The New APR Open Intake System is Here!

[El_bigote_AJ]

That's pretty weak. I'm not a fan of Navi's demeanor, but I'll hear him out on his "annoyance" with the tests.

Getting back on topic, it's nice to see a company introduce another product option.

To be fair... you hear others out so you can respond.

 

[Ostateballer]

I’m sure this intake is just fine. I’ve had no problems with other APR products; and they are great quality. My only complaint is the archaic tuning process - having to go into shops and pay an hour labor for tuning.

 

[GTI_Owner]

You're kidding right? If an intercooler is tested, why isn't the temperature of the air entering the intercooler measured and the temperature exiting the intercooler measured. Isn't that the whole purpose of having an intercooler? If the only thing you are looking at is flow of air through metal, then you're missing it. Let me know when he "installs" all the parts he tests and shows the temperatures as well as datalogs. Then maybe I'll care.

I feel like I'm the only person who looks for information outside of this forum. (That's an exaggeration, I see that other people do as well.)

IC street data.

 

[Navi]

I've heard good things about the do88

 

[billbadass]

I was commenting about how the flowbench is a measurement device and gave three other examples of measurement devices. When you reply with, "All true except for the last part.", and the last part was mentioning the dyno, that was how it came across.

The second part of your comment is unrelated to what I was talking about, but I'll take a shot at answering it.

APR

034Motorsport

Revo

Eventuri

aFe

I'm guessing that you didn't try looking for one?

all of these except for the Eventuri intake test look to have been done with the hood open which favors the open intakes and is not representative of how they will perform in the real world. good collection of charts though and interesting, a few in there i had not seen before

 

[StorableComa]

https://www.ebay.com/itm/VW-MK7-Gol...e=STRK:MEBIDX:IT&_trksid=p2060353.m1438.l2649

Now just get a nice filter and you're set.

 

[FB-GTI]

Well aware. Terrible test. 3% wouldn't produce the gains we see in the real world. This is because the test is skewed. They test the stock airbox without the front inlet. The front airbox has an opening larger than the inlet's opening when not attached, so it flows more on the bench. Also, the bench numbers are just plain offer - they literally measure our parts HIGHER than what we advertise. Probably not using the correct inlet size at the bench, which will throw any oversized TIPs off.

Arin@APR

"Terrible test" because the results are different from yours? Where is the information about your collection of "real world" data?

"Test is skewed". Are you referring to this piece needing to be attached? Testing performed with the front part attached showed that a common modification to the part produced the same reading as when the duct was removed. What are APRs findings when doing this test?

flow bench numbers "higher than what you advertise". Testing at a different depression will produce different airflow readings for the same part.

"The manufacturer, APR, provides airflow results on their product page. They provide test results at a maximum depression of 24″ of H2O. At that pressure the APR results show an airflow of approximately 468 CFM. If the results are scaled up to a test depression of 28″ of H2O the airflow is approximately 505 CFM which correlates well with the 501 CFM reading that was obtained with the direct 28″ of H2O reading made during this test."

 

[GTI_Owner]

all of these except for the Eventuri intake test look to have been done with the hood open which favors the open intakes and is not representative of how they will perform in the real world. good collection of charts though and interesting, a few in there i had not seen before

To be fair to the vendors, getting dyno results on the street would be quite a feat.

 

[Arin@APR]

The flow bench methodology of testing the closed systems if flawed as I outlined above. The resulting data certainly doesn't match what we see on the dyno, and in the real world. Flow data is all listed on page one for the closed and open system in various configurations. The reported data is at 28" H2O. Here it is again:


Flow Bench and Power Testing



The factory intake system simply can’t match the performance of our intake system. The full factory frontal airbox only flows 521 CFM at 28” of H2O. We improved this by 60% with our open airbox, which flows 833 CFM by comparison! However, it’s important to always look at the intake system as a whole as flow numbers alone don’t always speak to the broader picture. The factory turbocharger can only flow just under 400 CFM through the factory opening, and any intake system will lessen maximum flow. The goal is to minimize all restrictions before the turbocharger as much as possible to maximize performance. The full factory system brings this down to 275 CFM, or 31% less. The full APR System (Open airbox, rear pipe, and turbo inlet pipe), bring this down to 345 CFM, which is only 13% less, or a 25% improvement over stock! This directly translates to more power you can feel. Our full bolt on APR Tuned S3 saw max gains of 12 AWHP and 13 AWFT-LBS of torque using the full intake system compared to stock! These are solid gains that make a noticeable difference in performance!

 

[Jovian]

Do you plan on getting a CARB cert for it like the Neuspeed open element intake?

 

[Arin@APR]

We currently have Memo1A and are seeking CARB.

 

[Ezekiel81923]

You're kidding right? If an intercooler is tested, why isn't the temperature of the air entering the intercooler measured and the temperature exiting the intercooler measured. Isn't that the whole purpose of having an intercooler? Let me know when he "installs" all the parts he tests and shows the temperatures as well as datalogs. Then maybe I'll care.

It is.

And he does.

I get why people don't like him / his site / his tests / etc. But his site has evolved and he measures quite a number of things on different products. Sure, it started with airflow bench tests, but he's gradually incorporating first hand driving experience with datalogs and actual cooling of IC's and the like. He's only one person. He's (presumably) unbiased and discloses far more than a marketing team that's releasing a new product would disclose about the tests. I for one would not have the time, patience, or money to do what he is doing. And apparently neither would any of you.

The reality is, short of installing every configuration of every product on the same car on the same day at the same time at the same temperature and logging every one on the same road 3 times with 60-100 and 60-130 times on every tire at every width you can fit or having access to one dyno for an infinite amount of time, AND all else being equal, you'll never make everyone happy. You'll never know the perfect combination. There will always be a "yea, but" out there.

With that said, I DO come from a platform that had very little aftermarket support for way too long, so I appreciate everything APR has done and continues to do for the community. But, they are more expensive than most other offerings and are not unequivocally the best to back up that price, so I personally do not feel a need to run their parts.

 

[Navi]

It is.

And he does.

I get why people don't like him / his site / his tests / etc. But his site has evolved and he measures quite a number of things on different products. Sure, it started with airflow bench tests, but he's gradually incorporating first hand driving experience with datalogs and actual cooling of IC's and the like. He's only one person. He's (presumably) unbiased and discloses far more than a marketing team that's releasing a new product would disclose about the tests. I for one would not have the time, patience, or money to do what he is doing. And apparently neither would any of you.

The reality is, short of installing every configuration of every product on the same car on the same day at the same time at the same temperature and logging every one on the same road 3 times with 60-100 and 60-130 times on every tire at every width you can fit or having access to one dyno for an infinite amount of time, AND all else being equal, you'll never make everyone happy. You'll never know the perfect combination. There will always be a "yea, but" out there.

With that said, I DO come from a platform that had very little aftermarket support for way too long, so I appreciate everything APR has done and continues to do for the community. But, they are more expensive than most other offerings and are not unequivocally the best to back up that price, so I personally do not feel a need to run their parts.

I like this logical response

 

[Ezekiel81923]

I thought you might

 

[FB-GTI]

The flow bench methodology of testing the closed systems if flawed as I outlined above. The resulting data certainly doesn't match what we see on the dyno, and in the real world. Flow data is all listed on page one for the closed and open system in various configurations. The reported data is at 28" H2O. Here it is again:


Flow Bench and Power Testing



The factory intake system simply can’t match the performance of our intake system. The full factory frontal airbox only flows 521 CFM at 28” of H2O. We improved this by 60% with our open airbox, which flows 833 CFM by comparison! However, it’s important to always look at the intake system as a whole as flow numbers alone don’t always speak to the broader picture. The factory turbocharger can only flow just under 400 CFM through the factory opening, and any intake system will lessen maximum flow. The goal is to minimize all restrictions before the turbocharger as much as possible to maximize performance. The full factory system brings this down to 275 CFM, or 31% less. The full APR System (Open airbox, rear pipe, and turbo inlet pipe), bring this down to 345 CFM, which is only 13% less, or a 25% improvement over stock! This directly translates to more power you can feel. Our full bolt on APR Tuned S3 saw max gains of 12 AWHP and 13 AWFT-LBS of torque using the full intake system compared to stock! These are solid gains that make a noticeable difference in performance!

You did not outline anything above, you made several claims that are still unsupported.

I have not seen anybody say there is a 1-to-1 correlation between flow bench airflow readings and dyno results, that would be unwise for several reasons.

Marketing statement about your open intake is a different topic. The testing above references the closed system, below is the chart for the closed APR system. (I am curious about how these previous results match with your latest, which green line above is the intake setup shown on the chart below?)