I apologize as I have been remiss. I received the new SCC magazine nearly a week ago, Feb 2009, Vol 21, No.02and this little article in the backof it, Test Bench, page 80 to be exact,really caught my eye. With all the talk of installing new intakes around here, which is the best, etc,I thought this was highly significant.
The waythe article iswritten, difficult to fully understand for a non-engineer such as myself,I had to read it twice to make sure what they were trying to say. Many of the graphs included are so jumbled together that they too are hard to understand. Perhaps this is why they did not publish this article sooner and relegated it to the back pages of this issue?
Here"s my review of the article and I hope I understood their findingscorrectly:
The base car they used was a stock 2006 WRX with some miles on it using the stock-box.
They measured each of the three intakes using a centerline, not outside measurement.
The three intakes are:
1) The stock air-box and filter, 16.5" long.
2) AnInjen CAI, 30.75" in length
3) A K&N Typhoon SRI, 7.75" in length.

Not surprisingly, they discovered that different length intakes produce different results based on their resonant frequencies.
A Short Ramis liable toproduce the best HP up high in the rev range, but the trade-off is less HP and torque down low, and lost torque in the upper range as well.
They also discovered the CAI produces the best torque characteristics while also improving HP, but not as much as the SRI.
The stock box was the best of both worlds. It"s medium length producing the best HP and torque for every day driving on the street, but is also a trade off in max HP and bottom end torque. They claim thiscould be improved upon significantly if the air/fuel mixture was leaned out. That the stock, SAFE, fuel map settings ran the car richer thanis good for producing the best power and mileage.
In fact, they also claimed that one of the most significant things about an aftermarket intake was that it fooled the MAF sensor into thinking that less air was passing through it and therefore causing the PCM/ECU to trim the mixture.
Isn"t that interesting? We are all spending our hard earned dollars (me included,) up to $500for the morecostly ones,primarily just to lean out the mixture slightly and modify (tune, if you will) resonant frequency. Add to that just how small the actual improvemnents areand I have to ask, is it really worth it?

 

Thanks Virgin, excellent write-up. Can't wait to hear what they say about exhausts. Signatures are going to look aweful skimpy if none of this stuff is worth it.

 

Well, of course they were testing a turbo car, and not all react the same. Some will produce, better power others will not. But I have thought for a long time that these companies charge an awful lot for a polished piece of tubing w/a universal air filter on one end of it.
Of course I am over simplifying to make the point, but how much could it actually cost to produce a CAI for a small gain in HP, or a small loss in torque?

I have also wondered for a while if the power increase people claim to feel in their Butt Dyno isn"t mostly in their Head Dyno. I know I noticed an improvement with the exhaust system in mine, but other mods, including the CAI, I noticed almost nothing at all.

 

i have just noticed mainly noise with all of my mods. there have been marginal increases, but tuning is where it really starts.

 

That is kinda" the way I feel about most mods too. That"s why I question their validity and cost.
Of course it didn"t used to be like that, but these modern, computer controlled EVERYTHING cars..... [:@]

 

1 thing you have to take into consideration is how exactly the programmers from each company design there software that pertains to each of there vehicles. Some companies might embrace letting customers add aftermarket parts to there cars so the software and designs wont be too much of a problem tuning. Each vehicle is different, you have to break it down in terms of how the car is classified, whether it be a sports car which might be more forgiving when adding aftermarket components, or an econobox which will prolly give you more trouble than its worth when trying to add go fast parts.

I could on and on giving examples of "if you do this to this car it works but if you do this to this car it wont but it worked on the other car"

With our cars (Mz3) it comes down to this

1. ITS NOT A FORD, so parts from a fukkus wont work (just wanted to put it out there)
2. To make ANY noticable differnece tuning IS required which only can be done with a piggyback
3. Also drivetrain parts from a speed 3 will not work with us (thats such bs)
4. Should have bought a 90's honda if you wanted to mod econobox w/o headaches (dont hit me >.&lt

I have no idea how i got all that from a thread about intake tests

p.s 1.6-2.5l obd2 bs...thats all