# Phenolic intake manifold spacer comparison 034 VS New South Performance (pictures of course)



## Doooglasss (Aug 28, 2009)

I've had a New South Performance intake manifold spacer for years. During my recent BT build I thought I was going with a large port intake manifold for some time, so I bought a 034 transition spacer so I could run the large port manifold with my small port head. Plans have since changed and 034 was nice enough to take the transition port spacer back and exchange it for a small port spacer - and this was MONTHS later- I think I ordered the spacer in late August/early September, I'm sure it helped that it was in it's original packaging. I didn't just return the spacer, well because it makes the New South Performance spacer look like a gasket... the pictures can provide the rest of the explanation for me:

Link to 034's spacer: http://www.034motorsport.com/engine-components-18t-intake-manifold-spacer-18t-phenolic-p-764.html $57 and the New South Performance cost me about $50 from ECS years ago.

For an additional $7 you get quality you can't beat, gaskets are included and so is hardware. My NSP spacer came with neither gaskets or hardware.

The complete 034 kit:



034 thickness measured @ 4.0 with my caliper:



New South Performance measured @ 1.10:



Thickness comparison, like I said the 034 is huge: 







I'm sure the added thickness translates to lower intake temps which means more power. I know there is one other spacer out there- the EVO heatshield or gasket, if somebody has this part and has a free hour try to post some photos of it up so we can get this thread in the FAQ. If there are more spacers that I'm missing feel free to chime in!

Note: Sorry guys- dumb me didn't think of VAG-COM intake temperature tests until the new gasket was already installed. I've removed this manifold too many times this month to do it twice more today! Maybe one day I'll do a test comparison with logs/graphs.

Note2: My new south performance spacer is now for sale. I've got my hardware setup that I've been using, the spacer, and two gaskets ready to go. Shoot me a PM, since this thread kind of trashes the spacer you'll definitely be getting a more than fair price. So if you're on a budget this is for you! $20 shipped good ol' United States Postal service.


----------



## Krissrock (Sep 10, 2005)

nice write up...but until the logs are provided to compare,....


----------



## RabbitGTDguy (Jul 9, 2002)

I have a EVOShield gasket on the way right now that I'm installing this winter... I'll take pictures, etc. when it arrives. 

Adding this...with W/M injection and a bunch of other bits this winter...should be fun! 

Joe


----------



## mbaron (Aug 21, 2008)

The NSP product is a gasket and doesn't need additional gaskets or longer bolts. The 034 is a heat blocking spacer and needs those things. If the 034 lowers intake temps more, it is probably a better deal. 

I would like to see the differences in temps also.


----------



## PLAYED TT (Oct 17, 2010)

Doug honestly I don't see a difference


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

I have an EVO I can take pics of and measure tomorrow as my SEM manifold is off right now. I had a previous version of the NS that warped and I never considered them again. That said, none of them will actually lower IAT's, just what the sensor is reading. Keeping more heat in the head is a bad thing right? We'd all say yes, but we are fooled into thinking these gaskets/spacers lower intake temps. Intake charge velocity is so high that actual time spent in contact with the intake manifold wall is too short as to cause significant heat transfer to the charge. Friction along the manifold wall probably causes more of an increase to IAT's than actual conduction of the manifold to the intake charge. The purpose of true EGR, not the same as our SAI/combi valve, is to heat the intake charge and promote vaporization of the fuel charge. Being a turbo charged engine, this isn't really necessary. Keeping heat out of the combustion chamber allows more boost/ignition timing to be used with no change in fuel octane. So, being a mechanical engineer with a focus on automotive design, I'd say these aren't worthy of a stickied thread. Skip these and spend a little more on a lower temp thermostat (cheaper than these spacers), an oil cooler setup, or a water/meth injection kit. These are all much more effective in the goal of cooler intake temps and less chance of detonation/more ignition timing. So, anyone want to buy a used EVO heatshield?


----------



## PLAYED TT (Oct 17, 2010)

20v master said:


> I have an EVO I can take pics of and measure tomorrow as my SEM manifold is off right now. I had a previous version of the NS that warped and I never considered them again. That said, none of them will actually lower IAT's, just what the sensor is reading. Keeping more heat in the head is a bad thing right? We'd all say yes, but we are fooled into thinking these gaskets/spacers lower intake temps. Intake charge velocity is so high that actual time spent in contact with the intake manifold wall is too short as to cause significant heat transfer to the charge. Friction along the manifold wall probably causes more of an increase to IAT's than actual conduction of the manifold to the intake charge. The purpose of true EGR, not the same as our SAI/combi valve, is to heat the intake charge and promote vaporization of the fuel charge. Being a turbo charged engine, this isn't really necessary. Keeping heat out of the combustion chamber allows more boost/ignition timing to be used with no change in fuel octane. So, being a mechanical engineer with a focus on automotive design, I'd say these aren't worthy of a stickied thread. Skip these and spend a little more on a lower temp thermostat (cheaper than these spacers), an oil cooler setup, or a water/meth injection kit. These are all much more effective in the goal of cooler intake temps and less chance of detonation/more ignition timing. So, anyone want to buy a used EVO heatshield?


 Hmmmm no :sly:


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Well here's the picture. Turns out we have similar counter tops. lol Anyways, my battery in my cheap caliper is dead, and the good ones are at work with my digital camera, so this is the best I could do. The EVO heatshield is a hair under 7mm thick.


----------



## A4 1.8 Turbo (Feb 28, 2005)

are these things really worth it? just curious.


----------



## DurTTy (Aug 14, 2007)

A4 1.8 Turbo said:


> are these things really worth it? just curious.


 these things are nice, i have one myself (034 gasket). feels like a really solid piece, you can hurt some 1 with it lol. 

imo, if you gonna take the manifold off anyways and replace with oem gasket, might aswell grab one of these. 

otherwise, dont replace it it for the sake of doing it. 

just invest in a better IC.


----------



## A4 1.8 Turbo (Feb 28, 2005)

DurTTy said:


> these things are nice, i have one myself (034 gasket). feels like a really solid piece, you can hurt some 1 with it lol.
> 
> imo, if you gonna take the manifold off anyways and replace with oem gasket, might aswell grab one of these.
> 
> ...


 thats kinda what i figured, seems like a whole lot of thought into a piece that may or may not decrease intake temps much at all. I seem to think along the lines of 20v master when it comes to these spaver peaces.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

A4 1.8 Turbo said:


> are these things really worth it? just curious.


 I was about to say, did anyone read my post, then I saw your next reply. lol


----------



## l88m22vette (Mar 2, 2006)

They do make a difference, there are plenty of internet threads...its usually like 3-5hp but generally the spacer's improvement is qualitative, not so much quantitative


----------



## Doooglasss (Aug 28, 2009)

20v master said:


> Well here's the picture. Turns out we have similar counter tops. lol Anyways, my battery in my cheap caliper is dead, and the good ones are at work with my digital camera, so this is the best I could do. The EVO heatshield is a hair under 7mm thick.


 I cannot trust your mechanical opinion- your fingernails are cleaner than mine haha, I'm just kidding.

I think the spacer does make a difference, just not as much as other modifications. Kind of like a chip vs. a turbo inlet pipe. Sure the TIP helps, but it doesn't add 40+hp. With that said it looks like the EVO & the 034 pieces are both quality pieces. A "4" on my caliper is 1/2" which is 12.7mm. Is the EVO flexible or is it solid like the 034 is?

Will the spacer allow you to advance timing and add serious power like a water/meth kit will- nope. But when you compare the prices to the gains - good meth injection kit is $300+, this spacer is $57 and you don't need to refill it : )


----------



## PLAYED TT (Oct 17, 2010)

I'm not going to lie I have thought about these before. I know a lot of people talk highly about them, but do they really add 3-5hp?


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

l88m22vette said:


> They do make a difference, there are plenty of internet threads...its usually like 3-5hp but generally the spacer's improvement is qualitative, not so much quantitative


 Quality of what? Internet threads are like blogs, journals, forum threads, etc, aka not always accurate and sometimes based on opinion. 



DougLoBue said:


> I cannot trust your mechanical opinion- your fingernails are cleaner than mine haha, I'm just kidding.
> 
> I think the spacer does make a difference, just not as much as other modifications. Kind of like a chip vs. a turbo inlet pipe. Sure the TIP helps, but it doesn't add 40+hp. With that said it looks like the EVO & the 034 pieces are both quality pieces. A "4" on my caliper is 1/2" which is 12.7mm. Is the EVO flexible or is it solid like the 034 is?
> 
> Will the spacer allow you to advance timing and add serious power like a water/meth kit will- nope. But when you compare the prices to the gains - good meth injection kit is $300+, this spacer is $57 and you don't need to refill it : )


 My nails are clean because I wear nitrile/latex gloves when I wrench.  Yes, it's not expensive, but please give an explanation of how it could possibly give gains. Yes, I have one, but that doesn't mean I feel they do anything. In fact, if they were as good as what they claim, every OEM manufacturer would include something similar stock, especially given the cost on a mass production basis. 



PLAYED TT said:


> I'm not going to lie I have thought about these before. I know a lot of people talk highly about them, but do they really add 3-5hp?


 3-5HP is definitely within the variance of a dyno's repeatability. Who here or anywhere for that matter has run two dyno runs back to back with ample cooldown time and no changes and actually seen exact replicas of numbers and curves? No one.


----------



## DurTTy (Aug 14, 2007)

PLAYED TT said:


> I'm not going to lie I have thought about these before. I know a lot of people talk highly about them, but do they really add 3-5hp?


 yea maybe 3-5 hp on the 1st start up when the car is still cold. 

but after 1hr in traffic on the way home from the highway. i doesnt make didly squat. 

just my experience. 

but hey, nice to have. the bolts that come with the 034 kit are nice and shiny.


----------



## Doooglasss (Aug 28, 2009)

While I won't argue that there aren't any documented gains and gains this small are hard to document accurately. I will argue that VW/Audi didn't do a lot of things "right" from the factory. Their objective is to build a car as cheaply as possible and it still be reliable. We see this in a lot of the parts we replace as "modifications": diaphragm diverter valves that fail, turbo inlet hoses that collapse under high boost/RPMS, SAI pump rivets that rot away and a PCV system that eventually just leaks oil into the intake like crazy. These are just a few I can think of off the top of my head.

All I was saying in my OP that if you're going to buy one of these intake spacers with ~$50 that you have laying around I'd skip the new south performance model. I'd also like to see at least VAGCOM logs with intake temperature tests done on the same day with the ambient temp recorded- I'm just being lazy and not doing it yet- it's wayyy too cold out for me to do something for fun in my unheated garage!


----------



## notoriouszig (Jun 14, 2010)

DougLoBue said:


> While I won't argue that there aren't any documented gains and gains this small are hard to document accurately. I will argue that VW/Audi didn't do a lot of things "right" from the factory. Their objective is to build a car as cheaply as possible and it still be reliable. We see this in a lot of the parts we replace as "modifications": diaphragm diverter valves that fail, turbo inlet hoses that collapse under high boost/RPMS, SAI pump rivets that rot away and a PCV system that eventually just leaks oil into the intake like crazy. These are just a few I can think of off the top of my head.
> 
> All I was saying in my OP that if you're going to buy one of these intake spacers with ~$50 that you have laying around I'd skip the new south performance model. I'd also like to see at least VAGCOM logs with intake temperature tests done on the same day with the ambient temp recorded- I'm just being lazy and not doing it yet- it's wayyy too cold out for me to do something for fun in my unheated garage!


 :thumbup:


----------



## madmax199 (Oct 28, 2009)

DougLoBue said:


> While I won't argue that there aren't any documented gains and gains this small are hard to document accurately. I will argue that VW/Audi didn't do a lot of things "right" from the factory. Their objective is to build a car as cheaply as possible and it still be reliable. We see this in a lot of the parts we replace as "modifications": diaphragm diverter valves that fail, turbo inlet hoses that collapse under high boost/RPMS, SAI pump rivets that rot away and a PCV system that eventually just leaks oil into the intake like crazy. These are just a few I can think of off the top of my head.
> 
> All I was saying in my OP that if you're going to buy one of these intake spacers with ~$50 that you have laying around I'd skip the new south performance model. I'd also like to see at least VAGCOM logs with intake temperature tests done on the same day with the ambient temp recorded- I'm just being lazy and not doing it yet- it's wayyy too cold out for me to do something for fun in my unheated garage!


 Doug, you are so right about Audi/VW not doing a lot of things right from the start when they were designing and building the cars. 

I am shocked with the lack of knowledge on what these phenolic heat barriers can do on this board or maybe everyone is just posting opinions and feeling without any actual test, logs or even experience with the piece. I am maybe one the few that went to great length to get the TT's timing curve where it belongs without the computer pulling timing because of heat(I run E85 on a car that already have water/meth) and the phenolic heat barrier helped me greatly in achieving my timing goals for the car. 

I am also maybe one of the crazy ones that tried both the evo and 034 "spacers". I originally went with the EVO one because of the great tested reviews on QW but upgraded to 034 because of it's thickness (the happier you can keep that IAT sensor the better of a timing curve you will be able to sustain and timing is power). I originally wanted to make a phenolic IAT sensor spacer but gave the 034 spacer a shot and got great results. I recorded an average of 7 degrees celcius cooler on 034 compared to evo (tests were taken by an IR temp reader by the sensor on a summer hot days after autocross runs). 

Others have also tested and got tangible results on what the spacers can do both on different engine and the 1.8t motor. Modshack AKA Schwing tested an EVO spacer before and after on a TT and his full results can be found here: http://public.fotki.com/ttschwing/manifold_work/insulating_phenolic/ 

If this not enough for a 50$ spacer I don't know what is, almost 5 points of timing on the entire curve. I'd love to see any kind of actual data from the naysayers backing their statments. 
 

Uploaded with ImageShack.us


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

I'll take the Pepsi challenge. Before we go any further, you need E85 and water/meth to get that timing curve? At what boost level and what tune?


----------



## madmax199 (Oct 28, 2009)

20v master said:


> I'll take the Pepsi challenge. Before we go any further, you need E85 and water/meth to get that timing curve? At what boost level and what tune?


 What challenge :screwy: ? The graph posted is Modshack's before and after comparison of an evo spacer and it's effect on timing with all else being equal. If you read the post and click on the link you'll also find before and after temp readings. However, since you asked why I need to run E85 and water injection and at what boost level, I will answer you: 

Mainly, I run E85 and water injection so I could get to MBT without timing pull. 
I run them also so I can improve power from last year when I put a TT in an SCCA CSP trophy spot, both in National tour and a ProSolo in the car's first year of development, as well as having the fastest car at last year's Waterfest autocross. I run both so I can make a TT with stock turbo boost over 30 psi without blowing hot air and actually make power. I run a spike over 32 psi now and my IAT and EGT are so low that I deleted one of the SMIC to reduce pressure loss and and spool faster. 

This what my timing curve looked like before E85 on water only, no meth since it's illegal in my class(90 degree summer day). 
 

Uploaded with ImageShack.us 
 

Uploaded with ImageShack.us 

This is my car and now I challenge you to show me your timing graph or any hard data proving that a phenolic spacer is useless. 

 

Uploaded with ImageShack.us 
 

Uploaded with ImageShack.us


----------



## l88m22vette (Mar 2, 2006)

20v master said:


> Quality of what? Internet threads are like blogs, journals, forum threads, etc, aka not always accurate and sometimes based on opinion.


 Quantity = number of horsepower/torque/timing/etc. 
Quality = difference in feel of the engine, car, etc. 

They are based on opinion, but honestly what isn't? There is data to back up the spacers results, and a lot of little changes can add up to make a big difference; case in point, I had a totally modded stock tune engine (N249 removed, silicone TIP, N75K, turboback) and it felt worlds different than a normal 225, the whole character of the engine was better. In fact, I'd argue that getting a tune wasn't even that big of a deal, all I ever heard about was "night and day" when it came to tunes, and it was really more like sunrise/sunset (a difference, but not a massive one). Hell, with bolt-ons I think the 225 is plenty fast, I was far more excited to get my BBK, rear sway, and Haldex Blue since they made the car better overall, but I don't have braking distances to skidpad numbers to back it up. I always say take the internet with a grain of salt, but if you don't trust opinions then just buy your own **** and hope the salesperson isn't blowing too much smoke up your ass


----------



## DurTTy (Aug 14, 2007)

i think the point here was that 034 spacer is the one to go with. 

If you are in the market for these things. 



honestly, i only got it cuz i needed transitional so i could re-use the ATC IM on the AEB head. 

but w/e we will see when car gets tuned with W/M next season.


----------



## ManOfManyGTs (Dec 11, 2007)

Ordered my 034 spacer today! Planning to remove my intake mani to renew my plumbing and install a catch can as my little winter project. Though this would be a good time to do this mod.


----------



## PLAYED TT (Oct 17, 2010)

ManOfManyGTs said:


> Ordered my 034 spacer today! Planning to remove my intake mani to renew my plumbing and install a catch can as my little winter project. Though this would be a good time to do this mod.


 I may have to get one as well. For $50 it seems so right


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

madmax199 said:


> What challenge :screwy: ? The graph posted is Modshack's before and after comparison of an evo spacer and it's effect on timing with all else being equal. If you read the post and click on the link you'll also find before and after temp readings. However, since you asked why I need to run E85 and water injection and at what boost level, I will answer you:
> 
> Mainly, I run E85 and water injection so I could get to MBT without timing pull.
> I run them also so I can improve power from last year when I put a TT in an SCCA CSP trophy spot, both in National tour and a ProSolo in the car's first year of development, as well as having the fastest car at last year's Waterfest autocross. I run both so I can make a TT with stock turbo boost over 30 psi without blowing hot air and actually make power. I run a spike over 32 psi now and my IAT and EGT are so low that I deleted one of the SMIC to reduce pressure loss and and spool faster.
> ...


 If your goal is to trick the ECU into running more timing, then sure these help that. I'd rather have the software adjusted accordingly. Forget all your timing graphs and before and afters and think about it this way. If you're blocking heat from transferring into the intake manifold, where is that quantity of heat going? It's staying in the head. Keeping heat in the head does nothing to allow more timing advance. This is why I pointed out that a low temp thermostat would be half the price of these gaskets and do more to remove heat from the combustion chamber. Even if you convince the ECU that IAT's are lower and it compensates with more timing, it doesn't actually change the temperature of the intake charge, so there is no less of a chance for timing pull. If you can't accept that, then continuing this discussion is pointless. What is your definition of MBT? 

Here is some hard data showing that similar results to yours can be obtained without said phenolic spacer without any other gimics/tricks. This is a buddy's log from two years ago, running E85 with a MBC on a cranked WG on a K03S with typical bolt ons, APR 100 octane software, spiking to ~30 psi and tapering to ~22 psi at 7250 rpms, 6* of timing added, and NO insulating gasket/spacer between the intake manifold and head. This was done in the middle of summer in Atlanta, though I don't know the ambient temp. 














DurTTy said:


> i only got it cuz i needed transitional so i could re-use the ATC IM on the AEB head.


 Hopefully that was a temporary solution because that is far from optimal and creates a choke point. 

Doug, I never answered you. The EVO heatshield is not flexible.


----------



## ttorque (Sep 1, 2010)

Could adding a ~.5 spacer negatively affect performance due to changing the injector port alignment to the head intake ports? Thoughts anyone?


----------



## madmax199 (Oct 28, 2009)

20v master said:


> If your goal is to trick the ECU into running more timing, then sure these help that. I'd rather have the software adjusted accordingly. Forget all your timing graphs and before and afters and think about it this way. If you're blocking heat from transferring into the intake manifold, where is that quantity of heat going? It's staying in the head. Keeping heat in the head does nothing to allow more timing advance. This is why I pointed out that a low temp thermostat would be half the price of these gaskets and do more to remove heat from the combustion chamber. Even if you convince the ECU that IAT's are lower and it compensates with more timing, it doesn't actually change the temperature of the intake charge, so there is no less of a chance for timing pull. If you can't accept that, then continuing this discussion is pointless. What is your definition of MBT?
> 
> Here is some hard data showing that similar results to yours can be obtained without said phenolic spacer without any other gimics/tricks. This is a buddy's log from two years ago, running E85 with a MBC on a cranked WG on a K03S with typical bolt ons, APR 100 octane software, spiking to ~30 psi and tapering to ~22 psi at 7250 rpms, 6* of timing added, and NO insulating gasket/spacer between the intake manifold and head. This was done in the middle of summer in Atlanta, though I don't know the ambient temp.
> 
> ...


 Dude, you still haven't posted any hard data of the spacer not doing anything but the before and after graph of the phenolic did and that's a fact. Anyone can fish the net and find a graph that's they did not make and post. The only reason I posted graph of timing is because you asked and was quick to criticize without even reading or paying attention to what was posted. The timing graph you posted is great but I ran that without even E85, just distilled water injection alone so it's good but nothing to be impressed by. 

Just to inform you, MBT is maximum or best timing for torque. The way it works is that timing on any engine is a bell curve with two min and a peak, advancing timing produces power all the way to the peak point of that curve where pushing it more produces less power and dangerously high cylinder pressure, that's what MBT is. Anytime an engine is not limited by pre ignition or knock/detonation(not the same) advancing timing will create power all the way up to MBT, go research it. There is no gimmick or tricks when you manually advance the timing(flash, uni-settings etc) or allow the computer to do it as long as your fuel can take it. If making power safely is a gimmick we are not living in the same world. 

I understand your concern with IAT but what you do not understand is that there is residual heat being transfered from the head to the aluminum manifold making it a heat sink. That residual heat is what impacts the IAT sensor reading whithout having a direct relation to the actual air charge. 

A personal example, because I only talk about stuff that I know. I have a maf controlled Water Injection and at first looking at the logs puzzled me as the cooling registered on the IAT sensor came almost a full thousand RPM later than when injected. I then made an educated guess that the sensor was slow to respond but posting my findings on QW brought me to the conclusion, with the help of some knowlegable members, that residual heat from the manifold had to be overcomed before the sensor registers. A quick change on my maf controller, making the spray come in earlier than it was needed to anticipate the residual heat soak and everything fell in place. I am posting everything that I'm saying about the spacers from personal, tested experiences and I'm not making assumptions based on feel. Do some actual tests on things and you seem pretty smart, I'm convinced that you will come back with the same conclusions. 

I don't feel that it's right to mislead others with non factual impressions and that's why I'm still posting in this thread. This is the kind of thing where you need to take everything you read with a grain of salt and actually dig through the pile to get good factual info.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

madmax199 said:


> Dude, you still haven't posted any hard data of the spacer not doing anything but the before and after graph of the phenolic did and that's a fact. Anyone can fish the net and find a graph that's they did not make and post. The only reason I posted graph of timing is because you asked and was quick to criticize without even reading or paying attention to what was posted. The timing graph you posted is great but I ran that without even E85, just distilled water injection alone so it's good but nothing to be impressed by.


 I did post data showing that similar results were obtainable without a phenolic spacer, which counters your argument that the results you obtained, which aren't a before and after comparison, are dependent on a phenolic spacer. I didn't fish the net at all, I simply went to my personal FTP, which is the site that graph is posted from and is my own. I did read, and saw the info on the link you posted before I ever replied to you, including the before and after temperature plots. You assumed I wasn't paying attention. You ran water injection, which is the equivalent of running the same or even more octane than E85. If anything, the same argument could be applied to your reasoning, aka that you didn't supply a before and after, just your final results. 




madmax199 said:


> Just to inform you, MBT is maximum or best timing for torque. The way it works is that timing on any engine is a bell curve with two min and a peak, advancing timing produces power all the way to the peak point of that curve where pushing it more produces less power and dangerously high cylinder pressure, that's what MBT is. Anytime an engine is not limited by pre ignition or knock/detonation(not the same) advancing timing will create power all the way up to MBT, go research it. There is no gimmick or tricks when you manually advance the timing(flash, uni-settings etc) or allow the computer to do it as long as your fuel can take it. If making power safely is a gimmick we are not living in the same world.


 Just to inform you, I am well aware of what MBT is, but the way you used the term initially was incorrect in its meaning. Denotation of MBT is an average of RMT and LMT, while the real world definition is the timing that produce maximum torque with all other variables held constant and not causing pre-ignition/detonation. While what you say about increasing timing increases power up to a limit, there is a tradeoff between boost where adding additional boost vs timing or vice versa doesn't produce incremental gains over the opposite, ie timing vs boost. Advancing timing isn't a gimmick. Tricking the ECU to read a lower temp than actual to obtain more timing advance is, when the same could be accomplished by thorough tuning of the ECU, something most chip makers don't do. I'd like to hear you reasoning for WHY an appropriate timing curve is bell shaped to know that you understand the whole point here. 



madmax199 said:


> I understand your concern with IAT but what you do not understand is that there is residual heat being transfered from the head to the aluminum manifold making it a heat sink. That residual heat is what impacts the IAT sensor reading whithout having a direct relation to the actual air charge.


 I live in a warm and humid climate (most of the year, it's in the 20's (F) out right now), and I run an appropriate A/A FMIC to deal with this. I understand completely your point about heat transfer, but if the last sentence in the above quote is true, then a similar phenolic spacer on the IAT sensor alone, not the entire intake mani, would accomplish the same thing. 



madmax199 said:


> A personal example, because I only talk about stuff that I know. I have a maf controlled Water Injection and at first looking at the logs puzzled me as the cooling registered on the IAT sensor came almost a full thousand RPM later than when injected. I then made an educated guess that the sensor was slow to respond but posting my findings on QW brought me to the conclusion, with the help of some knowlegable members, that residual heat from the manifold had to be overcomed before the sensor registers. A quick change on my maf controller, making the spray come in earlier than it was needed to anticipate the residual heat soak and everything fell in place. I am posting everything that I'm saying about the spacers from personal, tested experiences and I'm not making assumptions based on feel. Do some actual tests on things and you seem pretty smart, I'm convinced that you will come back with the same conclusions.


 I have tested plenty, I can assure you, which can be seen by the the numerous logs hosted on the same site that the graph I posted is hosted on. While the conclusion you drew seems to be logical on the surface, it's obvious that you didn't step far enough back to consider alternative conclusions. That said, you seem to think the only source of residual heat affecting the IAT sensor is from the manifold itself. You don't think that the dynamic drop in temperature recorded by the sensor, which is far less accurate than say a thermocouple type sensor in terms of reaction time, and as such will never be instant, that occurs once injecting water or meth could be caused by the actual injection affecting the sensor element and is caused only by the conduction through the manifold itself? If not, I suggest you study up on conduction vs convection. 



madmax199 said:


> I don't feel that it's right to mislead others with non factual impressions and that's why I'm still posting in this thread. This is the kind of thing where you need to take everything you read with a grain of salt and actually dig through the pile to get good factual info.


 I agree with everything you said here, but I feel you are blinded by wanting to find gains, not by an objective and scientific approach as well as absolute control of all variables in your "testing." I have nothing to gain by convincing others that these spacers aren't as effective as claimed. I don't own a tuning company nor am I a competitor to the producers of these spacers in any way. Don't believe the hype is all I'm saying. If you'd like to simply agree to disagree at this point, I won't think any less of you or your opinion.


----------



## madmax199 (Oct 28, 2009)

Altough I like a good discussion, it is getting pointless. 
Facts will remain facts and the before and after graph is still there to prove it. 

It is going to be hard for you to argue your way around hard evidence when there was no other variables on the graph and link posted, just the spacer. Unless you can make a case for lower iat reading and increased timing throughout the curve not translating into power it is a lost cause. 

You clearly jumped the gun and asked why E85 and water injection was needed to run the timing graph posted while it was before and after results, just go back to your first reply to my post. 

My simple, forum type, use and definition of MBT is correct. MBT is the most/best timing you can run for power and is independent of boost, fuel type and any other variables and with a mechanical engineering background, you know it. What MBT is going to be for an engine is a result of the combustion chamber and cylinder head design etc. Yes, the fuel used may not be able to reach MBT but it is still the same. E85 for example can take timing up to and past MBT without knocking but MBT has not changed and is still the most/best timing for that engine. 

It looks like we will only agree to disagree and I will give you the last word. I know you well enough through a couple of posts to know that you will not give up altough the evidence is there and backed with hard data going against your assumptions. It was a good discussion and I hope some have benefited from it.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

Regardless of someone else's before and after (someone that sells to the TT community, not the rest of the 1.8T community, paint can intakes, Home Depot MBC's, and other bits I don't find effective), you haven't refuted any of the simple theories I've brought up. Your own timing results you posted aren't a before and after. Neither were mine, but as I said before, the graph I posted shows results similar to yours can be obtained without a phenolic spacer. You also never gave an explanation as to why timing curves are bell shaped, and obviously don't understand that yes, even octane can and will affect the shape of this curve as different fuels have different flame front speeds. Enjoy your spacer.


----------



## Doooglasss (Aug 28, 2009)

madmax199 said:


> It was a good discussion and I hope some have benefited from it.


 Agreed ^^

To be honest 20v, if you browse the modshack website and fotki there is hard data proving that his "paint can intakes" and "home depot boost controllers" work and have proven results. I've owned a boost machine and I can say that it significantly increases boost onset/response and maximum boost. Could you do this with a software tune- definitely, sadly tunes provided for our cars are a one size fits all tune. 

Similarly on his site there are multiple tests with the intake showing lower temps due to it. While this forum LOVES to hate on Steve, he is a very knowledgeable man and has went out of his way to help me with my car personally before I was a customer of his. I know he has done the same for others as well. Probably the best thing about him is that he documents his work very well and shares it with others- a lot of people ignore that step on forums and that's what makes a good community.


----------



## 20v master (May 7, 2009)

FYI, I've known of and read on his fotki since before most you of you had a 1.8T. Yes, a lot of info and good people were lost in the forum switch. Regardless, a 1.8T is a 1.8T no matter what chassis or orientation is it placed in. Having four rings attached the grill of your 1.8T vehicle somehow makes people think the engines are different. And sadly no, the boost tuning you want in the OEM ECU isn't possible as the MAP has a max reading of ~22 psi. Either way, one of my 1.8T's has a 3.5" velocity stack attached to a 3.5" pipe behind the passenger headlight feeding a 35R, the other has stock everything other than a chip and it will remain that way. I made 210whp/275wtq with a K03S about 5 years ago and gave up on eeking out every last HP from that minature turbo. I realize others will continue to do that so if his parts work for you and you like them, more power to you. 

PS, you edited your post and removed the part about forum software switch.


----------



## l88m22vette (Mar 2, 2006)

DougLoBue said:


> Could you do this with a software tune- definitely, sadly tunes provided for our cars are a one size fits all tune.


 Not with Maestro7


----------



## Doooglasss (Aug 28, 2009)

l88m22vette said:


> Not with Maestro7


 I'll be on board soon! I need to ditch this uni 830cc tune before it destroys my motor...


----------



## l88m22vette (Mar 2, 2006)

Don't drool on the keyboard, you might short it out  

 
(its a clicture!)


----------



## DurTTy (Aug 14, 2007)

DougLoBue said:


> I'll be on board soon! I need to ditch this uni 830cc tune before it destroys my motor...


Chris Tapp all the way bro.


----------

