Air intake evaluation

[MyGolfMk7]

Induct Performance provided me with their air intake to evaluate along with their turbo inlet pipe.

Posting this as a new thread since I expect to look at some other products and aspects of intake performance.

 

[PacDawg]

Is it fair to say that the reason for more flow with the induct performance intake compared to APR is due to it being a 3.5" system?

 

[MyGolfMk7]

Is it fair to say that the reason for more flow with the induct performance intake compared to APR is due to it being a 3.5" system?

I don't know.

I hadn't looked too closely at the APR intake design but it seems that I might be able to separate the filter and hose/pipe section from the filter housing and test that portion as an 'open' intake style. Doing so may give some insight into whether it is the filter housing or the smaller pipe that joins the filter to the inlet elbow that is driving the difference.

 

[GhostGTI2]

Looks nice.

 

[PacDawg]

I don't know.

I hadn't looked too closely at the APR intake design but it seems that I might be able to separate the filter and hose/pipe section from the filter housing and test that portion as an 'open' intake style. Doing so may give some insight into whether it is the filter housing or the smaller pipe that joins the filter to the inlet elbow that is driving the difference.

Thatd be a good test.

 

[MyGolfMk7]

Thatd be a good test.

The cover makes a difference in the flow test.

 

[Cptnjosh]

Intakes

Very nice bar graph. But what is this “28” of H2O”. Is the test done under water? I am probably missing something here. Enlighten me please...

Aside from that, I wonder if the OEM test rating was done with a high flow filter and snowgrate removal? Probably not.

It might sound better, but I will go out on a limb here and say it offers no performance benefits over a slightly modified stock airbox. Probably warmer air as well. The question is, how many CFM can the engine in a tuned form actually use?

 

[nonegiven]

It might sound better, but I will go out on a limb here and say it offers no performance benefits over a slightly modified stock airbox. Probably warmer air as well. The question is, how many CFM can the engine in a tuned form actually use?

This. Intakes are just rice for these cars, especially an open intake like this one.

 

[GroceryGTIer]

This. Intakes are just rice for these cars, especially an open intake like this one.

If it’s pulling more cfm, it would offer something, even if by a small amount.

 

[MyGolfMk7]

Very nice bar graph. But what is this “28” of H2O”. Is the test done under water? I am probably missing something here. Enlighten me please...

Aside from that, I wonder if the OEM test rating was done with a high flow filter and snowgrate removal? Probably not.

It might sound better, but I will go out on a limb here and say it offers no performance benefits over a slightly modified stock airbox. Probably warmer air as well. The question is, how many CFM can the engine in a tuned form actually use?

It is a measure of pressure. Some flow benches will use a stationary manometer which contains liquid, hence the reference to water. I have a digital manometer, but the unit of measure is the same.

If a part can flow more air at the same pressure drop, that is a performance gain. Whether the rest of the system can capitalize on the additional performance and how else performance might be measured could be considerations to make, but they are outside the scope of the test.

Within the margin of error of the testing the Induct intake flows 20% more than a stock airbox with aFe filter and snow grate removed.

 

[GroceryGTIer]

It is a measure of pressure. Some flow benches will use a stationary manometer which contains liquid, hence the reference to water. I have a digital manometer, but the unit of measure is the same.

If a part can flow more air at the same pressure drop, that is a performance gain. Whether the rest of the system can capitalize on the additional performance and how else performance might be measured could be considerations to make, but they are outside the scope of the test.

Within the margin of error of the testing the Induct intake flows 20% more than a stock airbox with aFe filter and snow grate removed.

So a gain is a gain... plus more air is always a plus as far as I know

 

[GroceryGTIer]

It is a measure of pressure. Some flow benches will use a stationary manometer which contains liquid, hence the reference to water. I have a digital manometer, but the unit of measure is the same.

If a part can flow more air at the same pressure drop, that is a performance gain. Whether the rest of the system can capitalize on the additional performance and how else performance might be measured could be considerations to make, but they are outside the scope of the test.

Within the margin of error of the testing the Induct intake flows 20% more than a stock airbox with aFe filter and snow grate removed.

Man, you’ve got all sorts of good info on turbos and everything else lol good stuff ?? I’m curious which turbo is best for the money.... reliability being a big thing.

 

[Scala]

If a part can flow more air at the same pressure drop, that is a performance gain.

If a part can flow more air at the same pressure drop, that is NOT a performance gain but a flow gain.

A Stoichiometric AFR requires the correct amount of air and fuel to produce a complete combustion event. For gasoline engines, the stoichiometric, A/F ratio is 14.7:1, which means 14.7 parts of air to one part of fuel.

No more fuel = no more performance.

 

[MyGolfMk7]

If a part can flow more air at the same pressure drop, that is NOT a performance gain but a flow gain.

A Stoichiometric AFR requires the correct amount of air and fuel to produce a complete combustion event. For gasoline engines, the stoichiometric, A/F ratio is 14.7:1, which means 14.7 parts of air to one part of fuel.

No more fuel = no more performance.

I am measuring the performance of air intake systems, not engines.

 

[GhostGTI2]

I am measuring the performance of air intake systems, not engines.

Right, I think he's just highlighting that more air flow in and of itself does not equate to more performance.

I get your comment though. Specifically speaking about the air intake, it was higher performing because it flowed better.