# Air intakes



## Joey GTI (Aug 8, 2011)

What would be a good brand of intake for a gti 1.8t I'm new with vw and was wondering what some good companies were


----------



## RadRacer513 (Nov 1, 2010)

Any really; I just have a cone on the end of my MAF. Not gonna see much of a difference between any of them, so pick what you want


----------



## ldaledub (Oct 14, 2007)

K&n drop in filter. youll see no gains from a CAI. also try esetuning.com if you want to spend money just purchase one of there short rams.


----------



## MKllllvr28 (Sep 15, 2005)

You should be banned for being an idiot. How ****ing hard is it to use the search function.


----------



## Joey GTI (Aug 8, 2011)

MKllllvr28 said:


> You should be banned for being an idiot. How ****ing hard is it to use the search function.


Bro this is a forum to ask questions and that's exactly what I'm doing I use my iPod and iPhone to look **** up and its slot harder to navigate this site and figure **** out so go cry elsewhere


----------



## iTech (Dec 29, 2008)

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=best+1.8t+cold+air+intake?









This one is always a winnar...opcorn:opcorn:


----------



## Joey GTI (Aug 8, 2011)

iTech said:


> http://lmgtfy.com/?q=best+1.8t+cold+air+intake?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Wtf? Wow lol


----------



## ldaledub (Oct 14, 2007)

Do want! Will this take the place of my intercooler? O man time to reengineer


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

:facepalm:


----------



## ldaledub (Oct 14, 2007)




----------



## cincyTT (May 11, 2006)

Joey GTI said:


> Bro this is a forum to ask questions and that's exactly what I'm doing I use my iPod and iPhone to look **** up and its slot harder to navigate this site and figure **** out so go cry elsewhere


We don't care what you use. Good bye :wave:


----------



## stevemannn (Apr 17, 2008)

Joey GTI said:


> Bro this is a forum to ask questions and that's exactly what I'm doing I use my iPod and iPhone to look **** up and its slot harder to navigate this site and figure **** out so go cry elsewhere


iphones are for ****.. be a man,and buy a ****in computer


----------



## Joey GTI (Aug 8, 2011)

stevemannn said:


> iphones are for ****.. be a man,and buy a ****in computer


 wahhh


----------



## hootyburra (Feb 19, 2007)

Filterless for maximum airflow.


----------



## Joey GTI (Aug 8, 2011)

I just don't understand the point in mocking and criticizing and following someone around who is new to a car make and site to make fun of someone who has questions ok some might be stupid but that's a area to inform not sit there and give me constant bs on my Qs


----------



## desertdubs_C (Sep 20, 2009)

hootyburra said:


> Filterless for maximum airflow.


^Do this!


----------



## cincyTT (May 11, 2006)

Joey GTI said:


> I just don't understand the point in mocking and criticizing and following someone around who is new to a car make and site to make fun of someone who has questions ok some might be stupid but that's a area to inform not sit there and give me constant bs on my Qs


Faq's are there to well, answer faqs! :banghead:

Same for search.


----------



## l88m22vette (Mar 2, 2006)

MKllllvr28 said:


> You should be banned for being an idiot. How ****ing hard is it to use the search function.


Sig'd :thumbup: Sorry for the flaming Joey, but when you cremated and burned the dead horse years ago its hard to take these posts seriously. Do a ton of research, all the info it out there...


----------



## Joey GTI (Aug 8, 2011)

l88m22vette said:


> Sig'd :thumbup: Sorry for the flaming Joey, but when you cremated and burned the dead horse years ago its hard to take these posts seriously. Do a ton of research, all the info it out there...


Yea I figured that out by looking up a diverter valve I'm just new to the vw world and don't know any companies out there


----------



## desertdubs_C (Sep 20, 2009)

l88m22vette said:


> Do a ton of research, all the info it out there...


True story. Days of endless information...these aren't new cars. All questions you have if you are new to the dub scene have been talked about. The only thing we see truely new here are unique problems to highly modified cars. So unless you have a flux capasitor or turbo encabulator I suggest you utilize the faq's and search before posting a new thread. eace:


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

Cat or pron?


----------



## desertdubs_C (Sep 20, 2009)

dubinsincuwereindiapers said:


> Cat or pron?


Ah wait on that a couple min. Let me find this sweet ass pic of longcat before it begins.

edit:
eh don't have the time to find it again. Should have saved the pic when I found it but these are gov computers so can't really do that. On with the Show!!


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

dubinsincuwereindiapers said:


> :facepalm:


agreed


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

longcat :thumbup: 56x


----------



## desertdubs_C (Sep 20, 2009)

Big_Tom said:


> longcat :thumbup: 56x


:thumbup: 56x that! :laugh:


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

Im getting bored with longcat tho.. Do you guys know of another 20 mile long JPEG that takes up an insane amount of bandwidth?


----------



## desertdubs_C (Sep 20, 2009)

dubinsincuwereindiapers said:


> Im getting bored with longcat tho.. Do you guys know of another 20 mile long JPEG that takes up an insane amount of bandwidth?


what about widedog?


----------



## MiffedRatx1 (Aug 10, 2009)

I was new too at one point coming from a Ford. Found all my information in the FAQs and using the search function. I have yet to ask a question that has already been answered.


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

MiffedRatx1 said:


> I was new too at one point coming from a Ford. Found all my information in the FAQs and using the search function. I have yet to ask a question that has already been answered.


one time for Orange Park:beer: i :heart: orange park mall


----------



## desertdubs_C (Sep 20, 2009)

Big_Tom said:


> one time for Orange Park:beer: i :heart: orange park mall


You guys got it nice. I miss florida. Though when I was stationed in florida it was up in the pan handle Destin/Pensacola area.


----------



## hootyburra (Feb 19, 2007)

l88m22vette said:


> Sig'd :thumbup: Sorry for the flaming Joey, but when you cremated and burned the dead horse years ago its hard to take these posts seriously. Do a ton of research, all the info it out there...


----------



## AmIdYfReAk (Nov 8, 2006)

hootyburra said:


> Filterless for maximum airflow.


This is how i run


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

iTech said:


> http://lmgtfy.com/?q=best+1.8t+cold+air+intake?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


you know i actually seen one of these the other day on a honda! :facepalm:


----------



## xxsur3shotxx (Sep 24, 2009)

Big_Tom said:


> you know i actually seen one of these the other day on a honda! :facepalm:


need to have some of these on hand:


----------



## DMVDUB (Jan 11, 2010)

Here this is for the WIN!


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

^^^^^^fvcking nice:thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## desertdubs_C (Sep 20, 2009)

DMVDUB said:


> Here this is for the WIN!


whoooaaattt!! :what:

That is the photo of the day so far.


----------



## xxsur3shotxx (Sep 24, 2009)

ya see, it takes the ambient air in, and cools it to ambient temperature using the ambient air. Genius


----------



## desertdubs_C (Sep 20, 2009)




----------



## DMVDUB (Jan 11, 2010)

__
Sensitive content, not recommended for those under 18
Show Content


----------



## bootymac (Apr 19, 2005)

I always get a laugh out of front mount intakes :laugh:

On a more serious note, I would say a velocity stack setup would be best. You can get them for cheap too. Look up Blox combinations on eBay or even Spectre would work. They're all the same components so brand is negligible


----------



## DMVDUB (Jan 11, 2010)




----------



## DMVDUB (Jan 11, 2010)




----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

This thread is now about Jennifer Aniston :heart:


----------



## DMVDUB (Jan 11, 2010)

NO!


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

You gotta do better than 1 singular panty pic of 1 suicide girl DMV..

You need an organised, concise, multipost to top my diddy above..

Step up yo game son:thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## ldaledub (Oct 14, 2007)

:heart: SG!


----------



## DMVDUB (Jan 11, 2010)




----------



## ldaledub (Oct 14, 2007)

well done


----------



## DMVDUB (Jan 11, 2010)

organization is too bothersome I'll leave that to you


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

Well played sir.. It gave me 2/3 wood.. WINNING:beer:


----------



## DMVDUB (Jan 11, 2010)

Too much info










I did that a little...


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

Your welcome :thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## ArcticFox (Nov 4, 2005)

I'm confused. 

I think pictures of 1/2 naked girls is better then the longcat.


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

ArcticFox said:


> I'm confused.
> 
> I think pictures of 1/2 naked girls is better then the longcat.


Don't we all? Where's the confusion?


----------



## desertdubs_C (Sep 20, 2009)

New rule:
1/2 naked hot/sexy girls > longcat

And so it was written


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

desertdubs_C said:


> New rule:
> 1/2 naked hot/sexy girls > longcat
> 
> And so it was written


This:thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## desertdubs_C (Sep 20, 2009)

Cause I have to bring back this in the spirit of all time automotive tuning screwups:

http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthread.php?5384395-oh-no-no-no-no-no...


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

the listing is gone. i wanted to see it lol


----------



## nhvdub (Feb 8, 2008)

I just installed an AEM CAI on my 1.8T yesterday and I'm very satisfied with it. I wouln't suggest spending the extra 30 or so dollars for K&N as the AEM uses thier filter anyway. It improved the sound of the car 10 fold and it seems to accelerate better. Hope this was helpful. Enjoy shopping


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

nhvdub said:


> I just installed an AEM CAI on my 1.8T yesterday and I'm very satisfied with it. I wouln't suggest spending the extra 30 or so dollars for K&N as the AEM uses thier filter anyway. It improved the sound of the car 10 fold and it seems to accelerate better. Hope this was helpful. Enjoy shopping


pics or it didnt happen haha


----------



## desertdubs_C (Sep 20, 2009)

Big_Tom said:


> pics or it didnt happen haha


^What he said ic: Or it didn't happen


----------



## DMVDUB (Jan 11, 2010)

If you spend $250 for a CAI on a forced induction car someone should kick you in the nuts (at least 251 times for good measure.)

Read the FAQ's 

Buy a decent cone filter (non oiled) and slap it on the MAF... *DONE*


----------



## ldaledub (Oct 14, 2007)

What he said


----------



## kroutbrner (Nov 2, 2009)

I run a 6.5" pipe off my 2.5" maf. turbo says psssssshhhhhh. ebay filter ftw. its mucho faster then da stock box. i can race mo better now with psssshhhh. I am a bag of dicks.


----------



## DMVDUB (Jan 11, 2010)




----------



## kroutbrner (Nov 2, 2009)

DMVDUB said:


>


:thumbup: hahahaha.... :wave:


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

Hai guise! !


----------



## Zbradshaw (Aug 24, 2011)

K&N pays the doctors boy!!!


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

Word...


----------



## DMVDUB (Jan 11, 2010)

make sure to use *EXTRA* oil on that filter. I heard it's good for the MAF


----------



## MKllllvr28 (Sep 15, 2005)

I use a positive displacement intake... It's called a turbonator...


----------



## desertdubs_C (Sep 20, 2009)

Hi EveryBody! :wave: What new greatness shall today bring to this thread? 

I'm just Hangin around


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

erevlydeux said:


> I personally run a gas-powered leafblower right into the MAF. It's like a turbo for the turbo.


im rockin this 1


----------



## DMVDUB (Jan 11, 2010)

I didn't say you could use that pic of me on the swing!:sly:


----------



## desertdubs_C (Sep 20, 2009)

DMVDUB said:


> I didn't say you could use that pic of me on the swing!:sly:


Ah crap that's right we don't want people knowing about the new prototype wing system for turbo applications. It adds 800degrees of downforce causing instant spool to 56psi of the transducer conductance allowing the turbine to be 5x more efficient than a stock air filter!

:laugh:


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

erevlydeux said:


> Nice, backpack leafblower. Any time you wanna race, just hire a Mexican to work the leafblower. The HP per dollar ratio is insane. :laugh: :laugh:


:laugh:


----------



## MKllllvr28 (Sep 15, 2005)

desertdubs_C said:


> Ah crap that's right we don't want people knowing about the new prototype wing system for turbo applications. It adds 800degrees of downforce causing instant spool to 56psi of the transducer conductance allowing the turbine to be 5x more efficient than a stock air filter!
> 
> :laugh:


damn yo! mo powaaaaaazzzzzz is mo betta!!! :thumbup:


----------



## desertdubs_C (Sep 20, 2009)

MKllllvr28 said:


> damn yo! mo powaaaaaazzzzzz is mo betta!!! :thumbup:


Its neck snapping thong disappearing titties flopping mo kind of powa!!!


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

This thread is now about women in chairs...


----------



## xxsur3shotxx (Sep 24, 2009)

erevlydeux said:


> I personally run a gas-powered leafblower right into the MAF. It's like a turbo for the turbo.


ya'll and your kidde blowers. Just gotta tow this baby around. The extra weight is nothing when you see the powa


----------



## desertdubs_C (Sep 20, 2009)

xxsur3shotxx said:


> ya'll and your kidde blowers. Just gotta tow this baby around. The extra weight is nothing when you see the powa


I would seriously put that in a gokart shaped like a ol aircooled bug and drive it around.


----------



## PhreakSpain (Aug 17, 2005)

evoms v-flow:thumbup:


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

xxsur3shotxx said:


> ya'll and your kidde blowers. Just gotta tow this baby around. The extra weight is nothing when you see the powa


:laugh: now thats a fuggin blower!


----------



## jettred3 (Aug 5, 2005)

What about a cold air feed. Velocity stack style inlen in one of the lower grilles.

3 inch ducting to a sealed air box with filter connected to maf housing pre turbo.


----------



## MKllllvr28 (Sep 15, 2005)

what about it?


----------



## MKllllvr28 (Sep 15, 2005)

erevlydeux said:


> You use your MAF pre-turbo? Damn, you're doing it all wrong, bro.


Exactly! You need to run the maf post throttle body so you can run a BOV. EVERYONE does this now.


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

jettred3 said:


> What about a cold air feed. Velocity stack style inlen in one of the lower grilles.
> 
> 3 inch ducting to a sealed air box with filter connected to maf housing pre turbo.


ghetto rigged


----------



## xxsur3shotxx (Sep 24, 2009)

while I would give you credit for the fabrication, if you did it, it's more trouble than it's worth. You'd be better off spending your money and time on a good front mount and/or W/M to cool down the charge post turbo. 

Get a drop in filter or regular cone to support better flow to the turbo, and leave the intercooler and W/M to do the cooling


----------



## jettred3 (Aug 5, 2005)

Pre TB, my bad. 

Drawing outside air will provide denser air to be compressed in the turbo.


----------



## jettred3 (Aug 5, 2005)

Fabrication has already be done on my Mk1 aba. 

Cost about 40 dollars in lexan, rivets, ducting, and a velocity inlet for the lower grille.


----------



## xxsur3shotxx (Sep 24, 2009)

jettred3 said:


> Pre TB, my bad.
> 
> Drawing outside air will provide denser air to be compressed in the turbo.


 best of luck to you. Fueling and such is determined by the density of the air post intercooler, using temperature values provided by the IAT sensor, flow values from the MAF (which is really a volumetric flow rate sensor that works in conjunction with the IAT sensor to determine the Mass Flow rate of the air) While allowing air to enter a little cooler at the compressor inlet may yield slightly cooler temps at the manifold, these temps will be far more dependent on intercooling and chemical intercooling


----------



## jettred3 (Aug 5, 2005)

My car is NA for now. It would work the same on a turbo car.


----------



## v-dub-p (Aug 10, 2011)

see shows how dumb you lot are, and think one thing is the best or nothing at all 

a cheap filter isnt going to filter out dust and other small smaller particules that will end up killing your rings, turbo and what ever else it grinds in too 

go ahead buy a cheap filter, even a foam filter, which does **** to filter any thing, you may as well run no filter. the bit filtering best performance air filter is the apexi cone filter. and i had this on my old 200sx and made a ton of difference compared to a **** filter that was fitted before i bought it 

and also the point you miss, is running a open filter in your hot engine bay is going to loose you power, because your sucking in hot air, cai's are made for a reason, to take in cold air from out side the engine bay. 

dont believe me search around but here a few to start you off 

http://forums.evolutionm.net/evo-en.../390973-air-filter-shootout-test-results.html 

http://theclippingpoint.blogspot.com/2010/02/air-filter-test.html


----------



## xxsur3shotxx (Sep 24, 2009)

v-dub-p said:


> see shows how dumb you lot are, and think one thing is the best or nothing at all
> 
> a cheap filter isnt going to filter out dust and other small smaller particules that will end up killing your rings, turbo and what ever else it grinds in too
> 
> ...


 I see you've almost learned spelling and decent grammar. (Loose you power? No. You still have work to do.) Loose: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/loose 
Lose:http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/lose 
Still, you'd want to say is going to cause a power loss. 
(see here, post#24 for those who don't know http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthre...a-good-blow-off-valve&p=73152802#post73152802) 

Sadly, I have to agree that a cheap filter will not filter as well, that is really not the basis of the current argument. It was more about CAI vs SRI 

Again, please view my post above to put yourself at ease with your hot engine bay theory. Colder air intakes on a NA vehicle, they help a lot. On a turbocharged vehicle, not so much.


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

^^^ lol


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

Ladies in chairs?


----------



## xxsur3shotxx (Sep 24, 2009)

dubinsincuwereindiapers said:


> Ladies in chairs?


 do it :thumbup:


----------



## MKllllvr28 (Sep 15, 2005)

[No message]


----------



## jettred3 (Aug 5, 2005)

It's not just about getting colder air. 

With the setup I mentioned above, having a duct in the lower grille with a velocity inlet connected to ducting to the airbox will increase intake velocity. 

Its basically a ram air induction box connected by 3" motorsport brake ducting.


----------



## xxsur3shotxx (Sep 24, 2009)

jettred3 said:


> It's not just about getting colder air.
> 
> With the setup I mentioned above, having a duct in the lower grille with a velocity inlet connected to ducting to the airbox will increase intake velocity.
> 
> Its basically a ram air induction box connected by 3" motorsport brake ducting.


 I'm sure it will be great for the NA application. Since you've already fabricated this, I'm sure you will leave it when you turbo charge. But I'm sure once you do turbo charge, you wouldn't notice a difference if you removed it simply because the velocity at which the turbo will draw the air in won't be aided by the moving air outside the vehicle much. Like throwing a match on a fire. :thumbup:


----------



## DMVDUB (Jan 11, 2010)

You do realize all that VELOCITY you're talking about slams into the impeller and becomes whatever pressure is set post turbo. 

It's not going to make .000000000001 difference in power on a turbocharged car. 

If you're running a huge turbo, having vents to the front of the car to feed the turbo will help. But help just that, feeding the turbo.


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

At first I was:what::screwy: now I just:laugh:


----------



## north (Sep 22, 2010)

Didn't bother to read all the flaming. A while back Savwko did some testing and found noticible gains using evoms vflow, both with a big turbo setup and a stock turbo setup. However, if you are looking for an intake for less than 300$ I have an APR cold air that I am selling for 200$ with around 5000-8000 miles on it. All hardware etc.. included.


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

north said:


> Didn't bother to read all the flaming. A while back Savwko did some testing and found noticible gains using evoms vflow, both with a big turbo setup and a stock turbo setup. However, if you are looking for an intake for less than 300$ I have an APR cold air that I am selling for 200$ with around 5000-8000 miles on it. All hardware etc.. included.


 He now runs a filter on the Turbo


----------



## MKllllvr28 (Sep 15, 2005)

Yes because paying 200 dollars for a used water suction device is so much better than paying 200 for a new water suction device.


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

I agree with both but would have to side with jettred3. 
I agree that a ram air set up like he is talking about can really help the car and is definitely worth doing. 
I also agree that you would benefit a lot more with that type of set up on a NA vs a turbocharged car. 
Maybe not as much on a turbo car but it will help colder air get to the air box which would be beneficial. 
I like mods like this. I have always done mods like this. Bottom line is if you are one of those guys that are going to do a drop in filter then this would be good for you. 
I feel like mods like this have always set my car apart from other very similar moded cars. Any little thing you can to to make your car faster or more efficient in racing is what wins. It doesn't matter if it is only 0.00000001. Don't knock it if someone wants to put the time into doing stuff to their car even if you think is useless. they will benefit and learn about there car. 
Just my 2...FTW


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

CAI FTW GAME OVAAAAAAAAA :laugh:


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

WMI end thread/


----------



## jettred3 (Aug 5, 2005)

That makes alot of sense.


----------



## Savvv (Apr 22, 2009)

dubinsincuwereindiapers said:


> He now runs a filter on the Turbo


 Not so fast sir  










It's a 6" K&N filter on a Vibrant 6" > 3" velocity stack. Uses same principles as the V-Flow from EVOMs but tailored to the BT setup. :thumbup:


----------



## snubbs64 (Oct 23, 2004)

Colder air in, colder air out. Period. Doesn't matter if the turbo heats it up or not. The turbo doesn't magically heat the air to a specific temp, it heats it a certain AMOUNT. Therefore, if the air going in is colder and denser, it will not heat to the same temp as warmer air being sucked in. Ram air slamming into a compressor blade? Forcing the air into the intake and compressor will reduce the amount of energy needed to PULL it through by the turbo, will increase spool, use less energy from exhaust gas to create the same level of boost which means less force the motor needs to use to force the exhaust gas out, reduce wasted energy, more power, less drag on the motor/turbo. 

The old argument that they don't increase power because dynos don't show them is incredibly short-sighted (just like pointing out spelling errors to discredit people who can actually put thought into the important points and concepts in a time of spell-check that we live in). Unless you strap a car to a dyno on a flat bed truck facing backwards, through it in reverse and get up to speed, then do some dyno runs, or use a dyno on a full fledged wind tunnel, neither ram-air or CAI are going to show much, if any, gains on a dyno with a ridiculous little fan. I don't care if you have 12 fans blowing at 70 mph, its just not the same environment. When i had my stock turbo, i had a cone filter and ran it both on the maf and on the end of a CAI arm and i could easily notice a significant difference in driving (so could many who rode in my car). The only reason i'm not currently running one is my intercooler pipe is in the way for all the off the shelf style and i have more than enough power to want to manufacture a custom solution. 

Bring facts, no regurgitated misconceptions to the table if you're gonna answer these questions. Taking as gospel what someone once said without thinking about it at all yourself in terms of how it might actually work is what inhibits progression. Those who challenge "common knowledge" foster advancement. 

Every watch drag races? Where are the compressors mounted? Down in the bumper at the extreme front of the vehicle facing forward using both the coolest air available and ram air. These people are spending millions for .00X seconds, maybe you guys wanna tell them they are wasting their money since CAI and ram air in FI don't do anything? 

Actual, real physics > BS talk 

(and since the temp in the engine bay changes less than the temp outside, the colder the weather, the bigger difference it will make!)


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

Savvv said:


> Not so fast sir
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Soo.. What's your take on this Mike?


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

snubbs64 said:


> Colder air in, colder air out. Period. Doesn't matter if the turbo heats it up or not. The turbo doesn't magically heat the air to a specific temp, it heats it a certain AMOUNT. Therefore, if the air going in is colder and denser, it will not heat to the same temp as warmer air being sucked in. Ram air slamming into a compressor blade? Forcing the air into the intake and compressor will reduce the amount of energy needed to PULL it through by the turbo, will increase spool, use less energy from exhaust gas to create the same level of boost which means less force the motor needs to use to force the exhaust gas out, reduce wasted energy, more power, less drag on the motor/turbo.
> 
> The old argument that they don't increase power because dynos don't show them is incredibly short-sighted (just like pointing out spelling errors to discredit people who can actually put thought into the important points and concepts in a time of spell-check that we live in). Unless you strap a car to a dyno on a flat bed truck facing backwards, through it in reverse and get up to speed, then do some dyno runs, or use a dyno on a full fledged wind tunnel, neither ram-air or CAI are going to show much, if any, gains on a dyno with a ridiculous little fan. I don't care if you have 12 fans blowing at 70 mph, its just not the same environment. When i had my stock turbo, i had a cone filter and ran it both on the maf and on the end of a CAI arm and i could easily notice a significant difference in driving (so could many who rode in my car). The only reason i'm not currently running one is my intercooler pipe is in the way for all the off the shelf style and i have more than enough power to want to manufacture a custom solution.
> 
> ...


 Amen!!!!!! Real talk...FTW!!!:thumbup::thumbup:


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

^^^this


----------



## bootymac (Apr 19, 2005)

snubbs64 said:


> Colder air in, colder air out. Period. Doesn't matter if the turbo heats it up or not. The turbo doesn't magically heat the air to a specific temp, it heats it a certain AMOUNT. Therefore, if the air going in is colder and denser, it will not heat to the same temp as warmer air being sucked in. Ram air slamming into a compressor blade? Forcing the air into the intake and compressor will reduce the amount of energy needed to PULL it through by the turbo, will increase spool, use less energy from exhaust gas to create the same level of boost which means less force the motor needs to use to force the exhaust gas out, reduce wasted energy, more power, less drag on the motor/turbo.
> 
> The old argument that they don't increase power because dynos don't show them is incredibly short-sighted (just like pointing out spelling errors to discredit people who can actually put thought into the important points and concepts in a time of spell-check that we live in). Unless you strap a car to a dyno on a flat bed truck facing backwards, through it in reverse and get up to speed, then do some dyno runs, or use a dyno on a full fledged wind tunnel, neither ram-air or CAI are going to show much, if any, gains on a dyno with a ridiculous little fan. I don't care if you have 12 fans blowing at 70 mph, its just not the same environment. When i had my stock turbo, i had a cone filter and ran it both on the maf and on the end of a CAI arm and i could easily notice a significant difference in driving (so could many who rode in my car). The only reason i'm not currently running one is my intercooler pipe is in the way for all the off the shelf style and i have more than enough power to want to manufacture a custom solution.
> 
> ...


 THANK YOU. I can't believe people are still spewing that "turbo heats the air up anyway" argument.


----------



## Savvv (Apr 22, 2009)

dubinsincuwereindiapers said:


> Soo.. What's your take on this Mike?


 Well, I skimmed some of the thread and don't feel like reading through the nonsense. This whole "omg but colder air at the filter" is short-sighted. A *velocity stack* on a big diameter, short path inlet pipe is the way to go. If you want cooler air at the filter, duct it from the bumper to spit it at the filter. There are better ways to get the charge air cooler where it counts, and that's at the IAT sensor. Examples: more efficient core, heat dissipation coatings, thermal barrier coatings, phenolic spacers, etc. The extra pipe length and bends on most CAI's isn't worth the few degrees in temp drop at the compressor inlet. Drag cars with turbo's in the hood or front bumper are surely getting the coolest air charge but they're not sucking it through 3' of pipe and a filter element. 

Now, if someone wants to argue, go buy yourself some logging equipment including pressure, temperature, and air velocity sensors and scatter em from the filter to the intake manifold and prove yourself right....oh right...no ones gonna spend that much $ for a moot point. :laugh:


----------



## xxsur3shotxx (Sep 24, 2009)

Savvv said:


> Well, I skimmed some of the thread and don't feel like reading through the nonsense. This whole "omg but colder air at the filter" is short-sighted. A *velocity stack* on a big diameter, short path inlet pipe is the way to go. If you want cooler air at the filter, duct it from the bumper to spit it at the filter. There are better ways to get the charge air cooler where it counts, and that's at the IAT sensor. Examples: more efficient core, heat dissipation coatings, thermal barrier coatings, phenolic spacers, etc. The extra pipe length and bends on most CAI's isn't worth the few degrees in temp drop at the compressor inlet. Drag cars with turbo's in the hood or front bumper are surely getting the coolest air charge but they're not sucking it through 3' of pipe and a filter element.
> 
> Now, if someone wants to argue, go buy yourself some logging equipment including pressure, temperature, and air velocity sensors and scatter em from the filter to the intake manifold and prove yourself right....oh right...no ones gonna spend that much $ for a moot point. :laugh:


 Exactly. Either way, have any of you actually seen data from an air density table? You can argue all day that cooler air will be more dense and produce more power blah blah blah, but the temperature difference between the charge that has been pulled from outside and compressed, or pulled from the bay and compressed does not yield a wide variety of density. We're talking maybe tenths of a kg/m^3. I'd quote you all some values from my thermodynamics text, but I don't think you'd all respect it anyway. What do I know anyway 

Again, the temperature is more important at the IAT sensor, which is how the ECU will calculate how much timing to pull, and additional fuel to add to combat possible detonation conditions. (Also uses input from the knock sensors). You will see far greater power differences resulting from timing pull than you will from variances in air density, which really doesn't vary THAT much. 

Here's a quick one: Air at -25 C 1.4224 kg/m^3 
@+35 C 1.1455 kg/m^3 

That's a difference of 0.2769 kg/m^3 over a temperature range of 60* C. (Those temperatures btw, are equivalent to -13 F and 95 F respectively.) Do you think you're gonna see even a tenth of that range difference post intercooler with a CAI? Not a chance. 

There's your physics........


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

There's a lot of people stuck on stupid:screwy: 
Bottom line is it makes a difference, whether or not you feel like its worth it to you or not is up to you. Yes it matters most at the IAT but the cooler the air is going in, the cooler the air will be at the IAT...PERIOD!!!!! It's not really up to us to prove that it works it is up to the naysayers to prove it doesn't do sh_t. It has already been proven on NA cars, the same principles apply...Like I said before I will take that 0.0001 any day of the week. I will say that an air box and some dryer duct may be as good as a CAI intake but having a short ram with no heat shield is retarded. Why does your car run better when its cold???? Its not just because the intercooler is colder, it's because the air going in the intake is colder as well. Its a win win situation. If you don't believe it just give me your addres and I will gladly come to your house and wire up a hair dryer in your intake and see how much you like that:laugh:


----------



## Gulfstream (Jul 28, 2010)

If you dont believe, run your car in the middle of the day and same at night.


----------



## xxsur3shotxx (Sep 24, 2009)

I think we will continue to run in circles here. Yes, cooler IAT's will produce more power. We can all agree on that. However, the differences in temperature between the bay and the outside air are not that drastic. Everyone says, oh the bay is so hot, but we all forget that air still moves through the bay when driving. 

As I illustrated above, density values from -13 F to 95 F only vary by approximately 20%. Though this variance COULD account for 20% more fuel, the efficiency of the combustion engine will never turn 20% more fuel into 20% more power. Regardless, you wouldn't see this range of temperature difference while moving air through the bay. 

Again, more about flow, and final IAT's regarding timing, than inlet temperature. Let's all remember that the stock air box also drew air from outside the bay, but gains were still made by fitting a SRI or CAI.


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

xxsur3shotxx said:


> I think we will continue to run in circles here. Yes, cooler IAT's will produce more power. We can all agree on that. However, the differences in temperature between the bay and the outside air are not that drastic. Everyone says, oh the bay is so hot, but we all forget that air still moves through the bay when driving.
> 
> As I illustrated above, density values from -13 F to 95 F only vary by approximately 20%. Though this variance COULD account for 20% more fuel, the efficiency of the combustion engine will never turn 20% more fuel into 20% more power. Regardless, you wouldn't see this range of temperature difference while moving air through the bay.
> 
> Again, more about flow, and final IAT's regarding timing, than inlet temperature. Let's all remember that the stock air box also drew air from outside the bay, but gains were still made by fitting a SRI or CAI.


 Come on man..... Buy a cheap thermometer and stick it in the engine bay and then drive 80mph on the highway and then pull over and quickly pop the hood and look at it. It would be no where near ambient temp . Back before there was a CAi intake on the market and I was making heat shields out of aluminum I got out of the dumpster at the Reynolds plant by my house I did some test. I found some small thermometers and Velcro them to one side of the heat shield and one inside the heat shield at it was like a 60degree difference and that was in the bay. To say that it is as cool in the bay as it is outside is a stretch. I feel you on the density but like it has been pointed out...drive your car in the cold and then drive it in the hot and tell me you don't feel a difference. It would be foolish to think some of that doesn't come from cooler intake temps. People should just say I don't personally think it makes enough difference to justify the money and quit trying to say it doesn't work and knock people who have one or want one. Not saying you are doing such but the dumb fu_ks runamuck on vortex.


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

hootyburra said:


>


 :what:


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

Big_Tom said:


> :what:


 X2

Sent from a payphone in Central Bookings


----------



## cincyTT (May 11, 2006)

Twopnt016v said:


> There's a lot of people stuck on stupid:screwy:
> Bottom line is it makes a difference, whether or not you feel like its worth it to you or not is up to you. Yes it matters most at the IAT but the cooler the air is going in, the cooler the air will be at the IAT...PERIOD!!!!! It's not really up to us to prove that it works it is up to the naysayers to prove it doesn't do sh_t. It has already been proven on NA cars, the same principles apply...Like I said before I will take that 0.0001 any day of the week. I will say that an air box and some dryer duct may be as good as a CAI intake but having a short ram with no heat shield is retarded. Why does your car run better when its cold???? Its not just because the intercooler is colder, it's because the air going in the intake is colder as well. Its a win win situation. If you don't believe it just give me your addres and I will gladly come to your house and wire up a hair dryer in your intake and see how much you like that:laugh:





Twopnt016v said:


> Come on man..... Buy a cheap thermometer and stick it in the engine bay and then drive 80mph on the highway and then pull over and quickly pop the hood and look at it. It would be no where near ambient temp . Back before there was a CAi intake on the market and I was making heat shields out of aluminum I got out of the dumpster at the Reynolds plant by my house I did some test. I found some small thermometers and Velcro them to one side of the heat shield and one inside the heat shield at it was like a 60degree difference and that was in the bay. To say that it is as cool in the bay as it is outside is a stretch. I feel you on the density but like it has been pointed out...drive your car in the cold and then drive it in the hot and tell me you don't feel a difference. It would be foolish to think some of that doesn't come from cooler intake temps. People should just say I don't personally think it makes enough difference to justify the money and quit trying to say it doesn't work and knock people who have one or want one. Not saying you are doing such but the dumb fu_ks runamuck on vortex.


 Stuck on stupid? Coming from those responses, we are not the ones stuck there. There have been a few tests that have shown that a 1.8t moving, the temps where the air intake sits is barely above ambient. Nothing that's going to effect power. It's when you stop (you know, to check that thermostat...) when the temps increase, move and they drop again. Cooler air in does not equal cooler Air at the iat sensor. A good fmic will bring the temps to the same deg no matter the temp out of the turbo. Lastly, BS you would pay for .000001 hp. Good luck feeling 2hp on a 200hp car let alone one that makes 400whp.


----------



## xxsur3shotxx (Sep 24, 2009)

cincyTT said:


> Stuck on stupid? Coming from those responses, we are not the ones stuck there. There have been a few tests that have shown that a 1.8t moving, the temps where the air intake sits is barely above ambient. Nothing that's going to effect power. It's when you stop (you know, to check that thermostat...) when the temps increase, move and they drop again. Cooler air in does not equal cooler Air at the iat sensor. A good fmic will bring the temps to the same deg no matter the temp out of the turbo. Lastly, BS you would pay for .000001 hp. Good luck feeling 2hp on a 200hp car let alone one that makes 400whp.


 x2 

It feels stronger in the cooler weather because the charge air is cooled far more by the intercooler. 
Go out on a cool night with a stock side mount or a poor intercooler and do a few pulls. Once you heat soak that thing you can't tell me the air temperature at the inlet is gonna make any difference.


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

Cincy... You need to post more

Sent from a payphone in Central Bookings


----------



## DMVDUB (Jan 11, 2010)

CAI's do ONE thing for the 1.8T... Make it sound better. I ran one for a year and got tired of having to clean the filter every 2 weeks, and slapped a new filter on the MAF. The difference cannot be felt. 

The whole drive when it's colder outside does more than just cool the intake charge. It cools EVERYTHING else in line such as your intercooler. 

CAI makes Zero difference on these cars, if they did I'd still be running one 

Just as someone earlier has said, your intercooler is going to bring the temp as close to ambient as possible, a cai isn't going to change that. The only thing that will is WMI. 

Bottom line, if you believe it's doing something then by all means throw away $200 on a CAI it's your car. Who really gives a sh1t? Even if it makes 2hp you're not going to notice it, and $100 per HP raitio sucks.


----------



## snubbs64 (Oct 23, 2004)

I've been partially swayed. :thumb up: to some explanation counter to my belief that actually uses some reason and theory besides "the turbo heats it up anyway." Regardless, the viewpoint i originally presented and the ones counter to it that actually backed themselves up with reason have nothing to do with "the turbo heats up the air anyway," but "the engine bay really isn't that much hotter while the car is moving" and "flow is more important, anyway." 

Edit: Don't know about swayed, but given things to consider and look further into (I gotta see it and understand it myself before i can be swayed)


----------



## snubbs64 (Oct 23, 2004)

Actually, a difference of that much in density when you're moving that much air would seem like it would make a difference. And why would that not make as much of a difference post intercooler? I have not seen an intercooler capable of completely cooling air to ambient, so why would cooler/denser air going into the intercooler not be denser/cooler coming out? Flow and a good velocity stack i can not argue, but everyone else is saying to run the car at day and night to see the difference. I did not say that, i said with and without a CAI and the same filter element. Is the same filter element on the end of a plastic tube in the bumper going to create better flow than the same filter on the MAF? Savv stated that the extra bends in the CAI would be more of an issue, but this is the opposite, are the bends not worth it or is the tube helping out air flow in some way beyond the filter on the MAF? I'm just saying none of that entirely meshes. I'm looking for understanding, not an argument. Thanks!


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

cincyTT said:


> There have been a few tests that have shown that a 1.8t moving, the temps where the air intake sits is barely above ambient.


 Show me or it didn't happen. There is no way an HOT engine in a metal box is going to be the same as ambient temp even with the car going 80mph. 



cincyTT said:


> BS you would pay for .000001 hp..


 I said I would take it any day of the week, I didn't way I would pay for it. I can make my own CAI. My point is every little bit adds up in the long run and everything can be improved upon. This is how people win races and improve their time at the track or strip or whatever. It is almost like saying you can just get a big turbo set up and big intercooler that makes 400hp and thats enough power that your not going to feel any other little mod you do to the car so it is pointless to waste the money or time on it. I just don't agree. Prime example would be the intake manifold spacer everyone buys for the 1.8t. I could just say your wasting your money it does really do that much so buy a WMI kit instead or get a more efficient intercooler. I am of the mind set that I want all of it... I want the CAI, better discharge piping, more efficient intercooler, WMI ,intake spacer and the better flowing intake manifold. :beer: 

edit: also if your IC has become heat soaked and is not being as efficient the cooler air going in would help things out some.


----------



## xxsur3shotxx (Sep 24, 2009)

snubbs64 said:


> Actually, a difference of that much in density when you're moving that much air would seem like it would make a difference. And why would that not make as much of a difference post intercooler? I have not seen an intercooler capable of completely cooling air to ambient, so why would cooler/denser air going into the intercooler not be denser/cooler coming out? Flow and a good velocity stack i can not argue, but everyone else is saying to run the car at day and night to see the difference. I did not say that, i said with and without a CAI and the same filter element. Is the same filter element on the end of a plastic tube in the bumper going to create better flow than the same filter on the MAF? Savv stated that the extra bends in the CAI would be more of an issue, but this is the opposite, are the bends not worth it or is the tube helping out air flow in some way beyond the filter on the MAF? I'm just saying none of that entirely meshes. I'm looking for understanding, not an argument. Thanks!


 the 20% density values were assuming huge differences in temps. -13 F and 95 F. Two extremes. In reality, there would never be that large of a range in temperature differences, thus the densities would be even closer to begin with. 

Secondly, even if the intercooler cannot completely cool to ambient temps, it will usually come pretty close. Just as an example, lets SAY air taken in through a CAI reaches exactly ambient after the intercooler. And SAY air drawn through a short ram doesn't quite get there, maybe 10-15 degrees difference. Here the difference in density is nearly negligible, combined with the fact that 100% efficiency is far from being obtained in an internal combustion engine. The difference in density post intercooler will be naught point. 

For what its worth, with ambient temps around 60-65 F, I generally see IAT's around 23 C (73 F). This is the Eurojet Street Core, no monster by any means. Drawing from the bay. Cone filter on the inlet tube.


----------



## cincyTT (May 11, 2006)

Twopnt016v said:


> Show me or it didn't happen. There is no way an HOT engine in a metal box is going to be the same as ambient temp even with the car going 80mph.


 Merry Christmas 

http://www.audiforums.com/forum/audi-tt-7/experiences-underhood-temps-109156/ 

There was also one one here but no luck finding it.


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

cincyTT said:


> Merry Christmas
> 
> http://www.audiforums.com/forum/audi-tt-7/experiences-underhood-temps-109156/
> 
> There was also one one here but no luck finding it.


 I was hoping for a video or pics... I have some free time this weekend, I may set up a few test like that and try to do some documentation. I'd love to be proved wrong about this, I have no problems with that.


----------



## madmax199 (Oct 28, 2009)

This is my take on this: 

-If any intake feed mod (cai, wai or just a shield) is not showing a change at your IAT sensor, after it's been heated then cooled by whatever heat exchanger you have, then it's pointless. 

-If you're sacrifying flow to get a marginal turbo inlet temperature drop, you are chasing your tail. From my testing, a drop of a few inches of water in flow restriction has much greater effect than a drop of a few degrees celcius at the turbo inlet. The flow increase both show at a pressure differential gauge and the MAF g/s. 

While all the theories are fine and can be argued both ways on paper, nothing replaces some cold hard facts like in the thread linked by Cincy. Personally, I have tested various combination of cold air vs warm air, short tube vs long tube to see what real life result I would get. I have also gone to 
great lengths to optimise airflow under the hood since it seems to have a huge effect on the inlet temp at speed. I have no rubber weatherstrip sealing the hood, the metal lip that housed the weaterstrip has been folded- I have also cut open a fresh feed in the wheel arch and sealed engine bay air from the feed area. These are a few pictures of the setup been discussed here. One is fully shielded and feeding from ambient air, the second one is your typical cone filter bolted on the pipe, the third one is feeding from the hotter engine bay but has been optimised to reduce pressure drop and increase airflow (big mama filter, 6" velocity stacks and reduced piping length) 


 

Uploaded with ImageShack.us 

 

Uploaded with ImageShack.us 

Uploaded with ImageShack.us 

The results I gathered speak volume, the shielded cold air intake *never* registered any IAT 
sensor drop (tested back-to back-to back with no water injection). The shielded cold air also registered the most decrease in flow with a magnehelic differential pressure gauge placed right after the MAF. The generic filter on a stick obviously did not help or hurt temp registered by the IAT sensor but improved airflow by an inch of water. Finally the velocity stacked flow monster increased g/s reading at the maf by almost 5% and dropped 3 inches of restriction over the shielded cold air ( probably x2 on an OEM box but I never tested one). To me, someone can bring all the reason in the world that a cold air intake is the way to go but in my particular 1.8t, the data showed me that the priority is to be placed on the attainable airflow increase and not the marginal temperature drop (if there ever was any after turbo and intercoolers).


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

madmax199 said:


> This is my take on this:
> 
> -If any intake feed mod (cai, wai or just a shield) is not showing a change at your IAT sensor, after it's been heated then cooled by whatever heat exchanger you have, then it's pointless.
> 
> ...


 Nice!!:thumbup: I always like your take on things Max!!:thumbup:


----------



## Savvv (Apr 22, 2009)

madmax199 said:


> Finally, the velocity stacked flow monster increased g/s reading at the maf by almost 5% and dropped 3 inches of restriction over the shielded cold air ( probably x2 on an OEM box but I never tested one). To me, someone can bring all the reason in the world that a cold air intake is the way to go but in my particular 1.8t, the data showed me that the priority is to be placed on the attainable airflow increase and not the marginal temperature drop (if there ever was any after turbo and intercoolers).


 Ehem ehem. Thank you. 

When I did the various intake tests on stock turbo, the MAF readings were where the gains were seen utilizing a V-stack setup. :thumbup:


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

erevlydeux said:


> Looks like I need to investigate a velocity stack setup...


 :laugh:


----------



## cincyTT (May 11, 2006)

Twopnt016v said:


> I was hoping for a video or pics... I have some free time this weekend, I may set up a few test like that and try to do some documentation. I'd love to be proved wrong about this, I have no problems with that.


 The link given matches the results that were posted on here to the T (thus my response in the linked thread). The test on here had pics and was far more detailed. But both test showed the same thing, 5-10 degs over ambient. Nothings changed since '08. 



madmax199 said:


> -If you're sacrifying flow to get a marginal turbo inlet temperature drop, you are chasing your tail. From my testing, a drop of a few inches of water in flow restriction has much greater effect than a drop of a few degrees celcius at the turbo inlet. The flow increase both show at a pressure differential gauge and the MAF g/s.


 It certainly hard for those overpriced intakes to work if you restrict the air ariund the filter. Never got why people wasted their money on those things for years. For years I'd been telling people to get a flow stack and large filter for $100 and save themselves money and get bett results. But you know how silly TT owners are :facepalm:


----------



## Savvv (Apr 22, 2009)

^Haha. BPi flowstack and filter for $100. Only reason I used the Vibrant (aluminum) one this time was to get rid of a coupler. Full 1 piece inlet pipe.


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

cincyTT said:


> The link given matches the results that were posted on here to the T (thus my response in the linked thread). The test on here had pics and was far more detailed. But both test showed the same thing, 5-10 degs over ambient. Nothings changed since '08.


 

Thats all find and dandy but you didn't provide anything other then a guy saying I did a test. 
You didn't provide any link with real pics. So saying nothing has changed since 08 doesn't' mean anything to me because you haven't given me anything other then a guy saying he did a test and you commenting about it. Like the saying goes...without pics it didn't happen. I am not necessarily doubting you or the guy with the test but proof speaks way more words so I would like to see for myself. I am really not trying to argue about this. I will try some test this weekend including the exact test he did.eace:


----------



## snubbs64 (Oct 23, 2004)

erevlydeux said:


> The turbo does heat up the air, no matter what.  While snubbs64 is right, I think his examples are a little disingenuous and not totally applicable, in the ways he would like us to believe, to what is being discussed here.
> 
> The biggest thing in my eyes is that he's comparing extreme applications of these techniques when we're dealing with Germany economy cars. Let's be real here. Moving the CAI from near the relay box to where the headlight used to be is not going to make any super huge difference. The *moving* air in the engine bay is not going to be significantly hotter than the outside air unless you're sitting on a dyno or something. You have to make big changes in intake temperature to affect significant change in the compressor outlet temperature.
> 
> Thermodynamics is great but you're trying to boil the operating behavior of a complex, changing system down to "colder air in, colder air out" while using far more complex and different systems as the basis for your statements.


 Your final statement, and calling my statement disingenuous, i do not agree with. Colder in colder out when nothing else in the system is changing is accurate and not boiled down. Nothing else in the system is changing, therefore all the heating factors are giving off the same amount of energy. To heat *anything* you need a certain amount of energy to heat the thing a certain amount of degrees (specific heat capacity of the item in question, in this case air). Colder air in, exposed to the same factors WILL, WITHOUT A DOUBT, result in colder air out. Its a straight forward fact that CANNOT be boiled down because it is at its most basic level. And no one has disproved any of my theory on that, actually only proved that density of air and a difference of 105*C WILL make a LARGE difference in density AND power. This has been where the argument points and thus this is where the crux of my argument has been. Also, be careful how you apply the difference in numbers caused by the inefficiencies of the internal combustion motor as the reduction is applied to the base input of air AND the % change in density, therefore the 20% change in density does not further reduce since the "penalty" caused by the inefficiency is the same to the base number and 20% increase remains a 20% over what was already going on since the initial numbers suffer the same loss to inefficiency (an awful sentence, i know, i hope the meaning can be taken from it regardless). Not disingenuous or misguided to the point being argued. My main point of contention with these threads has always been that 1) cold air doesn't matter since the turbo heats it up (still and always will be bull****) and 2) that a CAI provides no power increase over a filter on the MAF (always assumed because of colder air, however, that has been disproved as the reason for me, as follows). 

I WILL give you credit for moving me in the right direction with your second comment, however. The temp in the engine bay is barely hotter than the ambient air. I didn't believe this was true but thought it was worth evaluating so i took an inside/outside thermometer with an external lead that i strapped to my air filter. Popped the unit in my cabin and drove to work. Most of the time the temp was only between 5-10*F. Spiked at 20*F above cabin temp (stop and go in city) and at times was BELOW cabin temp (no air flow to the unit and it was in the sun in my cabin on my dash). This included numerous pulls up to 7,500 rpms with lots of boost. So, with the ambient maybe being AT MOST 10*F COOLER, the differences were 15-20*F max. Less in C* which i was the formulas thrown out were in. So the difference in air density, i'll concede, is negligible in the real-world application. Flow, i'm sure, is much more important at this point. And this is probably why my CAI was providing more power than a filter slapped on my MAF, such as SAVV has suggested. Thanks for the valuable input, everyone (especially madmax199 who seemed to be the only person who truly directly addressed the issue i was raising). This clarified and enlightened me to many things beyond the issue that sparked the conversation. 

Edit: I also do NOT have a pic and i normally do agree with the guy whos saying if there isn't visual proof he wont take it. Sorry i can't provide that, either, but i wasn't about to snap a shot while driving in today. I'm the same way, so if you're not gonna take my word for it since i don't have the evidence, i get that 100%. Its why i did the test myself this morning.


----------



## cincyTT (May 11, 2006)

Twopnt016v said:


> Thats all find and dandy but you didn't provide anything other then a guy saying I did a test.
> You didn't provide any link with real pics. So saying nothing has changed since 08 doesn't' mean anything to me because you haven't given me anything other then a guy saying he did a test and you commenting about it. Like the saying goes...without pics it didn't happen. I am not necessarily doubting you or the guy with the test but proof speaks way more words so I would like to see for myself. I am really not trying to argue about this. I will try some test this weekend including the exact test he did.eace:


 Have fun wasting your time for a test I have seen performed twice with the same results. I'll be waiting for you to tell me I was right and you are wrong yet again.


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

cincyTT said:


> Have fun wasting your time for a test I have seen performed twice with the same results. I'll be waiting for you to tell me I was right and you are wrong yet again.


 Whatever man. If you or I believed everything someone told us on Vortex we would both be in a world of hurt. What does it matter to you if I waste my time doing a test so I can see the results for myself since you cant provide me anything but hearsay. And you say you've SEEN the test preformed twice and one of your "twice" has no pics so you have only maybe seen it performed once and had someone else co-sign it with no data to back it. Like I said..I'm not saying your wrong, I just want to see it for myself. That is the problem...everyone wants to tell someone else that they are wasting their time or money. So what??? The only time that is being wasted is playing reindeer games with you right now.


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

snubbs64 said:


> Edit: I also do NOT have a pic and i normally do agree with the guy whos saying if there isn't visual proof he wont take it. Sorry i can't provide that, either, but i wasn't about to snap a shot while driving in today. I'm the same way, so if you're not gonna take my word for it since i don't have the evidence, i get that 100%. Its why i did the test myself this morning.


 I don't doubt you one bit:thumbup: 
According to Cincy we are both wasting our time. But I am ok with that. I like to experiment and learn and gain knowledge first hand. I don't think max was wasting his time doing his experimentation with the various intakes. But if someone wants to talk smack about how they are right and I am wrong then they better have some proof. I am man enough and am on the quest for knowledge enough to learn and admit when I am wrong:thumbup: 

Edit: ..and what I have learned so far is that I want a vstack set up:laugh:


----------



## NOLA_VDubber (May 24, 2007)

While I know you need a good 6"-3" transition to get a propper stack profile, I just picked up a nice 5"->3" K&N cone filter that has a really nice cone/stack molded right in to the base. I ended up ditching my old stack altogether and just running that.


DSC00706 by A. Baker, on Flickr


----------



## madmax199 (Oct 28, 2009)

NOLA_VDubber said:


> While I know you need a good 6"-3" transition to get a propper stack profile, I just picked up a nice 5"->3" K&N cone filter that has a really nice cone/stack molded right in to the base. I ended up ditching my old stack altogether and just running that.
> 
> 
> DSC00706 by A. Baker, on Flickr


 Nice setup :thumbup: 
One thing I notice is that every bends roughly accounts for a pressure drop of an inch of water. If you could afford to clear up some real estate, you may be able to optimize your intake even more by having it facing the headlight with only two bends worth of restriction :beer:


----------



## stevemannn (Apr 17, 2008)

i like my 60$ ebay intake http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/BLOX...r_Truck_Parts_Accessories&hash=item3cb8b2b46c


----------



## NOLA_VDubber (May 24, 2007)

madmax199 said:


> Nice setup :thumbup:
> One thing I notice is that every bends roughly accounts for a pressure drop of an inch of water. If you could afford to clear up some real estate, you may be able to optimize your intake even more by having it facing the headlight with only two bends worth of restriction :beer:


 I'm not really sweating a couple sweeping bends in a 3" pipe. I'm willing to take the hit in order to have a better looking inlet, quite honestly.


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

NOLA_VDubber said:


> While I know you need a good 6"-3" transition to get a propper stack profile, I just picked up a nice 5"->3" K&N cone filter that has a really nice cone/stack molded right in to the base. I ended up ditching my old stack altogether and just running that.
> 
> 
> DSC00706 by A. Baker, on Flickr


 Been doin werk on the bay huh? Looks good, I miss the red tho


----------



## NOLA_VDubber (May 24, 2007)

^ I have :laugh: I decided the red was a bit too much and changed it up a bit....for now anyways


----------



## madmax199 (Oct 28, 2009)

erevlydeux said:


> Would be nice if he could shape his intake pipe in the form of a low-slope arch and avoid any distinct "bends" except for the bend to line up with the turbo inlet. I've been thinking of something along those lines when I inevitably redo some of the lines coming off the TIP.


 That's the idea, minimal smooth bends going to the turbo inlet but he has stated that he needed some aestetics to go along with the function.


----------



## madmax199 (Oct 28, 2009)

stevemannn said:


> i like my 60$ ebay intake http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/BLOX...r_Truck_Parts_Accessories&hash=item3cb8b2b46c


 I hope that everyone realize that although this filter design will help with airflow, it can not be considered a true velocity stack and it's leaving some flow on the table.


----------



## DMVDUB (Jan 11, 2010)

What would the optimal size and length Velocity stack be for the 1.8t then? 

Does the angle of the stack affect the flow in any discernible way? 

Would the stack be more matched to the maximum amount of flow that the turbo can sustain or the maximum amount of flow the head can sustain? 

Wouldn't a velocity stack's size need to be "tuned" to the specific engine for it to offer optimal flow?


----------



## bootymac (Apr 19, 2005)

madmax199 said:


> I hope that everyone realize that although this filter design will help with airflow, it can not be considered a true velocity stack and it's leaving some flow on the table.


 Out of genuine curiosity, could you elaborate why? The 42DD and Blox/BPI velocity stacks appear very similar


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

anybody try this yet http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/e...viewitem=&_trkparms=clkid=2345229028446763606 :laugh:


----------



## MKllllvr28 (Sep 15, 2005)

Big_Tom said:


> anybody try this yet http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/ws/e...viewitem=&_trkparms=clkid=2345229028446763606 :laugh:


 Item Condition: Brand New 
Increase horsepower, torque and improve the gas Mileage 
It's the ultimate performance Air intake System 
This air intake can help your engine to draw more cooler air resulting in better throttle response and higher explosive horsepower output 
Allows maximum airflow through the stock manifold system 
Improve throttle response throughout low and mid RPM 
Filter is upgraded to high quality cone air filter, washable and reusable 
Will increase 6-8% horsepower and 6-8% Power of Torque 
All the parts being shown can be spray painted with different color 

LOL


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

^^^^ everybody in the thread is wrong :facepalm: that is infact the ultimate intake. it says it on the box LOL


----------



## desertdubs_C (Sep 20, 2009)

Big_Tom said:


> ^^^^ everybody in the thread is wrong :facepalm: that is infact the ultimate intake. it says it on the box LOL


 :laugh: How did this thread go away from sexy women on chairs????


----------



## AmIdYfReAk (Nov 8, 2006)

EVERYONE has sexy chicks on chairs, But an intake like THAT! No one i know has THAT!


----------



## desertdubs_C (Sep 20, 2009)

AmIdYfReAk said:


> EVERYONE has sexy chicks on chairs, But an intake like THAT! No one i know has THAT!


 haha damn too bad I can't view it! Can't look at ebay on these gov computers :facepalm:


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

desertdubs_C said:


> haha damn too bad I can't view it! Can't look at ebay on these gov computers :facepalm:


 just for you









thats the intake. description is same as above, and the price is $239.99 w/ free shipping :screwy:


----------



## MiffedRatx1 (Aug 10, 2009)

Big_Tom said:


> just for you
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Its on order cannot wait to install!


----------



## DMVDUB (Jan 11, 2010)

6-8% HP increase?!? 

So... 

200HP + intake = Possible 16HP gain :sly: 

300HP + intake = Possible 24HP gain :what: 

400HP + intake = Possible 32HP gain  

Damn! Now that's a deal! 

I wonder if those numbers are guaranteed?


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

DMVDUB

the power increase's are squared every 100hp. So at 6% on a 400 HP engine you're talking 1,680,016 hp..


----------



## desertdubs_C (Sep 20, 2009)

Big_Tom said:


> just for you
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 :banghead::banghead::banghead: I'll have to re check this out when I get off work. We have computers with "normal" access so for now I can't see most pics.


----------



## DMVDUB (Jan 11, 2010)

> Originally Posted by dubinsincuwereindiapers
> DMVDUB
> 
> the power increase's are squared every 100hp. So at 6% on a 400 HP engine you're talking 1,680,016 hp..


 *REALLY!!!!!* 

I'M BUYING ONE AND GOING FOR THE FIRST SUPERSONIC COMBUSTION ENGINE CAR! POSSIBLY HYPERSONIC!!!!!!!!!


----------



## madmax199 (Oct 28, 2009)

bootymac said:


> Out of genuine curiosity, could you elaborate why? The 42DD and Blox/BPI velocity stacks appear very similar


 Very good question that I do not have an answer backed by any data of my own. However, from my limited experience playing with velocity stacks on custom individual TB in my E-prepared Saturn race car, I learned the hard way that not all velocity stacks are created equal. The cheap ones gave cheap results while the expensive ones designed and tuned for a particular setup really improved performance. I know that 42DD did their homework on the stack that they use (they are one of my sponsors ) but don't have any of the data that made them come to the conclusion that this was "the size" needed for a 3" intake. 

The following dyno test was conducted on a naturally aspirated engine and shows the difference between the ebay type stacks/filter vs true racing stacks like the one 42DD used. I wouldn't rely 100% on the data from the dyno since I can't confirm any of the variables that may have impacted the results, but it gives some kind of idea that there is a difference. 

 

Uploaded with ImageShack.us


----------



## bootymac (Apr 19, 2005)

madmax199 said:


> Very good question that I do not have an answer backed by any data of my own. However, from my limited experience playing with velocity stacks on custom individual TB in my E-prepared Saturn race car, I learned the hard way that not all velocity stacks are created equal. The cheap ones gave cheap results while the expensive ones designed and tuned for a particular setup really improved performance. I know that 42DD did their homework on the stack that they use (they are one of my sponsors ) but don't have any of the data that made them come to the conclusion that this was "the size" needed for a 3" intake.
> 
> The following dyno test was conducted on a naturally aspirated engine and shows the difference between the ebay type stacks/filter vs true racing stacks like the one 42DD used. I wouldn't rely 100% on the data from the dyno since I can't confirm any of the variables that may have impacted the results, but it gives some kind of idea that there is a difference.
> 
> ...


 Did some follow up and here are the velocity stacks they compared: 

eBay: 









Prototype Racing: 









The eBay velocity stack used in the dyno looks like junk, but I'm willing to say that the Blox/BPI, 42DD and Prototype Racing velocity stacks are similar enough that any differences would not have any practical effects. Velocity stack intakes are the way to go :thumbup:


----------



## madmax199 (Oct 28, 2009)

bootymac said:


> I'm willing to say that the Blox/BPI, 42DD and Prototype Racing velocity stacks are similar enough that any differences would not have any practical effects


 Very plausible conclusion :beer:


----------



## wagner17 (Oct 20, 2009)

breaking the speed of sound


----------



## DMVDUB (Jan 11, 2010)

If you used a velocity stack with a decent length funnel wouldn't that be better since it would have more time / length to straighten out and condense the flow? 

vs, 

A short V-stack that only has, say an inch of runner leaving what's left from the transition from 6" to 3" a much steeper angle? 

I know when I cad my 280Z my Mikuni's had V-stacks and all 6 (3 sets of dual carbs) were ~6" long with a very slight taper from ~2" mouth - ~1.5" intake (on a side note it made it sound mean when there was no filters on the stacks)


----------



## desertdubs_C (Sep 20, 2009)

$200+ on a CAI/Velocity stack 

OOORRRR 

Filter on a stick + use the extra money you saved from switching to filter on stick on :beer::beer: and ( . Y . ) 

Your choice. Choose wisely


----------



## Savvv (Apr 22, 2009)

I had some talks with Bryan Pendelton of BPi in the past. He is a mechanical engineer and put in quite a bit of time designing his flow stack. He told me for a 3" inlet, that 6" is the optimal size for the filter. He makes a 6" into 3.5" but said the velocity effect isn't as pronounced as on the 3" version due to a tighter radius bell mouth. Also if you wanted a 4" inlet you'd need an 8" filter.


----------



## travis_gli (Jan 31, 2008)

stevemannn said:


> i like my 60$ ebay intake http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/BLOX...r_Truck_Parts_Accessories&hash=item3cb8b2b46c


 This is what I'm running. Noticeable difference after swapping out my weapon-r intake. Yes I said weapon-r. :facepalm: 



bootymac said:


> Out of genuine curiosity, could you elaborate why? The 42DD and Blox/BPI velocity stacks appear very similar


 Because one costs 5x's more than the other of course. :laugh: IMO there is no difference, it's people hating on ebay and a plastic velocity stack. I can understand that the plastic MAY cause a bit of resistance however but it can't be much.


----------



## kroutbrner (Nov 2, 2009)

Big_Tom said:


> just for you
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 $239 is a smokon deal for such a quality product. will make all the diference in the world. thats why I have 3 installed on my 01 Jetta. my 1.8t owns the road.:snowcool:


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

^^^ :beer:


----------



## v-dub-p (Aug 10, 2011)

kroutbrner the dickhead said:


> thats why I have 3 installed on my 01 Jetta


 
then that would make you an idiot surely? :facepalm:


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

v-dub-p said:


> then that would make you an idiot surely? :facepalm:


 :facepalm: come on dude, can you not smell sarcasm?


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

Big_Tom said:


> :facepalm: come on dude, can you not smell sarcasm?


 I think not Tom:laugh:...


----------



## v-dub-p (Aug 10, 2011)

Big_Tom said:


> :facepalm: come on dude, can you not smell sarcasm?


 well clearly you can't...........


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

^^^^ just stop :screwy:


----------



## v-dub-p (Aug 10, 2011)

i was being sarcastic to his comment, and you clearly didnt see that, but then decided i didnt relise he was being sarcastic, :what:


----------



## cincyTT (May 11, 2006)

travis_gli said:


> Because one costs 5x's more than the other of course. :laugh: IMO there is no difference, it's people hating on ebay and a plastic velocity stack. I can understand that the plastic MAY cause a bit of resistance however but it can't be much.


 They make an aluminum on also for a few dollars more.


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

v-dub-p said:


> i was being sarcastic to his comment, and you clearly didnt see that, but then decided i didnt relise he was being sarcastic, :what:


 whatever. i dont think u even know what sarcasm is  :facepalm:


----------



## travis_gli (Jan 31, 2008)

cincyTT said:


> They make an aluminum on also for a few dollars more.


 Hmmmmm. Very curious. :sly: I'll have to take a look. Why didn't a get myself an aluminum one....


----------



## v-dub-p (Aug 10, 2011)

travis_gli said:


> Hmmmmm. Very curious. :sly: I'll have to take a look. Why didn't a get myself an aluminum one....


 becasue your a tit? :laugh:


----------



## travis_gli (Jan 31, 2008)

v-dub-p said:


> becasue your a tit? :laugh:


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

travis_gli said:


>


 that guy has already proven himself to be an idiot :facepalm:


----------



## v-dub-p (Aug 10, 2011)

i have indeed, kinda match the rest of the people here eace:


----------



## travis_gli (Jan 31, 2008)

v-dub-p said:


> i have indeed, kinda match the rest of the people here eace:


 :thumbup:


----------



## Big_Tom (Aug 19, 2007)

v-dub-p said:


> i have indeed, kinda match the rest of the people here eace:


 :laugh: this is true :facepalm:


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

No argument here


----------



## bootymac (Apr 19, 2005)

travis_gli said:


> Hmmmmm. Very curious. :sly: I'll have to take a look. Why didn't a get myself an aluminum one....


 I guess you _could_ argue that the composite material won't retain heat, but I highly doubt it makes any difference :laugh:


----------



## groggory (Apr 21, 2003)

Next time I have it apart I'm going to take some pics and measurements of the bell on my APR stg3 velocity stack. I know it's not nearly as big as these guys.


----------



## fosterfobag (Aug 14, 2011)

ldaledub said:


> K&n drop in filter. youll see no gains from a CAI. also try esetuning.com if you want to spend money just purchase one of there short rams.


 This. 

There is a DIY for this. Your CAI on a turbo'd car isn't going to make or break any 1 Single HP over stock air box. 

Keep in mind that a setup with a nice structure and easy to clean is about your best bet. Feel free to spend the money on something you think looks nice, but honestly unless your going towards looks a Drop in is gonna be the best way to go.


----------



## bootymac (Apr 19, 2005)

Something worth noting is that the turbohoses.com velocity stack looks like an actual bell mouth while the rest look like they're just rounded edges 

Turbohoses: 









42DD:


----------



## Savvv (Apr 22, 2009)

bootymac said:


> Something worth noting is that the turbohoses.com velocity stack looks like an actual bell mouth while the rest look like they're just rounded edges


 From my understanding it was the vacuum near the rounded edges created by air being drawn in that helped increase the velocity and thus the total air flow. The reason Bryan from BPi told me a 4" outlet V-stack wouldn't work well with a 6" inlet is because the outer bellmouth curves would be too tight of a radius to give a good effect...


----------



## bootymac (Apr 19, 2005)

Savvv said:


> From my understanding it was the vacuum near the rounded edges created by air being drawn in that helped increase the velocity and thus the total air flow. The reason Bryan from BPi told me a 4" outlet V-stack wouldn't work well with a 6" inlet is because the outer bellmouth curves would be too tight of a radius to give a good effect...


 The 42DD/BPI/Blox velocity stacks do look a lot smoother. Anything is an improvement over a sharp edge 










For sh*ts and giggles, check out the velocity stacks on the E39 M5: 










/random tech dump


----------



## bootymac (Apr 19, 2005)

groggory said:


> Next time I have it apart I'm going to take some pics and measurements of the bell on my APR stg3 velocity stack. I know it's not nearly as big as these guys.


 I think the velocity stack in the APR kit is meant to replace the one inside the stock airbox, presumably due to the larger MAF housing


----------



## v-dub-p (Aug 10, 2011)

they put those velocity stacks in most air boxes


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

bootymac said:


> For sh*ts and giggles, check out the velocity stacks on the E39 M5:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 Haha...I was going to post the same thing...I was thinking of this thread as I worked on one today and thought I would post a pic..


----------



## DMVDUB (Jan 11, 2010)

I'd like to hear that run without the cover on it


----------



## madmax199 (Oct 28, 2009)

It's funny how this thread jumped from bashing the OP, to women in chairs, to CAI vs WAI, to velocity stacks, I think it's a serious case of Vortex ADD (VADD) 

This thread is getting somewhat technical enough to get my attention again. As I said before there is a difference between velocity stacks, and I'm not talking about price. 
A simple bell mouth (although highly effective whenever there is some kind airflow or ram air to the inlet that doesn't have to be sucked in by vacuum) is not going to be as effective as a full velocity stack like the 42DD one and the BPI kind. So before I loose anyone, I consider the turbohose kind to be bell mouths that mostly act as air funnels, the 42DD kind to be real V-stacks and the Prototype racing one to be a hybrid between the two because of the unusually sharp radius for a V-stack and has a long transition before the 3" section. 

When looking at V-stacks for an application there are the few things to look at: 
-radius of the inlet lip (Rl) 
-radius of the "funnel" (Rv) 
-relationship between (Rl) (Rv) and the intake piping diameter (in our case 3" ID) and the velocity contour of Rl play a huge role. 

In a V-stack like the 42DD, where the pressure gradient will actually smoothly curve around the backside of the lip, it will allow more air to be drawn in. The funnel type does not offer a tangent transition to the front plane resulting in not enough "mushrooming" of the incoming air especially with the filters that have a front end blocked (I hope that made sense). We need to remember that the purpose of a V-stack at this location is to simply aid with the pressure loss associated with a sharp, turbulent entrance. In theory, a mushroom filter could be able to take advantage of a funnel type stack with air been forced in but in more enclosed environment relying on vacuum only, do yourselves a favor and run a 42DD type stacks. 

All we can do besides that is having the equipment to model and test these theories and various V-stacks. I don't have the such equipments and rely on the MAF for simple improvement of metered mass air. What I'd really like to test and discuss is the effect of the length of the intake on the powerband (increase/decrease in midrange vs top end) since I already know that CAI means nothing at the MAF and IAT sensors and the real V-stacks improved MAF reading by a peak of 20% and from 4K-up. Thoughts? (I mean intelligent ones)


----------



## desertdubs_C (Sep 20, 2009)

madmax199 said:


> It's funny how this thread jumped from bashing the OP, to women in chairs, to CAI vs WAI, to velocity stacks, I think it's a serious case of Vortex ADD (VADD)


 Whats funny is I was just thinking the same thing when I saw this has 7 pages now. I click on the 7th page and find you've already said what I was going to say. 

"How did this happen?" :screwy: Eh


----------



## madmax199 (Oct 28, 2009)

desertdubs_C said:


> Whats funny is I was just thinking the same thing when I saw this has 7 pages now. I click on the 7th page and find you've already said what I was going to say.
> 
> "How did this happen?" :screwy: Eh


 I read minds :laugh:!


----------



## DMVDUB (Jan 11, 2010)

Women on Velocity Stacks?


----------



## bootymac (Apr 19, 2005)

madmax199 said:


> This thread is getting somewhat technical enough to get my attention again. As I said before there is a difference between velocity stacks, and I'm not talking about price.
> A simple bell mouth (although highly effective whenever there is some kind airflow or ram air to the inlet that doesn't have to be sucked in by vacuum) is not going to be as effective as a full velocity stack like the 42DD one and the BPI kind. So before I loose anyone, I consider the turbohose kind to be bell mouths that mostly act as air funnels, the 42DD kind to be real V-stacks and the Prototype racing one to be a hybrid between the two because of the unusually sharp radius for a V-stack and has a long transition before the 3" section.


 I completely agree :beer: 



> All we can do besides that is having the equipment to model and test these theories and various V-stacks. I don't have the such equipments and rely on the MAF for simple improvement of metered mass air. What I'd really like to test and discuss is the effect of the length of the intake on the powerband (increase/decrease in midrange vs top end) since I already know that CAI means nothing at the MAF and IAT sensors and the real V-stacks improved MAF reading by a peak of 20% and from 4K-up. Thoughts? (I mean intelligent ones)


 I've thought about this as well. BPi's testing page shows a lot of different vehicles with various intake setups and the resulting dyno graphs. Good information to review: http://www.bpinitiatives.com/testing.php 

It's pretty clear that peak numbers are mostly unchanged, but benefits are realized throughout the entire powerband. Something else I noticed was that the 350Z showed additional gains when fitting a velocity stack on an existing CAI (but then again, the old filter looked like garbage). The same happened with the 2001 Sentra with the SR20DE engine. The CAI alone had minimal gains over stock, while the velocity stack added to the CAI piping yielded the most power. Unfortunately it's not the SR20DE-T so we don't know how the CAI performs on a turbocharged engine.


----------



## Dub-Nub (Sep 27, 2005)

I started to look at the different companies 

Prototype racing doesnt exist anymore, so the velocity stacks can only be obtained from those that have them. The only point of contact i found was [email protected] and that domain does not exist anymore. 

42DD does not sell their velocity stacks by themselves on the website, possibly need to email them directly and ask. 

BPI is the only one that can be obtained without digging into it.


----------



## madmax199 (Oct 28, 2009)

DMVDUB said:


> Women on Velocity Stacks?


 No, more like women on 3" pipes  !


----------



## bootymac (Apr 19, 2005)

Dub-Nub said:


> I started to look at the different companies
> 
> Prototype racing doesnt exist anymore, so the velocity stacks can only be obtained from those that have them. The only point of contact i found was [email protected] and that domain does not exist anymore.
> 
> ...


 From what I've heard, Blox is a direct copy of the BPi velocity stacks, and they're readily available on eBay. 

Even Spectre has velocity stacks: http://www.autozone.com/autozone/ac...n-velocity-stack-adapter?itemIdentifier=62003


----------



## madmax199 (Oct 28, 2009)

erevlydeux said:


> This is should become an FAQ on engine mods that give reliable power on stock turbos. :laugh:
> 
> 20% extra air mass over 4k RPM is a seriously good thing if it only ends up being a $100 - $120 mod. I feel like this could use a groggory treatment.


 If you're quoting me, don't forget *Peak* of 20% and significant mass flow increase in the entire 4k-up range.


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

madmax199 said:


> No, more like women on 3" pipes  !


 Don't tempt me:laugh:

Im glad to see this turn into a discussion on velocity stacks though, as its something most don't truly understand.

When my stepfather ran top fuel and top alcohol dragsters; I remember the discussions about the velocity stacked, injected nitro cars. These guys were running normally aspirated dragsters on Nitromethane in the alchohol supercharged class. The discussion always centered around the tuning of the velocity stacks. It was almost a black art to tune the length of the stacks IIRC, hence the reason that the nitro injected cars pretty much disappeared from the top alchohol classes. It was much easier to just run high boost on methanol than fool with the stacks constantly. Afaik the guys used to have to tune the lengths of them for different altitudes, temperatures, etc. 

Theres much tech in this subject.. keep it going:beer:


----------



## Dub-Nub (Sep 27, 2005)

bootymac said:


> From what I've heard, Blox is a direct copy of the BPi velocity stacks, and they're readily available on eBay.
> 
> Even Spectre has velocity stacks: http://www.autozone.com/autozone/ac...n-velocity-stack-adapter?itemIdentifier=62003


 Blox is a copy of BPis but the dyno graphs i saw between the two showed BPi yielding more gains.


----------



## Savvv (Apr 22, 2009)

Dub-Nub said:


> I started to look at the different companies
> 
> Prototype racing doesnt exist anymore, so the velocity stacks can only be obtained from those that have them. The only point of contact i found was [email protected] and that domain does not exist anymore.
> 
> ...


 I've got one from Vibrant. Looks very similar to the BPi/42DD versions.


----------



## Dub-Nub (Sep 27, 2005)

Savvv said:


> I've got one from Vibrant. Looks very similar to the BPi/42DD versions.


 Very similar designs can yield different results if they are not tested. I just looked into 3 mentioned stacks in this thread, im sure there is alot. The BPi and Prototype racing were ones i could find information on. I couldnt find much on the 42dd cause you cant buy on its own. 

I think the 42dd is out of the question unless you are planning to weld it. The way they connect it requires the MAF and most BT run MAFless unless you are planning to add this to a MAF'ed car. 





















Here is some good info


----------



## bootymac (Apr 19, 2005)

Dub-Nub said:


> Here is some good info


 Any chance you can link to the entire article? Looks like a good read :thumbup:


----------



## Dub-Nub (Sep 27, 2005)

bootymac said:


> Any chance you can link to the entire article? Looks like a good read :thumbup:


 Sure thing. I saw it a while ago when the guy with the red audi quattroo was building his engine started heat in the 1.8T forums and got banned several times...he posted the link and i read it. 

Its also available when you wikipedia 'velocity stacks' at the bottom of the page. 

http://www.profblairandassociates.com/pdfs/Bellmouth.zip


----------



## bootymac (Apr 19, 2005)

Dub-Nub said:


> http://www.profblairandassociates.com/pdfs/Bellmouth.zip


Thanks! This article shows pretty conclusive information not only about velocity stacks, but also different velocity stack designs.

The BPi velocity stacks look elliptical. I can't confirm if Blox velocity stacks are the same as I can't find a diagram, but I assume they are if Blox copied BPi's design.









Spectre velocity stacks seem to be more of a "simple radius" style









While I can't find any diagrams, the Turbohoses velocity stack looks to be more of an "aerofoil profile" design


----------



## Dub-Nub (Sep 27, 2005)

I think bpi is worth a try as it has the shape which produces smoothest flow into pipe


----------



## Bob Ross' Fro (Jul 11, 2011)

Dub-Nub said:


> I saw it a while ago when the guy with the red audi quattroo was building his engine started heat in the 1.8T forums and got banned several times...he posted the link and i read it.



who was that guy???


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

Bob Ross' Fro said:


> who was that guy???


Some douchenozzle from the PNW


----------



## Bob Ross' Fro (Jul 11, 2011)

dubinsincuwereindiapers said:


> Some douchenozzle from the PNW


guy must be a drunk or somethin. haha


----------



## dubinsincuwereindiapers (Jan 16, 2008)

Wouldn't surprise me. Pretty much just a bunch of transplanted Canadians up there. Think McKenzie bros


----------



## Dub-Nub (Sep 27, 2005)

dubinsincuwereindiapers said:


> Some douchenozzle from the PNW


I had no issues with him and think he knew his stuff...even after going through several high HP engines.


----------



## steve-o 16v GLI (Jun 26, 2005)

Dub-Nub said:


> I had no issues with him and think he knew his stuff...even after going through several high HP engines.


you missed the sarcasm a wee bit:laugh:


----------



## Dub-Nub (Sep 27, 2005)

^^^ lol i think i did :laugh:

Not sure how i feel about Vibrants '2-steps' on their stacks. Looks like its not 1 smooth curve but two.


----------



## Savvv (Apr 22, 2009)

I originally was gonna be using the BPi stack, but for show points, a one piece looking inlet pipe beats a 2 piece with coupler and clamps all day. Whether or not I lost a tad bit of function was irrelevant to me. Still better than just clamping the filter down to cut pipe.

Dunno if I should be saying this or not but 42 is aware of this thread and is working on producing stacks for fab purposes...ie...not with the MAF bolt holes and O-rings in em, rather something more like the vibrant piece. :thumbup:


----------



## Dub-Nub (Sep 27, 2005)

Savvv said:


> I originally was gonna be using the BPi stack, but for show points, a one piece looking inlet pipe beats a 2 piece with coupler and clamps all day. Whether or not I lost a tad bit of function was irrelevant to me. Still better than just clamping the filter down to cut pipe.
> 
> Dunno if I should be saying this or not but 42 is aware of this thread and is working on producing stacks for fab purposes...ie...not with the MAF bolt holes and O-rings in em, rather something more like the vibrant piece. :thumbup:


My K&N filter i have has a slight velocity stack built into it from what i have felt when i was fisting it while cleaning. I need to check the model and check the specs on it.

Thanks for info on 42dd's plans, it would be a good choice for them as their design appears to be that of BPi and they are great designs.


----------



## madmax199 (Oct 28, 2009)

Dub-Nub said:


> ^^^ lol i think i did :laugh:
> 
> Not sure how i feel about Vibrants '2-steps' on their stacks. Looks like its not 1 smooth curve but two.


Will create some turbulance as result of seperation. I would love to see someone with the right tool do some modeling on something like that so we can see what that does to the boundary layer and the few crucial layers above it (any active fluid ME aboard with some modeling tools?) 

Another cool thing would be to see the effect of a dimpled surfaced V-tack (golf ball like) that stimulates the stagnant boundary layer on the smooth stacks.


----------



## bootymac (Apr 19, 2005)

Bumping this up as I replaced my 2.75" cold air intake with a Blox velocity stack kit and the difference is noticeable. I don't have any data logs yet but the driving characteristics have changed compared to my old setup. The engine feels less restricted in the low RPM range and revs more freely. Car seems to accelerate quicker (less lag) when going WOT, but again I have no data logs to verify this. Intake noise is also much more noticeable in cabin compared to a cold air intake. 

The best way I can describe this is that it felt like my engine was breathing through a straw with the cold air intake while it feels more "free flowing" with the velocity stack. I can't say if there are any performance gains, but I'll share my data logs once I get around to doing them. 

PS: A 2.75" silicone coupler will easily stretch onto the 3" outlet on the velocity stack :thumbup:


----------



## wagner17 (Oct 20, 2009)

lest see some logs im very intrested in this


----------



## carcraz (Jan 25, 2011)

wow..this is poison. 
i might get one too..


----------



## bootymac (Apr 19, 2005)

bootymac said:


> Bumping this up as I replaced my 2.75" cold air intake with a Blox velocity stack kit and the difference is noticeable. I don't have any data logs yet but the driving characteristics have changed compared to my old setup. The engine feels less restricted in the low RPM range and revs more freely. Car seems to accelerate quicker (less lag) when going WOT, but again I have no data logs to verify this. Intake noise is also much more noticeable in cabin compared to a cold air intake.
> 
> The best way I can describe this is that it felt like my engine was breathing through a straw with the cold air intake while it feels more "free flowing" with the velocity stack. I can't say if there are any performance gains, but I'll share my data logs once I get around to doing them.
> 
> PS: A 2.75" silicone coupler will easily stretch onto the 3" outlet on the velocity stack :thumbup:


No data logs yet but I thought I would follow up after some more driving time with the velocity stack. I recently drove WOT up a hill that I frequently use for testing purposes and it felt like my engine was choking during high-RPM conditions, and wouldn't pull as it used to with the CAI. I've never experienced this with my CAI which leads me to believe the velocity stack isn't receiving enough air or the hot air in the engine bay is hindering performance.

My conclusion so far is that the free-flowing benefits of the velocity stack aids in low-RPM driving conditions (when compared to a CAI), while the nature of the short-ram intake is limited by ambient air flow and hot underhood air temperatures. I'm hoping to rectify this with air ducting from the bumper and cowl area. I will share updates as I continually try to improve this intake.

*Update: *
Another follow up. The lack of "high-RPM pull" observed before was caused by a boost leak. Since addressing that issue, the car pulls much harder throughout the entire powerband. I've also routed a 4" duct from the lower bumper grille to the intake area (ram induction) and trimmed a portion the upper hood seal near the intake (cowl induction). Bottom line? A velocity stack intake is superior to a CAI.

*Here are a couple of sound clips for those who are interested:*
Intake:


Intake + exhaust:


----------



## Twopnt016v (Jul 5, 2009)

bootymac said:


> No data logs yet but I thought I would follow up after some more driving time with the velocity stack. I recently drove WOT up a hill that I frequently use for testing purposes and it felt like my engine was choking during high-RPM conditions, and wouldn't pull as it used to with the CAI. I've never experienced this with my CAI which leads me to believe the velocity stack isn't receiving enough air or the hot air in the engine bay is hindering performance.
> 
> My conclusion so far is that the free-flowing benefits of the velocity stack aids in low-RPM driving conditions (when compared to a CAI), while the nature of the short-ram intake is limited by ambient air flow and hot underhood air temperatures. I'm hoping to rectify this with air ducting from the bumper and cowl area. I will share updates as I continually try to improve this intake.


Let us know your finds man. Sounds like if you get some airflow to it like your planning then the issue is hopefully resolved:thumbup: Good luck!


----------



## Matt 337 (Apr 10, 2009)

bootymac said:


> Bumping this up as I replaced my 2.75" cold air intake with a Blox velocity stack kit and the difference is noticeable. I don't have any data logs yet but the driving characteristics have changed compared to my old setup. The engine feels less restricted in the low RPM range and revs more freely. Car seems to accelerate quicker (less lag) when going WOT, but again I have no data logs to verify this. Intake noise is also much more noticeable in cabin compared to a cold air intake.
> 
> The best way I can describe this is that it felt like my engine was breathing through a straw with the cold air intake while it feels more "free flowing" with the velocity stack. I can't say if there are any performance gains, but I'll share my data logs once I get around to doing them.
> 
> PS: A 2.75" silicone coupler will easily stretch onto the 3" outlet on the velocity stack :thumbup:


I recently purchased the spectra 6 to 3in velocity stack and a k&N filter, I would agree with what you said above, the motor seems to breath more freely. I have vcds, but I'm a noob when it comes to data logging, if you tell me what to log I would be more than happy to share my logs.


----------



## bootymac (Apr 19, 2005)

bootymac said:


> No data logs yet but I thought I would follow up after some more driving time with the velocity stack. I recently drove WOT up a hill that I frequently use for testing purposes and it felt like my engine was choking during high-RPM conditions, and wouldn't pull as it used to with the CAI. I've never experienced this with my CAI which leads me to believe the velocity stack isn't receiving enough air or the hot air in the engine bay is hindering performance.
> 
> My conclusion so far is that the free-flowing benefits of the velocity stack aids in low-RPM driving conditions (when compared to a CAI), while the nature of the short-ram intake is limited by ambient air flow and hot underhood air temperatures. I'm hoping to rectify this with air ducting from the bumper and cowl area. I will share updates as I continually try to improve this intake.


Another follow up. The lack of "high-RPM pull" observed before was caused by a boost leak. Since addressing that issue, the car pulls much harder throughout the entire powerband. I've also routed a 4" duct from the lower bumper grille to the intake area (ram induction) and trimmed a portion the upper hood seal near the intake (cowl induction). *Bottom line? A velocity stack intake is superior to a CAI.*

Here's a video for no reason:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ri_ri8W6pHE


----------



## theGo (Aug 3, 2009)

use a dirty sock


----------



## 5P4RK4 (Jun 24, 2004)

bootymac said:


> Another follow up. The lack of "high-RPM pull" observed before was caused by a boost leak. Since addressing that issue, the car pulls much harder throughout the entire powerband. I've also routed a 4" duct from the lower bumper grille to the intake area (ram induction) and trimmed a portion the upper hood seal near the intake (cowl induction). *Bottom line? A velocity stack intake is superior to a CAI.*
> 
> Here's a video for no reason:
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ri_ri8W6pHE


told ya


----------

