Air intake evaluation

[anotero]

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

But our cars don't run on intakes alone. They run on the complete engine-turbo-intake-fuel pump-etc. systems. If the remainder of the system cannot make use of the increased flow rate from an intake, it does not matter if the intake can swallow an elephant. It's like a converging nozzle -- the flow at the neck will choke no matter what.

 

[nonegiven]

But our cars don't run on intakes alone. They run on the complete engine-turbo-intake-fuel pump-etc. systems. If the remainder of the system cannot make use of the increased flow rate from an intake, it does not matter if the intake can swallow an elephant. It's like a converging nozzle -- the flow at the neck will choke no matter what.

Correct. The only benefit from dropping resistance to flow is slightly faster spool and less wear on the turbo. Both are good things but aren't as sexy as flow benches and ridiculous HP claims.

 

[nonegiven]

Also wanted to add a thanks to the OP for doing the testing. We can debate how useful it is in different situations but it's great to have 3rd party data and not have to rely on the manufacturers.

 

[MyGolfMk7]

But our cars don't run on intakes alone. They run on the complete engine-turbo-intake-fuel pump-etc. systems. If the remainder of the system cannot make use of the increased flow rate from an intake, it does not matter if the intake can swallow an elephant. It's like a converging nozzle -- the flow at the neck will choke no matter what.

I made that point just a couple of posts above yours:

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.

It would also be useful to consider what is going to take place on the vehicle. The engine will pull the same amount of air from any of these intakes. What ends up being different amongst the intakes is the amount of pressure drop that the intake causes. The restriction prior to the compressor of different intakes varies corresponding to the air flow ranking, an intake that will flow more at a fixed depression will cause less pressure drop then one that can flow less, when they are operating at the same flow rate.

It is two sides of the same coin, I just test to a fixed depression because it is easier to do than a fixed airflow.

 

[MyGolfMk7]

Ran another variation on the stock intake.

 

[nonegiven]

Ran another variation on the stock intake.

I wonder if the air channel would be a larger restriction if the stock airbox flowed better to start with. Something like the S&B might benefit more than the stock intake by opening up the air channel.

 

[MyGolfMk7]

I wonder if the air channel would be a larger restriction if the stock airbox flowed better to start with. Something like the S&B might benefit more than the stock intake by opening up the air channel.

At a higher airflow there will be more of a difference in airflow between the unmodified and modified part, but that would also be the case if more airflow was pulled through the stock setup than what I tested using.

The restriction caused by the part isn't changing, not like if the opening was contracting at higher airflow, which might be the case with a soft hose.

There's more benefit to opening up the part as higher flowing air intakes are used, assuming the intake uses air that passes through that part.

 

[anotero]

Correct. The only benefit from dropping resistance to flow is slightly faster spool and less wear on the turbo. Both are good things but aren't as sexy as flow benches and ridiculous HP claims.

As long as the passage to the turbo can accommodate the increased flow rate, which is what dropping the resistance does. I'm all for it, don't get me wrong.

 

[anotero]

I made that point just a couple of posts above yours:







It would also be useful to consider what is going to take place on the vehicle. The engine will pull the same amount of air from any of these intakes. What ends up being different amongst the intakes is the amount of pressure drop that the intake causes. The restriction prior to the compressor of different intakes varies corresponding to the air flow ranking, an intake that will flow more at a fixed depression will cause less pressure drop then one that can flow less, when they are operating at the same flow rate.



It is two sides of the same coin, I just test to a fixed depression because it is easier to do than a fixed airflow.

I missed that bold part, my bad.

 

[MyGolfMk7]

As long as the passage to the turbo can accommodate the increased flow rate, which is what dropping the resistance does. I'm all for it, don't get me wrong.

Reducing the pressure drop is analogous to using these to move furniture. If the turbocharger has to do less work to draw the air in the benefits extend throughout the operating range.

 

[CFGTI]

Reducing the pressure drop is analogous to using these to move furniture. If the turbocharger has to do less work to draw the air in the benefits extend throughout the operating range.

No doubt its working less and being more efficient. But is it enough to matter? E.g. make dyno gains bigger than the margin of error. Or increase the area under the curve.

 

[Twist1]

It would be cool if you could take your findings and see if a dynojet backed up the rankings.

 

[Faceman]

It would be cool if you could take your findings and see if a dynojet backed up the rankings.

Since he's doing enough work, it would be nice if someone else did the dyno part.

 

[The Fed]

Doesn't matter if the flow out the turbo isn't improved.

 

[MyGolfMk7]

No doubt its working less and being more efficient. But is it enough to matter? E.g. make dyno gains bigger than the margin of error. Or increase the area under the curve.

Perhaps not. Maybe it will depend on the car setup. It would also depend on what someone defines as being enough change to matter. It could also be part of a larger strategy to optimize the entire intake where it's the accumulation of gains from multiple parts that is the goal.

It would be cool if you could take your findings and see if a dynojet backed up the rankings.

I agree.

Doesn't matter if the flow out the turbo isn't improved.

Why do you think that?