Author Topic: VWR Intake disappointing  (Read 15362 times)

Offline r5gtt

  • Just look at my post count
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 353
  • -Receive: 343
  • Posts: 5592
Re: VWR Intake disappointing
« Reply #30 on: August 01, 2017, 04:24:39 PM »
If the canister needs a dent in it then that should have been done at factory as a design not a flaw for that kind of money don't you think?.

Just saying :smiley:

Exactly..... it's what I was saying further back.  It was designed in a hurry to get it out to market as quickly as possible to maximize profit.  There are only so many MK5s they can sell this kit for, so the quicker they get them out of the door before people notice the flaws, the better.

Racingline constantly bang on about their methodical, extensive R&D and OEM quality approach to their products..... but the reality is they just rebadge existing products.  Like my street dampers for example, they started life orange and RL sprayed them black.  And with this air filter, they took ITG's kit made for racing (hence no real concern about fouling other parts) and just anodized the canister and pretty much changed nothing else....and added a massive tax to it.    Their "R&D" clearly missed the fact it snaps off the coolant feed to the turbo.....so not important then, really  :stupid:

Sorry, not trying to offend any VWR owners...... this kind of thing just really bugs me because I can't believe such stupidity exists when £450 is changing hands.
yea pudding I did rear that earlier in the post and thats exactly why people shouldn't buy them imho, why fund the greedy blood suckers when they can't be asked to resolve the issues customers are having and rectify the flaw as they'll still profit from these ugly boxes  :sick: yes I don't like anything boxed but by personal choice  :happy2:

As much as I don't like open cones, the Revo does at least fit in the engine properly, providing you don't have xenons!

The VWR is a good intake for performance and refinement, but I'm not paying them £450 to bug fix the product for them!  They should be paying us to do that.
revo?  :thinking: would have fitted mine but the pipe was way too large for my liking as it's too close to everything leaving no gaps and the filter doesn't fit nice imho. I'm happy with the ramair 70mm  :love:

Offline Scottymon

  • Just look at my post count
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 82
  • -Receive: 125
  • Posts: 2139
  • UnNaturally Aspirated
  • My Ride: http://www.voodish.co.uk/misc/6n/6n-alive1.jpg
Re: VWR Intake disappointing
« Reply #31 on: August 01, 2017, 06:44:12 PM »
The best OEM looking CAI imo was the Volant from the US, had it for a while :happy2:


Offline Shoduchi

  • Just look at my post count
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 215
  • -Receive: 414
  • Posts: 4052
  • My Ride: http://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,95592.msg952042.html
Re: VWR Intake disappointing
« Reply #32 on: August 01, 2017, 07:40:11 PM »
The best OEM looking CAI imo was the Volant from the US, had it for a while :happy2:



Best looking indeed but not the best performance wise. :wink:

Offline Scottymon

  • Just look at my post count
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 82
  • -Receive: 125
  • Posts: 2139
  • UnNaturally Aspirated
  • My Ride: http://www.voodish.co.uk/misc/6n/6n-alive1.jpg
Re: VWR Intake disappointing
« Reply #33 on: August 01, 2017, 07:44:12 PM »
The best OEM looking CAI imo was the Volant from the US, had it for a while :happy2:



Best looking indeed but not the best performance wise. :wink:

I concur; but it was quite quiet for those wanting that sort of thing... there were some wooshes etc but not Spencer Wilding in the Glovebox and it DID make more power top end with a tune...

Tbh with the snapped sensor on the HPFP I have at the moment due to the OEM Airbox,........ I wished I'd kept the Volant!

Offline r5gtt

  • Just look at my post count
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 353
  • -Receive: 343
  • Posts: 5592
Re: VWR Intake disappointing
« Reply #34 on: August 01, 2017, 08:17:15 PM »
The best OEM looking CAI imo was the Volant from the US, had it for a while :happy2:


:happy2:

Offline r5gtt

  • Just look at my post count
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 353
  • -Receive: 343
  • Posts: 5592
Re: VWR Intake disappointing
« Reply #35 on: August 01, 2017, 08:25:38 PM »
The best OEM looking CAI imo was the Volant from the US, had it for a while :happy2:



Best looking indeed but not the best performance wise. :wink:

I concur; but it was quite quiet for those wanting that sort of thing... there were some wooshes etc but not Spencer Wilding in the Glovebox and it DID make more power top end with a tune...

Tbh with the snapped sensor on the HPFP I have at the moment due to the OEM Airbox,........ I wished I'd kept the Volant!
how much did u sell it for as that's one I really liked but the price was quite high  :surprised:

Offline Pudding

  • Just look at my post count
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 2
  • -Receive: 409
  • Posts: 4815
Re: VWR Intake disappointing
« Reply #36 on: August 02, 2017, 09:47:45 AM »
I like the look of the Volant!   Some thought went into that.

I bet there's not even 5hp peak difference between any of the aftermarket intakes.  VWR claim 25hp and 500rpm reduction in lag, but I've not seen any data to verify that.
Black Edition 30 with manually selected cogs, a beefier clutch, some extra boost and them Whiteline thingies, otherwise standard.

Offline Shoduchi

  • Just look at my post count
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 215
  • -Receive: 414
  • Posts: 4052
  • My Ride: http://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,95592.msg952042.html
Re: VWR Intake disappointing
« Reply #37 on: August 02, 2017, 11:17:45 AM »
I like the look of the Volant!   Some thought went into that.

I bet there's not even 5hp peak difference between any of the aftermarket intakes.  VWR claim 25hp and 500rpm reduction in lag, but I've not seen any data to verify that.

For what my car made from changing the panel filter to the closed cone intake I can see a 20 BHP of difference. My engine's output is now limited by the octane grade of the fuel. With higher octane fuel it would make near 370 BHP and with race fuel it would be easier to make 380.

With the remap my K04 peaks at 2500 rpm with the closed cone filter, while before the remap it only peaked at 3000 rpm. With the panel filter and the remap my turbo peaked at around 2600 rpm, so there's a difference but very subtle.

Offline Scottymon

  • Just look at my post count
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 82
  • -Receive: 125
  • Posts: 2139
  • UnNaturally Aspirated
  • My Ride: http://www.voodish.co.uk/misc/6n/6n-alive1.jpg
Re: VWR Intake disappointing
« Reply #38 on: August 02, 2017, 11:37:41 AM »
The best OEM looking CAI imo was the Volant from the US, had it for a while :happy2:



Best looking indeed but not the best performance wise. :wink:

I concur; but it was quite quiet for those wanting that sort of thing... there were some wooshes etc but not Spencer Wilding in the Glovebox and it DID make more power top end with a tune...

Tbh with the snapped sensor on the HPFP I have at the moment due to the OEM Airbox,........ I wished I'd kept the Volant!
how much did u sell it for as that's one I really liked but the price was quite high  :surprised:

I bought it direct from the US in 2013 for about £190 delivered. Sold it to lad in Ireland for £155 sometime later  :happy2:

Offline Pudding

  • Just look at my post count
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 2
  • -Receive: 409
  • Posts: 4815
Re: VWR Intake disappointing
« Reply #39 on: August 02, 2017, 11:51:29 AM »
I like the look of the Volant!   Some thought went into that.

I bet there's not even 5hp peak difference between any of the aftermarket intakes.  VWR claim 25hp and 500rpm reduction in lag, but I've not seen any data to verify that.

For what my car made from changing the panel filter to the closed cone intake I can see a 20 BHP of difference. My engine's output is now limited by the octane grade of the fuel. With higher octane fuel it would make near 370 BHP and with race fuel it would be easier to make 380.

With the remap my K04 peaks at 2500 rpm with the closed cone filter, while before the remap it only peaked at 3000 rpm. With the panel filter and the remap my turbo peaked at around 2600 rpm, so there's a difference but very subtle.

Not bad at all  :happy2:

Do you 'feel' the power and reduced spool time on your bum dyno?
Black Edition 30 with manually selected cogs, a beefier clutch, some extra boost and them Whiteline thingies, otherwise standard.

Offline Shoduchi

  • Just look at my post count
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 215
  • -Receive: 414
  • Posts: 4052
  • My Ride: http://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,95592.msg952042.html
Re: VWR Intake disappointing
« Reply #40 on: August 02, 2017, 12:18:59 PM »
I like the look of the Volant!   Some thought went into that.

I bet there's not even 5hp peak difference between any of the aftermarket intakes.  VWR claim 25hp and 500rpm reduction in lag, but I've not seen any data to verify that.

For what my car made from changing the panel filter to the closed cone intake I can see a 20 BHP of difference. My engine's output is now limited by the octane grade of the fuel. With higher octane fuel it would make near 370 BHP and with race fuel it would be easier to make 380.

With the remap my K04 peaks at 2500 rpm with the closed cone filter, while before the remap it only peaked at 3000 rpm. With the panel filter and the remap my turbo peaked at around 2600 rpm, so there's a difference but very subtle.

Not bad at all  :happy2:

Do you 'feel' the power and reduced spool time on your bum dyno?
The spool is pretty much the same with the panel filter and the closed cone filter, but I did notice a better engine response when under heavy accelerations. So the remap made the biggest difference on the spool response.

On top rpm, which means after the 6k rpm, it's a marked difference. The engine keeps pulling much stronger. :smiley:

Offline r5gtt

  • Just look at my post count
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 353
  • -Receive: 343
  • Posts: 5592
Re: VWR Intake disappointing
« Reply #41 on: August 02, 2017, 11:13:40 PM »
The best OEM looking CAI imo was the Volant from the US, had it for a while :happy2:



Best looking indeed but not the best performance wise. :wink:

I concur; but it was quite quiet for those wanting that sort of thing... there were some wooshes etc but not Spencer Wilding in the Glovebox and it DID make more power top end with a tune...

Tbh with the snapped sensor on the HPFP I have at the moment due to the OEM Airbox,........ I wished I'd kept the Volant!
how much did u sell it for as that's one I really liked but the price was quite high  :surprised:

I bought it direct from the US in 2013 for about £190 delivered. Sold it to lad in Ireland for £155 sometime later  :happy2:
thats silly cheap as I've seen the price a lot more than that  :surprised:

Offline Pudding

  • Just look at my post count
  • ******
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 2
  • -Receive: 409
  • Posts: 4815
Re: VWR Intake disappointing
« Reply #42 on: August 07, 2017, 09:33:27 PM »
OK, so I bought one of these kits to see what kind of problems you guys are having, and to satisfy my own curiosity  :smiley:

The amount of chopping and filing I had to do to get this thing to fit was hilarious  :grin:

It really is an embarrassingly poor piece of Mickey mouse engineering.  Let's run through the issues one by one:

1) Not an issue with the intake itself, but for some reason there is was a MK7 R600 silicon pipe in my box.  Why that was there, I have no idea! 

2) The MAF sensor literally didn't fit in the intake pipe.  I had to file out the hole for clearance  :surprised:

3) Once I'd done that and the sensor fitted through the hole, the weather seal wasn't pulled down by the screws, double  :surprised: :surprised:

I kid you not, I had to file the profile of the MAF into the intake pipe to get it to seal properly, otherwise sh1t loads of unmetered air would have leaked past the loose seal.  You can probably see signs of my handy work here......



4) Then I had to trim ~10mm off the N80 valve's hose, otherwise big rubbage!  Could probably do with a bit more trimming off but as it stands now, there is no tension on the plastic elbow thingy.



5) And then of course, the famous coolant elbow issue.  Firstly I released the clamp on the rad top hose and clocked it round a bit to relieve the tension off the bottom of the canister (yet another bit of shonkiness).  This gave a 'little' more clearance for the fragile Tee off, but the only way I could get enough room for that was to not fit the air scoop on the grille.

This is as good as I could get it.  Approx 15mm clearance.



6) The aforementioned deleted grille scoop.  Without doing this, the canister rubs on the Tee off permanently.  Enough engine rocking will snap it off in time.  I also had to trim the grille scoop to get that to fit properly as well  :grin:





7)  The silly noises it makes  :doh:  OMG tt sounds ridiculous, like a dirty phone caller breathing heavily down a drain pipe  :grin:  Maybe if I was 15 years younger I'd appreciate it, but people with open intakes?!? WTF, how the hell do you put up with it? It's embarrassing  :grin:

When I saw all this sh1t, I felt like chucking it back in the box and sending it back, but I'd already cut the DV return elbow into the TIP and made other marks on the kit trial fitting it.  Plus the thought of having to explain all these problems to someone on the phone filled me with a due sense of exhaustion and dread, so I persevered with it and got it in.

I will revisit this with some choice modifications to make it fit PROPERLY, but for now, it's functional and isn't going to snap that hose off  :happy2:

So, ignoring all that shoddiness for a moment.... as an intake, does it actually work?  I must concede.....hell yeah, it does  :happy2:  Immediately noticeable improvements.  Sharper throttle response everywhere and kicks harder in boost.  Top end fees a bit more eager too.

Had I known fitment would be THAT bad prior to buying it, and given the weird and embarrassing noises, would I still buy it?  Absolutely not.  It's tragically bad and VWR should be ashamed of themselves for releasing such a poorly developed product onto the market.  Remember, this is a £450 intake!!  :grin:

Maybe I got a B grade special (it happens to me all the frickin time!), but it's there now and I'll keep it there.  Luckily I have the skills and tools to correct this sort of thing, but should I have had to?  I pity anyone who didn't notice the things I did and ends up stranded and crap running due to the ill-fitting MAF sensor.

I'll report back with the improvements in due course  :happy2: 
Black Edition 30 with manually selected cogs, a beefier clutch, some extra boost and them Whiteline thingies, otherwise standard.

Offline 99hagued

  • Always Involved
  • ****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 4
  • -Receive: 23
  • Posts: 202
Re: VWR Intake disappointing
« Reply #43 on: August 07, 2017, 10:23:42 PM »
I had every problem you have listed fitting mine absolutely shocking for the money this costs

Offline 99hagued

  • Always Involved
  • ****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 4
  • -Receive: 23
  • Posts: 202
Re: VWR Intake disappointing
« Reply #44 on: August 07, 2017, 10:26:13 PM »
Does yours not knock with no front mounting bracket pudding?