little lid on the front section I did get 8-10 hp just removing that lid(but the hood was open so that could have made some difference)


----------



## jaybyme (Aug 29, 2012)

There's a few pictures here of the sealed air feed. 
http://www.nlcarbon.de/pages/gallery.php 
I've run the engine with the lid off,no air feed etc,and the differences in intake temps were very small. 
Running with the lid off,hood open,could make a big difference on the dyno though


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

[email protected] said:


> Yeah, it's possible. We've conducted several tests over the past 6 months.


Any progress.


----------



## 311-in-337 (Feb 19, 2003)

R5T said:


> Any progress.



I dont think so.


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

R5T said:


> Any progress.


We're testing intakes with stage 3 to see if they even do anything once airflow is increased.


----------



## vailance (Nov 16, 2011)

is there a stage 3 for TTS using GTX2867R soon?


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

vailance said:


> is there a stage 3 for TTS using GTX2867R soon?


Yes, we have many out there right now. Finalizing everything.


----------



## Audi RS3 (Apr 20, 2011)

R5T said:


> The intake cost € 179,- and is made by this German Company: http://www.nlcarbon.de
> 
> The Signature is from "Walter Röhrl".


 They don't answer to my emails.


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

[email protected] said:


> Yes, we have many out there right now. Finalizing everything.


 2 months already.


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

R5T said:


> 2 months already.


 Yeah? Well, we're not ready yet. We'd like to get some good seat time with it on the stage 3 kit before making the decision to sell it or not. We could have sold it months ago, untested. Is that what people prefer? It does look really nice.


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

The TT RS production will end soon, maybe even before APR put that kit on the market.


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

R5T said:


> The TT RS production will end soon, maybe even before APR put that kit on the market.


 Well in that case, let's just rush the release because once production of the car's over, they all vanish!


----------



## Williamttrs (Mar 29, 2013)

[email protected] said:


> Well in that case, let's just rush the release because once production of the car's over, they all vanish!


 Seriously Arin! Is the extreme sarcasm necessary? Perhaps your loyal customers are simply stating the obvious. It's an air intake, not rocket science. How much R&D does it really need? 

Of course no one wants APR to just throw something on the market! I think we will all agree prima facia that several other intakes have been produced and that even APR has produced several products for the TTRS that are drastically more complicated. So why does it take APR so long to produce a less complicated product than an exhaust or tune? One very logical answer is that the intake is not a high priority and that in fact there are not engineers slaving away day and night in a wind tunnel. My best guess is that the intake is a little side project that will be gotten to when there is time. 

That is okay by-the-way. In fact, it is okay if APR does not make the intake. What is not okay is leading people to believe that they are going to get the intake quickly and then being defensive and hiding behind the smokescreen that APR is just being careful. Your not dealing with a bunch of 1st graders. We can handle the truth and value honesty. 

A pattern is emerging and it is very troubling. As I mentioned before, who I pay my money to is as important as what I pay for. This is suppose to be fun. There is no requirement for any of us to participate in this activity or buy from APR. If you goal on this forum is to get more business for APR, then your attitude and comments are working against this goal.


----------



## JohnLZ7W (Nov 23, 2003)

Williamttrs said:


> Seriously Arin! Is the extreme sarcasm necessary? Perhaps your loyal customers are simply stating the obvious. It's an air intake, not rocket science. How much R&D does it really need?


 In fairness, he is replying to R5T, who doesn't own a TTRS and mostly just trolls.


----------



## croman44 (Jan 9, 2013)

Also have to think about the fact that APR is tweaking it as they finalize the Stage 3 kit. Why would you release it and then alter it? 

I am guessing that when the Stage 3 kit is finished and they know that they will no longer tweak the intake that it will then be released


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

Williamttrs said:


> Seriously Arin! Is the extreme sarcasm necessary?


 Quite frankly, yes! It's R5T we've spoken quite a bit before.  



> Perhaps your loyal customers are simply stating the obvious. It's an air intake, not rocket science. How much R&D does it really need?


 We just want to make sure it makes power. I know the claims I'm seeing at stock, stage 1 and stage 2 with intakes are, cough, BS. :laugh: 



> So why does it take APR so long to produce a less complicated product than an exhaust or tune?


 Well, this is a Carbonio intake. APR is simply the only company in the world distributing it, so the ball is not always in our court. As far as lead time, it's carbon fiber, so it takes forever. 



> What is not okay is leading people to believe that they are going to get the intake quickly and then being defensive and hiding behind the smokescreen that APR is just being careful.


 Quickly? When did I say that? Sigh... I've debated this in the past. Maybe I should just never show anything. Whenever I do, everyone gets mad when it's not available right away, or if we decide not to launch it, or if there are other delays, or whatever. Just upset people. Everyone's always upset. 



> A pattern is emerging and it is very troubling. As I mentioned before, who I pay my money to is as important as what I pay for. This is suppose to be fun. There is no requirement for any of us to participate in this activity or buy from APR. If you goal on this forum is to get more business for APR, then your attitude and comments are working against this goal.


 Sigh.... I can't win.


----------



## Williamttrs (Mar 29, 2013)

JohnLZ7W said:


> In fairness, he is replying to R5T, who doesn't own a TTRS and mostly just trolls.


 If there is history between Arin and R5T or if R5T is just a trouble maker, then I will retract my statement. Giving the benefit of the doubt is easier if there were not other examples of this kind of attitude. A PM to R5T would have been more appropriate for Arin to express his personal frustration. 

Peace!


----------



## [email protected] (Jul 29, 2008)

Williamttrs said:


> A PM to R5T would have been more appropriate for Arin to express his personal frustration.


 To be honest, I preferred the sarcastic response as I thought several others here would too. :laugh:


----------



## Williamttrs (Mar 29, 2013)

[email protected] said:


> To be honest, I preferred the sarcastic response as I thought several others here would too. :laugh:


 Fair enough. eace


----------



## bigstu (Mar 6, 2008)

[email protected] said:


> We could have sold it months ago, untested. Is that what people prefer? It does look really nice.


 As long as it doesn't loose power, I don't think people care, just sell it. :beer::beer: 

I like intake noise, which is typically the reason I buy them, not for the couple HP they may or may not make. The first mod on my Mk3 VR6 when I was 18: intake, and I loved it just for the sound it made. I know it isn't going to be that dramatic of a difference, but HP is definitely not the only reason people buy intakes. 

The carbon would also accent the OEM carbon pieces nicely as well. Osir make carbon accent pieces for the TT-RS engine, all they do is look cool, and people buy 'em. I'm sure some people buy the Carbino Intakes for its looks alone. 

Thanks Arin and APR!


----------



## cipsony (Mar 26, 2013)

My intake story: 

As many others I initially bought the panel filter and then I bought the ITG intake. I was the first LHD car with an ITG intake and the ITG had to adjust the pipe according to my measurements. 

ITG intake 
- While the ITG is better than the stock one (due to obvious reasons and I actually did a minimal test) I felt is not good enough and more important it looks really bad under the hood. The TT RS engine design is pretty eye catching so the ITG canister just isn't from there. 
- Another "drawback" of ITG is that the filter inside is rated by ITG at only 440 bhp (those with hybrids are way beyond this figure) --> I know that Intakes can't be rated to provide a certain bhp number but if the ITG filter is rated by ITG with this 440 figure then for sure it puts a restriction to those with more powerful engines. 
- If someone will stay behind the car during a dyno test they will understand the huge amount of air that is passing through the engine --> the engine is getting more air through the exhaust that the dyno fans are throwing on the front --> and all this through a narrow intake pipe! AMAZING  
- Most of the powerful & efficient engines have 1 intake that feeds 3 or 4 cylinders (for example, the Nissan GTR have 2 intakes for 6 cylinders) --> the TT RS is quite unique with one intake "feeding" 5 cyls ! 

To cut the story: I decided to make my own intake as I don't think any company will invest enough time and money for developing a proper one --> By proper intake I mean one that will take advantage of all the space available in the engine bay. 

Intake development: 
- The intake will be made out of CF 
- The intake will look good under the hood --> will follow the hood line, will fill the empty space and form (not just a simple canister), will look as it were designed by Audi. 
- The intake will have a big filter inside (rated at around 600 bhp) --> I'm not saying the car will have 600 bhp ... I'm just saying that the filter will put as minimum restriction as possible 
- The intake will feed from 2 points and will take the air directly from outside the car (no air will come from the engine bay) 
- The exit pipe that will go from the intake housing to the turbo will be made from 2 different layers (the outside layer will be CF) --> different layers will ensure better heat insulation. 
- The previous "pipe" will start with a diameter of 152 mm and will be gradually be reduced to the turbo intake size. 
- The intake housing will be huge to allow more air inside it so the turbo will pull the air easily and have an instant response. This will be the biggest difference between ITG or OEM intake vs. mine. The bigger the turbo the bigger the difference. 
- Overall the restriction put by the intake assembly will be minimal 
- For taking advantage of the new intake the Map might need to be adjusted 
- I expect the turbo to have a better response and the car to rev easier above 5500~6000 rpm (where the air volume that goes into the engine is just huge). 

Below is a picture with the intake housing --> this part will be used for taking the mold and making the carbon fibre part. 
http://i1244.photobucket.com/albums/gg580/Ciprian_Chete/2013-03-15125100_zpsded6ea47.jpg 

Development times 
1) The intake housing design is finished 
2) The mold of the intake housing is finished 
3) The process of making the intake housing from CF will began next week 
4) The intake "pipes assembly" that will go from the housing to the turbo will began next week. 
Overall, I estimate that the intake will be ready in 1.5 ~ 2 month 

I will provide more pics in time but I don't want for anyone to copy the design at this stage so this is why I am posting only one. 
If anyone will be interested and have enough patience then I will be willing to build a few extra (once mine will be ready and tested). 

SO, wish me luck so I can show you a REAL intake in 2 month time.


----------



## cipsony (Mar 26, 2013)

Another detail: The intake housing volume will be about 4-th time bigger than the ITG one.


----------



## Williamttrs (Mar 29, 2013)

cipsony said:


> My intake story:
> 
> As many others I initially bought the panel filter and then I bought the ITG intake. I was the first LHD car with an ITG intake and the ITG had to adjust the pipe according to my measurements.
> 
> ...


 That is some ambitious stuff. The photo is intriguing. If it is well executed, I can see that it will be a real looker. If the quality is there, I would be interested in a kit. 

As was recently mentioned from another member, I am doubtful that there is really much to be gained by any intake change, but the astatic quality is important too. Is there anyone here that does not like to look under their hood. I huge CF intake would nicely match the beauty that is already there. 

Good luck! :thumbup:


----------



## InTTruder (Mar 28, 2006)

I'm a little curious about discussions/assertions on intake volume. Volume ("3x or 4x bigger") is inconsequential. FLOW is the primary determinant of efficiency and power development. Some vo,lumetric changes occur to facilitate flow, bit a bigger volume (do some Bernoulli here folks) means lower velocity in that volume, and then you slam it into the TIP and compress it and speed it up again. Smooth is fast. Be careful of claims that bigger is better. That should not be the determinant in your choice if intake.


----------



## Poverty (Feb 17, 2012)

InTTruder said:


> I'm a little curious about discussions/assertions on intake volume. Volume ("3x or 4x bigger") is inconsequential. FLOW is the primary determinant of efficiency and power development. Some vo,lumetric changes occur to facilitate flow, bit a bigger volume (do some Bernoulli here folks) means lower velocity in that volume, and then you slam it into the TIP and compress it and speed it up again. Smooth is fast. Be careful of claims that bigger is better. That should not be the determinant in your choice if intake.


 exactly make it too big. and the pipework too big and you will affect response. bigger isnt always better


----------



## LongviewTx (Dec 26, 1999)

I bought the REVO (aka Pipercross) intake several months ago. Installed at the same time as the forge FMIC. 

All I want to add to this "discussion" is that you really ghear the blow off and diverter valve working. Initally, since I was accustomed to the "quite" engine, I didn't like it. But now, I have grown very fond of the sounds. It adds another dimension. 

Just thought I would insert this, as I don't think the change in "cabin input" noise has been mentioned.


----------



## cipsony (Mar 26, 2013)

InTTruder said:


> I'm a little curious about discussions/assertions on intake volume. Volume ("3x or 4x bigger") is inconsequential. FLOW is the primary determinant of efficiency and power development. Some vo,lumetric changes occur to facilitate flow, bit a bigger volume (do some Bernoulli here folks) means lower velocity in that volume, and then you slam it into the TIP and compress it and speed it up again. Smooth is fast. Be careful of claims that bigger is better. That should not be the determinant in your choice if intake.


 Yes, do some Bernoulli please. 

Make some computation and show us some figures, please. 

I already did mine.


----------



## Quisp (Mar 18, 2012)

I was thinning along the same line as cipsony about making a intake and trying to get more outside air and eliminate the engine bay intake hot air. The trick is finding an additonal spot for an intake to get outside air. Wheel wells were a thought buut very dificult to access and there are things there already. Still working on it though


----------



## JohnLZ7W (Nov 23, 2003)

Quisp said:


> I was thinning along the same line as cipsony about making a intake and trying to get more outside air and eliminate the engine bay intake hot air. The trick is finding an additonal spot for an intake to get outside air. Wheel wells were a thought buut very dificult to access and there are things there already. Still working on it though


 The entire driver side lower vent is open and it looks like you could route a hose up under the headlight and straight to the open port on the side of the airbox.


----------



## cipsony (Mar 26, 2013)

Quisp said:


> I was thinning along the same line as cipsony about making a intake and trying to get more outside air and eliminate the engine bay intake hot air. The trick is finding an additonal spot for an intake to get outside air. Wheel wells were a thought buut very dificult to access and there are things there already. Still working on it though


 Did you manged to make any part or a project? 
This site might help you make an idea of the piping and restrictions the OEM or ITG system is having: 

http://www.tlv.com/global/TI/calculator/


----------



## jaybyme (Aug 29, 2012)

Hperformance Germany, already have a kit, which takes air from the lower LH grill to the opening at the bottom of the airbox. 
I've been waiting for him to come back to me, so I can order it and see if it helps intakes.


----------



## cipsony (Mar 26, 2013)

jaybyme said:


> Hperformance Germany, already have a kit, which takes air from the lower LH grill to the opening at the bottom of the airbox.
> I've been waiting for him to come back to me, so I can order it and see if it helps intakes.


 Do you have a link or picture? Thx


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

cipsony said:


> Do you have a link or picture? Thx


----------



## cipsony (Mar 26, 2013)

Thanks, 

That's where I planned the second connection tube also.


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

cipsony said:


> Thanks,
> 
> That's where I planned the second connection tube also.


 Rothe-motorsport.de have this upgrade to the OEM airbox to get more cold air in it.


----------



## cipsony (Mar 26, 2013)

i will keep the oem feed (through the front bumper) and add another feed from the front air vent (like Rothe). Except this everything will be different.


----------



## jaybyme (Aug 29, 2012)

R5T said:


>


 Thanks for that R5T,I've been hunting for that picture for ages,can't remember where I first saw it


----------



## jaybyme (Aug 29, 2012)

looking at that again,it's hard to see how much air flow to the Stronic radiator is blocked off


----------



## jaybyme (Aug 29, 2012)

Checked yesterday,and that won't work with the Stronic,so I might just do some short term DIY mods to the plastic ducting flowing air to the gearbox cooler. 
I also done a few runs with a sealed air intake yesterday,to refresh my memory. 
I now remember why I took it off and went back to the oem set up,intakes were at +35c ! under short wot runs. 
The standard air intake, with it's holes and air flow into the engine bay,might look weird,but it works. 
Standard under same conditions, +18c


----------



## Black BeauTTy (Jun 11, 2011)

Does anyone have any evidence that the temp of incoming air (pre turbo) has any affect on the temp of that air after it runs through the turbo (post turbo but pre IC)? The OEM intake seems pretty well done from a flow and volume perspective, I'm just not sure if it is going to matter that much. The OEM system is pulling from inside and outside the engine bay. Will it really make a difference if it is all coming from the outside?


----------



## Quisp (Mar 18, 2012)

Does the HPPerfomrance connect to the box or is it just pushing air into the bay and then having it suckedin by the engine through the lower hole? If it doesnt then it would be more hot air because of the engine bay heating it up. Although it would be a good source of air for the engine if the box and intake are sealed so that they dont put air in or draw from it. That would keep the intake air isolated from the air that is being heated in thebay(except for a small amount of heat soak but that would not be much until after the box when it runs over the top) It would also address the concer i mention below about keeping the engine cool.
I have been focusing on the intake and how it connects to the box. I hav not takenb the bumper off and gotten into routing hoses and ductwork. I am trying to keep it relatively simple and see what results can be had with that. I had an intake that went through a front duct and came up through the engine on my BMW. It worked great since it was pulling air from in from outside of the engine instead of from in the bay like most aftermarket "cold air" intakes were doing. The only downside was working on it or anything else in that area because it was already tight in there and then adding carbon fiber tube, second filter, and scoop and all that fun, plus it was something that required more than just a little skill to do the actual install(and was a pain in the ass).
I tried to contact the company in Gemany that makes the carbon box but they never got back to me. I would say that is pretty much what i am looking for and working towards.
A possible concern has been mentioned by jaybyme and that is the openings on the factory intake and box into the bay may be more than just a water drain or a secondary source for the intake. It looks like it is cooling the engine as well. With outside temps at 110 degrees plus around here I want to make sure that whatever i do does not screw with that and have the engine running too hot. These engines already run fairly hot. From the size of the slot in the bottom of the intake I can see that he is probably correct. If it were just to keep water ot of the box then it would not need to be so bigand it explains the way theyhave the curved surfaces redirecting the air inside that area. It is designed to foce a great deal of the cooler air into the engine bay and then draw it back into the system through the lower openig in the airbox(after it has been heated)
f the duct were just used to get air into the engine and not necessarily connect to the intake then the combination of the duct that puts air into the engine bay and then sealing the intake system fom putting air into or taking air from the bay could be a good combination.


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)




----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)




----------



## jaybyme (Aug 29, 2012)

I definitely think that the secondary ducting that Hp as done from the lower front duct is worth looking into. 
I took the air box out the other day and had a good look at the possibilities. 
With the manual you should have plenty of room to run some sort pipe up to the air box,with the Stronics it's not so easy,as the space is filled with a radiator and plumbing for the gearbox. 
Actually any air that the lower opening sucks in,will have already passed through the gearbox cooler. 
I might open up the ducting in front of the coolers to let more air into the engine bay,just have to work out why Audi decided not to do it ? 
Hopefully it might be that it would just keep the engine bay cleaner ?


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 14, 2012)

R5T said:


>


 Looks like a very nice cold water intake.


----------



## Quisp (Mar 18, 2012)

[email protected] said:


> Looks like a very nice cold water intake.


 If the hole connects to a pipe (straw) that could be a concern unless there is some type of drain slot in the pipe. But if it is connected to a closed system the suction would draw the water right in.
That is a good reason to possibly just use that without a connection to the airbox as supplemental engine cooling and then seal up the other intake whereit opens the the engine bay. Then the cool air stays in the intake and the other air cools the engine (in ase the opening in the factory intake is for cooling the engine )


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

It's used with a pipe/hose up to a open cone.


----------



## jaybyme (Aug 29, 2012)

looks like it could suck in water in bad weather. 
I've just looked this morning again,the options for the Stronic are very limited,unless something is moved to make space. 
As soon as I'm in the mood,I'll whip the front off and look properly at any options,but apart from cutting and drilling a few ducts, I don't see a way of getting much improvement.


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

This are useable mod's for dry countries, not for wet/winter Europe.


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

I still think this would be the only upgrade that make sense IMHO.


----------



## jaybyme (Aug 29, 2012)

Have that and tried it, but intakes are higher when it"s fitted.
The complicated design of the oem air feed must have a purpose.


On the move


----------



## Quisp (Mar 18, 2012)

R5T said:


> It's used with a pipe/hose up to a open cone.


 What if you eliminate the hose but leave the intake duct at the bottom? That would allow air to get into the engine bay to help with cooling but not snorkel the water from the rain or puddles and it would compensate for the air that was coming out the bottom slots of the OEM intake if you used a closed intake like the carbon fiber one. I would still put a small (about 5 mm) slit across the bottom of the carbon fiber one at a spot where it curves or some other way to allow any water that might get in to drain off.
I beleivee that is part of the reason for the way the oem one is designed with the curved planes inside of it. It deflects the air and any water. The water, being heavier, colllects and goes out the bottom opening in the intake along with a great deal of the coooler air(which could be to help with the engine cooling)while the rest of the air keeps moving through. Then some of the air that was lost at the opening is sucked back in through the opening in the air box but it isnow hot air because it has been circulating in the engine bay. Given that the engine bay is somewhat sealed off when the hood is closed and h`as a limited amount of sources for air I think that this is a possible reason for it being designed as it is. There is also a lot of structural support in that oem intake. Almost like it is to keep it from collapsing like a when a straw collapses or pinches while drinking a very thick shake. I didnt thijnk the enigne created that much suction that it would do that but they put that supprt there for something.


----------



## R5T (Apr 7, 2010)

The most common reason for a closed engine bay's is to keep it clean. 
If you put vents in the bonnet you create more air flow and because of that more dirt comes through the engine bay with the air flow.


----------



## jaybyme (Aug 29, 2012)

The price you pay for cold air,lol 
Even if you look at the little vents on the radiator,they have small rubber flaps to stop dirt coming in to the engine bay. 
When I was looking the other day, I was wondering why the oem air feed has a small removable lid ? 
Why would it be designed like that ? 
I have actually done a few miles with it off,but it didn't really make a difference,even though it would have been sucking in a lot of air from the engine bay. 
There again, the oem box does that anyway.


----------



## Quisp (Mar 18, 2012)

That little lid may not make much difference on the road but it does on the dyno. Just popping that little lid added 8hp the last time i dynoed my car. That is why I thought chaning the intake would yield better results but I forgot about the hood being closed when you are driving vs open on a dyno. with the lid off and the hood closed there is not as much fresh air since the bay is somewhat sealed off.


----------



## jaybyme (Aug 29, 2012)

impossible to tell if removing the lid increases power on the road,it just didn't really change intake temperatures as far as I can remember. 
The best mod,would be to remove the left headlight,would give the car a great intake then.


----------



## bull30 (Jun 15, 2008)

R5T said:


> I still think this would be the only upgrade that make sense IMHO.


So, does anyone know who makes this piece and where I can purchase?


----------



## Fined (Sep 3, 2013)

http://www.nlcarbon.de/pages/luftfuehrungen.php



posted by R5T originally


----------



## jaybyme (Aug 29, 2012)

I have one lying around in the garage


----------



## bull30 (Jun 15, 2008)

Just sent you PM...


----------



## Kramer1 (May 6, 2014)

Jaybyme you have PM sir!!


----------



## cipsony (Mar 26, 2013)

Here is my option for intake. If interested you can contact me at: [email protected]

http://i1244.photobucket.com/albums/gg580/Ciprian_Chete/TT RS - for sale/IMG_7906_zps0e3bc2db.jpg
http://i1244.photobucket.com/albums/gg580/Ciprian_Chete/TT RS - for sale/IMG_7898_zpsc881feb8.jpg
http://i1244.photobucket.com/albums/gg580/Ciprian_Chete/TT RS - for sale/Cot90_zps6bdc4142.jpg
http://i1244.photobucket.com/albums... RS - for sale/AdmisieCFnegru_zpsac405b3c.jpg
http://i1244.photobucket.com/albums/gg580/Ciprian_Chete/SteveJay-admisieinstalata_zpseae06395.jpg

The last pic shows the intake installed on a car (the owner is a member here).


----------



## cipsony (Mar 26, 2013)

cipsony said:


> Here is my option for intake. If interested you can contact me at: [email protected]
> 
> http://i1244.photobucket.com/albums/gg580/Ciprian_Chete/TT RS - for sale/IMG_7906_zps0e3bc2db.jpg
> http://i1244.photobucket.com/albums/gg580/Ciprian_Chete/TT RS - for sale/IMG_7898_zpsc881feb8.jpg
> ...


----------

