MK5 Golf GTI
All Things Mk5 => Mk5 General Area => Topic started by: john_o on July 30, 2009, 09:07:52 pm
-
:happy2: :pomppomp:
forge say around 4 weeks from today ......
only issue may be the cost :surprised:
-
We asked them at inters how much and they wouldn't even give us a ball park figure. :chicken:
Its got to be something around the price of its competitors me thinks. My guess is £300. (https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdaz.co%2Fmedia%2Fmm104%2Ftomashandmilly%2FtheJencat.jpg&hash=9f1ccf0846ce45b549e4d453cd8003c03819d77f)
-
^^^ IMHO It's going to be well over £300 I think based on the cost of the far more simple ones like the Evoms :chicken:
The ITG one should be released about the same time too :wink:
-
yeah Id agree Steve , £395 or £449 are likely given it has 2 air cans....
you got any pics on the ITG one?
also slightly concerned how well these aftermarket intakes deal with engine rocking?
(OE and carbonio retain the flexi bit ...)
-
^^^ Not that I can post at this stage :innocent:
I do know on Revo's Leon K1 the ITG has proven to give a better flow than the Evoms :smiley:
-
I'd love to see some comparative figures between the ITG,EVOM's and the twintake. Without proper comparative figures it is hard to think whether or not to go for the Twintake or not. It does look lovely, but it needs to perform. :smiley:
-
^^^ Agreed, have you logged the Airflow on yours John with the Revo Stage 2+ code??
-
i think they have priced it around the 300 mark, spoke to mark a few weeks back about a price and he said about 300-320 rrp on it , i have seen a few dyno's on the cars they tested the twin take on and they saw between 13-18bhp gain from the cars tested... one being mine!!!
-
I like the Forge stuff. Just cant afford their price tags. Really was interested in the PCV kit, but at £300 + P&P not a chance. Id guess this will be around the £325 + VAT + P&P mark.
-
also slightly concerned how well these aftermarket intakes deal with engine rocking?
(OE and carbonio retain the flexi bit ...)
....Unless you've got a full set of aftermarket engine mounts.
-
^^^ Agreed, have you logged the Airflow on yours John with the Revo Stage 2+ code??
No, SWMBO won't let me near it this week (we both have a week off work!). I'm annoying her already with looking for parts for the upgrade without spending time on data logging :grin: The last time I played with VCDS I was out 6hrs :ashamed:
-
The :ashamed: is 'cos I'm a relative newbie with it :grin:
-
i have seen a few dyno's on the cars they tested the twin take on and they saw between 13-18bhp gain from the cars tested... one being mine!!!
I really like the look of it and am seriously considering swapping my intake to it.
But those gains are from K04 turbo'd cars so i wonder what the gains woud be for a k03. id say probably less, and if thats the case, then you may as welll stick with evoms etc unless the price is very competetive
-
^^^ IMHO It's going to be well over £300 I think based on the cost of the far more simple ones like the Evoms :chicken:
The ITG one should be released about the same time too :wink:
Indeed it should ;)
Got mine almost booked in.
^^^ Not that I can post at this stage :innocent:
I do know on Revo's Leon K1 the ITG has proven to give a better flow than the Evoms :smiley:
I wonder if we have the same pics Steve ;)
-
Guys £300+ for air filter setup ? ? ? :stupid: :stupid: :stupid:
.... not for me ....
-
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdaz.co%2Fmedia%2Fb308%2FRedRobin_05%2FForgeIntake_Jonnyc.jpg&hash=1644d07b28141b2e425a5a68dc163e70eaf81329)
^ Gold leaf NOT included!! :laugh:
-
:happy2: cheers robin , jonnyc's bay is nice and clean :notworthy:
Id have to turn the filters , as im not a fan of the forge badges
-
:happy2: cheers robin , jonnyc's bay is nice and clean :notworthy:
Id have to turn the filters , as im not a fan of the forge badges
....You're welcome, buddy!
You couldn't turn one of the filter enclosures because of the side entry from the other.
-
ah true, will need to try and get it without them then :confused:
-
....
Unless perhaps the 'offending' one could be somersaulted end over end and still fit and work.
Just thinking creatively :happy2:
-
i have seen a few dyno's on the cars they tested the twin take on and they saw between 13-18bhp gain from the cars tested... one being mine!!!
I really like the look of it and am seriously considering swapping my intake to it.
But those gains are from K04 turbo'd cars so i wonder what the gains woud be for a k03. id say probably less, and if thats the case, then you may as welll stick with evoms etc unless the price is very competetive
they tested it on my k03 golf, i have never had a k04 fitted to my golf!!!!!!
-
they tested it on my k03 golf, i have never had a k04 fitted to my golf!!!!!!
Wow, 13 extra hp with that intake on a k03... :scared:
Are you running stage 2+?
-
:happy2: cheers robin , jonnyc's bay is nice and clean :notworthy:
Id have to turn the filters , as im not a fan of the forge badges
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdaz.co%2Fmedia%2Fy115%2Fjonsmout%2FIMG_17032.jpg&hash=b9d57aacda9244d55d6769ab2c27eca269561279)
That might be possible from this pic
-
^^^^
Ah! Thanks yin - That pic shows that the 'side' filter leads to a 'Y' tube - Couldn't see that on the other pics.
:happy2:
-
Yeh not a fan of the Forge badges, if i ordered one it would have to be without those big advertising boards.
-
Yeh not a fan of the Forge badges, if i ordered one it would have to be without those big advertising boards.
....Thing is though that further down the line some people would prefer to buy with badges so they know it's genuine.
-
....Thing is though that further down the line some people would prefer to buy with badges so they know it's genuine.
I really can't see any manufacturer doing a replica of this though...
-
^^^^
:laugh:
Good luck to them if they do! They'll need it!
-
Thats why you keep your receipts :happy2:
-
they tested it on my k03 golf, i have never had a k04 fitted to my golf!!!!!!
Wow, 13 extra hp with that intake on a k03... :scared:
Are you running stage 2+?
was running revo stage 1 when i had the car, with downpipe + decat, miltek cat back, FMIC, and few other little bits
-
Nick how would you describe the induction noise vs the stock intake?
-
13bhp from ko3 turbo. very good indeed then. even more interested now then.
i bet theres more to be had with a k04. i must admit from that pic it looks very well made. lets just hope the price is good
-
Nick how would you describe the induction noise vs the stock intake?
from what i heard of it, the waste gate chatter sounded very very good, it gave it more of a roar compared to the standard air box, its hard to say how much more louder it was then the standard air box, you would have to see a video of it, definately worth the £££ IMO, as you would struggle to get other mods for £300 or there abouts that will give u a nice increase in power
-
I'm bumping this old thread to see if anyone has heard more from Forge on this one?
There was mention on golfmkv.com from the US Forge guys that the UK production run was underway.
I'd rather buy it ex UK than ex USA, so it is only making one trip across the planet...
so anyone got an inkling on the true release date? :smiley:
-
^^^^
As with most new products, it won't be available until it's available. Most self-respecting manufacturers prefer not to launch a product until they are satisfied with it < Much preferred imo.
However, watch this space.
-
However, watch this space.
Exactly what space do we need to concentrate on RR?? :laugh:
-
However, watch this space.
Exactly what space do we need to concentrate on RR?? :laugh:
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi22.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fb308%2FRedRobin_05%2FPsychodelicFace.png&hash=a37ac06a599413d9b01e26334ba6fa6550e6501b)
Or you may prefer : -
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdaz.co%2Fmedia%2FRedRobin_05%2FRED_INK%2FKarmann.jpg&hash=a08402ef7208e7674c5a53b848d3fe58f068d1f8)
-
I wouldn't pay more than about £20 over EVOMS.
You only get about an extra 3bhp over EVOMS and unless your into number chasing i don't think it would be worth it.
Would prove a problem for people with DV Relocation aswell. Unless they have done one for KO4 Cars aswell
Carl :happy2:
-
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdaz.co%2Fmedia%2FRedRobin_05%2FRED_INK%2FKarmann.jpg&hash=a08402ef7208e7674c5a53b848d3fe58f068d1f8)
Those are mighty fine protruding "headlights"... :laugh: :laugh:
-
You only get about an extra 3bhp over EVOMS and unless your into number chasing i don't think it would be worth it.
Would prove a problem for people with DV Relocation aswell. Unless they have done one for KO4 Cars aswell
Carl :happy2:
....I thought that Forge had done their Twintake for the K04 before the K03, but I may be wrong.
Meanwhile, while we wait for further news about the launch, here's another space to watch : -
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdaz.co%2Fmedia%2FRedRobin_05%2FHotties%2Foptical_illusion.jpg&hash=aef8c299c27d1983ce93ba9c95ba9d3d485f1dc5)
Those are mighty fine protruding "headlights"... :laugh: :laugh:
^^^^ :laugh: :signLOL: :laugh:
-
I got a phone call from Forge today :jumpmove: :jumpmove:
I get my Twintake tomorrow - just in time for the product's launch and just in time for Edition 38 :)
(the car will be on display so anyone coming to the show is most welcome to have a look at the kit fitted :) )
-
Have you got an idea of the price or is it still a secret? :laugh:
-
Have you got an idea of the price or is it still a secret? :laugh:
I'll let you know by tomorrow hopefully when I see the bill for their bits :laugh:
Peter and the team at Forge turned this one around for me very quickly and as far as I know there were talks of two pipe finishes, black and polished. I would have preferred black - but I guess I'll see whats in the box tomorrow!
I'll post up some pics if you guys like - probably over the weekend when I get a chance (the car is in the spray booth at the moment getting some chips taken out).
-
I wish I wasn't going to Tenerife so I could go to edition :(
-
I wish I wasn't going to Tenerife so I could go to edition :(
I'll happily swap places with you Jay! :wink: :grin:
-
I wish I wasn't going to Tenerife so I could go to edition :(
you stay here I'll take Steph instead :laugh:
-
Your ok mate, she likes a real seeing to, not something you could help her with haha!
-
Your ok mate, she likes a real seeing to, not something you could help her with haha!
:laugh:
-
Your ok mate, she likes a real seeing to, not something you could help her with haha!
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: u think, bin round the block a few more times than u young uns :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:
-
I heard "don't let him see me smoking story" haha
-
I heard "don't let him see me smoking story" haha
:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: best leave that there :smiley:
-
as long as Gaz doesnt have to stand up he's ok apparantly (I'm told!)......
-
have we gort a price on this twin take yet :wink:
-
have we gort a price on this twin take yet :wink:
We will have it sorted by Tuesday.
Also - we will be offering special show discounts on all Forge products to visitors at E38. I can extend that offer to the forum too :happy2:
-
Forge finally gonna get this out on the market! Trouble is ITG have now stole their thunder with their product.
-
Forge finally gonna get this out on the market! Trouble is ITG have now stole their thunder with their product.
....And there's a third one waiting in the wings. But I don't have a clue how its performance will compete with these two.
-
what else is due out then???
-
what else is due out then???
....Still in development, no due date yet, can't say more at this stage.
-
what else is due out then???
At a guess, a VWR intake
-
^^^ I would think so too as me and Mat ED30 where chatting to VWR about there plans last week :smiley:, and if that's the one Robin is referring to I don't know why he thinks it's secret :confused:
-
^^^ I would think so too as me and Mat ED30 where chatting to VWR about there plans last week :smiley:, and if that's the one Robin is referring to I don't know why he thinks it's secret :confused:
Quite, VWR have been telling everyone about it :)
I spoke at length with Matt@VWR last time I was there about it.
-
^^^^
I didn't say it was a secret :smiley:.
I don't have any more info about it so nothing for me to report at this stage. It appears you and Mat do have some info.
-
I am back there on Tuesday for some more work so will see what the latest is :wink:
-
Would the VWR one fit the S3's and cupras?
The SEAT Leon Supercopas racing cars have a mental intake, looks nothing like all the aftermarket ones, I want to buy one but dont speak spanish!
-
Would the VWR one fit the S3's and cupras?
....Very likely, as it would be designed for the 2.0T FSI engine common to all.
-
....
Latest word on the street for the UK launch of Forge's Twintake is the muddy field of Edition38 - Isn't that this weekend?
-
Sure is Robin. will be good to see the finished unit. Going to hold fire and see what the other intakes from the like of VWR and ITG are going to be like power wise. I do like the look of the forge unit but im not in it for the bling factor.
Iain
-
....
Forge are saying that the addition of the second pipe and filter deliver more power gains than the single front one as it increases the air flow.
My guess is they'll be selling them for around £300 and around $400 in the U S of A.
I'm not going to Edition38 (camping in the UK ain't my scene anymore) so please take pics if you can.
I'm holding fire too and might need an APR fuel pump if I upgrade my air intake.
Enjoy your weekend :drinking:
-
I do like the look of the forge unit but im not in it for the bling factor.
Iain
....What did you say about bling? : -
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.vwvortex.com%2Fgallery%2Falbums%2F%2FEvents%2FEnthusiast%2FWaterfest%2F2009%2FVW%2520Mk%25205%2Fvwvortex-waterfest-2009-181.jpg&hash=b3cc373c1cb8ee2dae0fec106ef316fbcfbd2b91)
^ OMG!! Only in America!
-
before everyone rushes out and buys these, why dont we see if forge UK will do us a group buy, forge UK are decent guys having delt with them a few times in the past. :smiley:
-
before everyone rushes out and buys these, why dont we see if forge UK will do us a group buy, forge UK are decent guys having delt with them a few times in the past. :smiley:
....I prefer to wait and see which of these new air intakes suits my car best, rather than go for the cheapest deal.
I think that ITG's offering will, when launched, be a very strong contender and VWR also quite rightly won't produce theirs until they are confident in its performance gains.
EVOMS sounds too raspy for my taste.
-
No doubt there will be a few people playing musical intakes when they come out :wink: :innocent:
-
Robin, will take pics and post when i get home on the sunday night or could text them to you. Not into the camping either, staying not to far from the show in a nice warm and DRY hotel :signLOL:
Joe, a group buy mite be a good idea if it proves to out perform the rest. A saving of the like found on the GB catch can offer would be great.
Will be a good weekend if the weather is nice to us. Have always been lucky at E38 when it comes to the sun :jumpmove:
Iain
-
^^^^
Just post them here, Iain, so all can share :happy2:
Wishful thinking but not realistic to expect such a generous discount as from Dubtek on the BSH KhaziCan - It was very much an introductory deal. Also there simply aren't the production numbers in it for Forge - They will hardly be mass produced!
-
I'm holding fire too and might need an APR fuel pump if I upgrade my air intake.
Why? The pump is not required unless you are planning to go to stage 2+... :confused:
-
i emailed them today to enquire about twintake for ed30, chris their development manager replied back saying 6-8 weeks....... :sleepy:
-
I'm holding fire too and might need an APR fuel pump if I upgrade my air intake.
Why? The pump is not required unless you are planning to go to stage 2+... :confused:
....So I have learnt from speaking to Revo since I posted that about needing a HPFP.
I had been misinformed by someone who told me I'd need a HPFP if I upgraded my air intake - I'm waiting for a call back for them to explain themselves.
Am grateful for your confirmation :happy2:
-
....
HOT OFF THE PRESS! : -
Forge Twintake will be £295+vat from Forge and £265.50+vat from JKM (being 10% discount to forum members)
Expected to be available 2-3 weeks time if pre-ordered.
-
thats cheaper than i had predicted which can only be a good thing.
-
i emailed them today to enquire about twintake for ed30, chris their development manager replied back saying 6-8 weeks....... :sleepy:
He told me 2-3 weeks yesterday lol, i think its safe to say they don't have any idea when its going to be released :signLOL:
-
....
HOT OFF THE PRESS! : -
Forge Twintake will be £295+vat from Forge and £265.50+vat from JKM.
Expected to be available 2-3 weeks time if pre-ordered.
I am sorely tempted.. :ashamed:
-
How can Forge supply it more expensively than someone they are supplying??? (aka JKM)
It's about time this came out. I was suffering with a really bad flat spot at 4.000rpm and when the Twintake failed to materialise went for the ITG:
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Flh6.ggpht.com%2F_-x267klfZGE%2FSpjOOMul3ZI%2FAAAAAAAACV4%2FB8DQtLMD7C0%2Fs912%2FDSC_9652.JPG&hash=bf32cf8827c3d0ae0a19d466a415b7715b476e95)
However as I am of an open minded disposition I'm fascinated to see what the Forge offers in the world of 'heavy breathing' CAI's!
-
How can Forge supply it more expensively than someone they are supplying??? (aka JKM)
It's about time this came out. I was suffering with a really bad flat spot at 4.000rpm and when the Twintake failed to materialise went for the ITG:
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Flh6.ggpht.com%2F_-x267klfZGE%2FSpjOOMul3ZI%2FAAAAAAAACV4%2FB8DQtLMD7C0%2Fs912%2FDSC_9652.JPG&hash=bf32cf8827c3d0ae0a19d466a415b7715b476e95)
However as I am of an open minded disposition I'm fascinated to see what the Forge offers in the world of 'heavy breathing' CAI's!
did this cure your flat spot?
-
whats in the pic i cant see it???
-
did this cure your flat spot?
Fortunately it did. To SimonSkerton it is an ITG CAI.
-
How can Forge supply it more expensively than someone they are supplying??? (aka JKM)
....I don't know but I do know JKM very well and trust them. Perhaps they are prepared to reduce their profit margin.
EDIT: It's a JKM 10% discount to forum members :notworthy:
Is this the same Warren Cox who frequents SeatCupra.net? :wink: :grin: :wink: And who writes superb reviews!
I still haven't managed to read your ITG Review yet - Need to set aside a block of time without interruptions.
A Very Warm Welcome here! :drinking:
-
JKM may also do a group buy for us!! :smiley:
if not then i doubt id spend that much on an intake alone even though the results are very good.
-
whats in the pic i cant see it???
....If you still can't see it (or it happens somewhere else), click Quote and then copy the http address and paste it into a new browser window. After you've seen it appear there, the link should have become established instead of broken and showing the little blue question mark icon.
Hope This Helps, buddy :happy2:
-
Is this the same Warren Cox who frequents SeatCupra.net? :wink: :grin: :wink: And who writes superb reviews!
I still haven't managed to read your ITG Review yet - Need to set aside a block of time without interruptions.
A Very Warm Welcome here! :drinking:
:laugh:
:drinking:
-
JKM may also do a group buy for us!! :smiley:
if not then i doubt id spend that much on an intake alone even though the results are very good.
.... :laugh: www.4cheapintakes.com :grin:
-
JKM may also do a group buy for us!! :smiley:
if not then i doubt id spend that much on an intake alone even though the results are very good.
.... :laugh: www.4cheapintakes.com :grin:
:P :P
-
I do like the look of the forge unit but im not in it for the bling factor.
Iain
....What did you say about bling? : -
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.vwvortex.com%2Fgallery%2Falbums%2F%2FEvents%2FEnthusiast%2FWaterfest%2F2009%2FVW%2520Mk%25205%2Fvwvortex-waterfest-2009-181.jpg&hash=b3cc373c1cb8ee2dae0fec106ef316fbcfbd2b91)
^ OMG!! Only in America!
This unit looks clumsy compared to the ITG imo.
-
....
I'd like to know answers to questions such as whether the filters are dry or oiled, and whether they are special size only available from Forge, and how easy is their maintenance.
I'm also curious what it will sound like!
-
I think the ITG one looks much better. HAs anyone tried or looked at the K&N Typhoon kit, they claim to give 18bhp over stock, also how come APR who seem to do lots for VA G cars haven't jumped on the CAI bandwagon ?
-
how come APR who seem to do lots for VAG cars haven't jumped on the CAI bandwagon ?
....But they have - There's a new one for the TSI and they're working on one for the FSI. The Rocco GT24 race cars had it fitted.
They also 'own' Carbonio (or are in bed with them).
-
how come APR who seem to do lots for VAG cars haven't jumped on the CAI bandwagon ?
....But they have - There's a new one for the TSI and they're working on one for the FSI. The Rocco GT24 race cars had it fitted.
They also 'own' Carbonio (or are in bed with them).
ah..... I still don't like the look of the Forge CAI though, it looks like the engine has been "marineised"
-
Still not sure the £475 I paid for my HKS one was justified in terms of performance gains (as I havent had it on the rollers yet to do the comparison), but in terms of looks and sound it produces, I've heard and seen nothing like it.
I might be asking a stupid question here, but has this 'twintake' concept been used and proven to be effective on any other vehicle before??
-
Still not sure the £475 I paid for my HKS one was justified in terms of performance gains (as I havent had it on the rollers yet to do the comparison), but in terms of looks and sound it produces, I've heard and seen nothing like it.
I might be asking a stupid question here, but has this 'twintake' concept been used and proven to be effective on any other vehicle before??
....Baby asleep at last huh? :grin:
Have you any pics and info about the HKS - I've never heard of them.
Re Twintake concept - Yes, aftermarket twin filters have been used on Jap and BMW's IIRC - I can check it out.
:happy2:
-
come on then dubtek, lets get some video footage or sound footage of this HKS one going off. :drool: :wink: saw the pic and it looks nuts. id bet the gains would be good, maybe not £475 good, but still good. HKS are a pretty serious tuning brand
-
....
Here we go! : -
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.turnermotorsport.com%2Fimage%2Fintake%2Fafe%2Fintake_afe_intake_kit_135i_335i_335xi_535i_535xi_cold_air_intake_54-11472_installed.jpg&hash=65094c60e01b2648bb989f0d38540e57083e27e9)
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.proformancemotorsports.com%2Fcorvettes%2Fintake%2Fimgs%2Fair_twinflow.jpg&hash=05cd6e39b002c784177b9b1c8f9b4923218066e3)
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.corvettehorsepower.com%2Fimages%2FProducts%2F1300198b-bd90-4e2d-a4c2-d883e1462c85Gran%2520LS1%2520Dual%2520Cone%2520filter.jpg&hash=cc4fea3929e20389cb2c024bcc4e1e084ff769ba)
Dunno if this Forge pic has been posted here before : -
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.golfmkv.com%2Fforums%2Fattachment.php%3Fattachmentid%3D44535%26amp%3Bstc%3D1%26amp%3Bd%3D1242737428&hash=ec1027e438e83bb28bad05cb5495094cdbf3cc93)
See! It's not just VAG Babes I have pics of! :P
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.airintake.ca%2Fimages%2Fair-intake.jpg&hash=f659c7d06915badf38b55e0d5af45118e96e48a9)
-
Obviously they've been used on V6/8/10/12 engines, and flat 6's like BM's but I personally dont recall seeing anything like this freely available and used in the Jap market or any other for that matter. Might be me, but I'm just curious why this sort of thing hasnt been done elsewhere before if it is going to work as well as its claimed to do.
I'll get some pics of my HKS up tomorrow, my only gripe is that it sucks so loudly sometimes you just want to tame it down a bit, :laugh:
-
did you notice much of an improvment when you fitted it
-
Absolutely, I didnt pay that sort of money without doing some research, the HKS brand is absolutely massive in the Jap market and their reputation is impeccable. Through my contacts in the other business I managed to get one, and it was only 1 of 5 in Europe at the time.
Just want to compare a few different kits on the rollers before I can honestly tell people just how good it is without just thinking it because it sounds, looks and feels good though!
-
Obviously they've been used on V6/8/10/12 engines, and flat 6's like BM's but I personally dont recall seeing anything like this freely available and used in the Jap market or any other for that matter. Might be me, but I'm just curious why this sort of thing hasnt been done elsewhere before if it is going to work as well as its claimed to do.
I'll get some pics of my HKS up tomorrow, my only gripe is that it sucks so loudly sometimes you just want to tame it down a bit, :laugh:
....Someone has to be first and sometimes the simplest ideas are the best - Who knows? The proof of Forge's pudding will be in the eating.
Sounds like I would like the sound of your intake [Thinks: When am I next visiting Exeter?]
-
Just want to compare a few different kits on the rollers before I can honestly tell people just how good it is without just thinking it because it sounds, looks and feels good though!
....No rollers setup can accurately reproduce air intake conditions - You need on the road logging with a laptop.
-
the other problem with comparison will be all cars will act differently. ideally the best way to compare would be to do logs with just 1 car, but trialling the various different intakes and logging. this way any other variables are removed
-
the company that produce my intake provide info on their site comparing the std system to their own.
http://212.227.84.30/Codered/CR2.0TFSISportfilterengl.pdf
-
the company that produce my intake provide info on their site comparing the std system to their own.
http://212.227.84.30/Codered/CR2.0TFSISportfilterengl.pdf
....Are you happy with yours, Sy? Sorry if you've already posted on this.
-
I've just installed my forge Twintake... (needed to sort out a cpl of issues with Forge - hence the delay).
No pics so far - but fit is pretty good.
Noise on idle is the same as standard and in the workshop isnt noticably different to the Carbon Speed/Pipercorss I had before!
I'll be on the road tomorrow and enroute to E38. Depending on the Hotel's wireless conection or the Blackberry's battery (lol) - I'll let you know how it drives like!
TW will be offering a GB for sure :happy2:
-
JESUS!! 475 from HKS??!! who was that through, HKS singapore are based next door to my warehouse in singapore so may get someone to pop over and have a look, i was interested in importing HKS stuff for VAG cars as its very hard to get bits in the UK, you should see and hear the HKS tbe!! OMG :drool: :drool: back box was only 370 last time i was there aswell!!
-
the other problem with comparison will be all cars will act differently. ideally the best way to compare would be to do logs with just 1 car, but trialling the various different intakes and logging. this way any other variables are removed
I think you would want 2 cars, but test all the filters on both. One OEM car, one modified car and then see which ones make a difference in the each configuration to see if there are any significant differences. Quite a lot of work, but interesting from the perspective it's not something that is often done.
-
the other problem with comparison will be all cars will act differently. ideally the best way to compare would be to do logs with just 1 car, but trialling the various different intakes and logging. this way any other variables are removed
I think you would want 2 cars, but test all the filters on both. One OEM car, one modified car and then see which ones make a difference in the each configuration to see if there are any significant differences. Quite a lot of work, but interesting from the perspective it's not something that is often done.
....I was thinking about this last night (sad!) and air intakes are usually easy to take on and off. Also, as my car is Revo'd I can switch it to stock map as well. With some cooperation I may have access to more than one intake system. It's something I'll look into but it would also need someone to spend time in my passenger seat logging out on the road.
Using 2 cars would give additional information but every car is different and surely it would only be relative and a broad indicator.
-
piece of p!ss to take on or off. it'll be the jubilee clip(or the std one used) holding the intake onto the turbo, awkward to get to but not to bad, maf is held in by 2 torx screws, and then what ever bracket supportstye end of the intake. the heat shields should be able to stay in imo. would love to be able to see the difference they make
-
JESUS!! 475 from HKS??!! who was that through, HKS singapore are based next door to my warehouse in singapore so may get someone to pop over and have a look, i was interested in importing HKS stuff for VAG cars as its very hard to get bits in the UK, you should see and hear the HKS tbe!! OMG :drool: :drool: back box was only 370 last time i was there aswell!!
until earlier i never even new HKS did vag kit,
whos got links then!!!
-
the company that produce my intake provide info on their site comparing the std system to their own.
http://212.227.84.30/Codered/CR2.0TFSISportfilterengl.pdf
....Are you happy with yours, Sy? Sorry if you've already posted on this.
performance wise i did notice the difference, especially higherin the rev range, but there is the question of build quality, design and fit. the heat shield i had to cut down to size and then chamfer the edges, and the filter is very tight in the space provided. had i bought this from new i would have gone nuts, but i got it well cheap
-
JESUS!! 475 from HKS??!! who was that through, HKS singapore are based next door to my warehouse in singapore so may get someone to pop over and have a look, i was interested in importing HKS stuff for VAG cars as its very hard to get bits in the UK, you should see and hear the HKS tbe!! OMG :drool: :drool: back box was only 370 last time i was there aswell!!
until earlier i never even new HKS did vag kit,
whos got links then!!!
Have a look at Dubtek - http://dubtek.co.uk/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=11&zenid=342a4f94033b863535aaa0130a30289f
-
JKM may also do a group buy for us!! :smiley:
if not then i doubt id spend that much on an intake alone even though the results are very good.
Hi Guys
Just wanted to clear this up as I have woke up this morning to a barrel of emails.
The Forge twintake is £295.00 plus VAT. We will be offering the product to forum members at 10% off RRP. There will not be a group buy on this as per instructions from Forge.
I am sure this will be a great product. At present the product is listed for the MK5 Golf GTi (KO3) only.
Kind Regards
Kate
-
I'm holding fire too and might need an APR fuel pump if I upgrade my air intake.
Why? The pump is not required unless you are planning to go to stage 2+... :confused:
....So I have learnt from speaking to Revo since I posted that about needing a HPFP.
I had been misinformed by someone who told me I'd need a HPFP if I upgraded my air intake - I'm waiting for a call back for them to explain themselves.
Am grateful for your confirmation :happy2:
^^^^ I now learn there are two strongly opinioned schools of thought on whether fitting an aftermarket CAI necessitates also fitting an upgraded HPFP. I would be inclined to err on the side of caution and invest in a HPFP.
I'm referring to the need for a HPFP if at Stage2 and not necessarily at Stage1 which I don't know about.
I'm posting this comment here because I think it's relevant or may be helpful to considerations of intakes such as by Forge and ITG etc.
:smiley:
-
I was under the impression that with a stage 1 remap on the EA888 engine they had to be careful with the fuel settings as when accelerating under full load up a hill in say 5th gear you could get DTC's if the map was tuned too aggressively (lean fuel on bank XXX - apologies forget the exact error code). This was irrespective of any other mods.
The stage 1 map was still constrained by the limits of the pump in places. However, due to the efforts made to accommodate this in the mapping you did not need a pump for stage 1, even with a filter etc....
I had pump internals put in with stage 1 and TBH it felt very little different as the map was still compensating. Once stage 2+ map went on it was quite a difference to upper band torque. However for stage 1 I wouldn't even bother.
-
Robin didnt you say 265 + VAT? :sad1:
-
£265+VAT is pretty much (£295+VAT)-10% ;)
-
Here is a pic of the HKS mushroom
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdaz.co%2Fmedia%2Ftt74%2Fprepree1%2F6f8c5670587cf26b5d7e970da8f6694e_im.jpg&hash=77c91cf028286e6c9c23ca79e4553fe4e22bf757)
Dubtek - id love to hear a sound clip of this- if it sound anything like it does on the evo and gave performance gains such as Forge etc id be very tempted!!
-
£265+VAT is pretty much (£295+VAT)-10% ;)
ahaaa, cheers coco, :ashamed:
-
£265+VAT is pretty much (£295+VAT)-10% ;)
ahaaa, cheers coco, :ashamed:
....Yes, thanks, coco :happy2:
I have since edited my post about prices to explain that the £265 is the JKM 10% discounted price.
-
I was under the impression that with a stage 1 remap on the EA888 engine they had to be careful with the fuel settings as when accelerating under full load up a hill in say 5th gear you could get DTC's if the map was tuned too aggressively (lean fuel on bank XXX - apologies forget the exact error code). This was irrespective of any other mods.
The stage 1 map was still constrained by the limits of the pump in places. However, due to the efforts made to accommodate this in the mapping you did not need a pump for stage 1, even with a filter etc....
I had pump internals put in with stage 1 and TBH it felt very little different as the map was still compensating. Once stage 2+ map went on it was quite a difference to upper band torque. However for stage 1 I wouldn't even bother.
....Perhaps I should edit my post to state I'm referring to Stage2 in conjunction with a high flow tubular style intake.
It seems relatively unusual to go straight from Stage1 to 2+. Most people hang out with Stage2 before 2+.
My understanding is that it's the boost settings you would need to reduce in the absence of a HPFP but with an aftermarket high flow intake, but I am a bit out of my depth.
:happy2:
-
Here is a pic of the HKS mushroom
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdaz.co%2Fmedia%2Ftt74%2Fprepree1%2F6f8c5670587cf26b5d7e970da8f6694e_im.jpg&hash=77c91cf028286e6c9c23ca79e4553fe4e22bf757)
Dubtek - id love to hear a sound clip of this- if it sound anything like it does on the evo and gave performance gains such as Forge etc id be very tempted!!
....Something tells me I've gotta arrange to hear Dubtek Ben's HKS! Sound clips never do a sound justice.
But doesn't it suck up relatively hot air from within the engine bay?
-
Here is a pic of the HKS mushroom
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdaz.co%2Fmedia%2Ftt74%2Fprepree1%2F6f8c5670587cf26b5d7e970da8f6694e_im.jpg&hash=77c91cf028286e6c9c23ca79e4553fe4e22bf757)
Dubtek - id love to hear a sound clip of this- if it sound anything like it does on the evo and gave performance gains such as Forge etc id be very tempted!!
....Something tells me I've gotta arrange to hear Dubtek Ben's HKS! Sound clips never do a sound justice.
But doesn't it suck up relatively hot air from within the engine bay?
I know they are totally different cars but the noise these make on my friends evos, liners and a honda accord is amazing!!
I agree sound clips wont do it justice but may give some indication :happy2:
-
Here is a pic of the HKS mushroom
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdaz.co%2Fmedia%2Ftt74%2Fprepree1%2F6f8c5670587cf26b5d7e970da8f6694e_im.jpg&hash=77c91cf028286e6c9c23ca79e4553fe4e22bf757)
Dubtek - id love to hear a sound clip of this- if it sound anything like it does on the evo and gave performance gains such as Forge etc id be very tempted!!
....Something tells me I've gotta arrange to hear Dubtek Ben's HKS! Sound clips never do a sound justice.
But doesn't it suck up relatively hot air from within the engine bay?
surely that would depend on where the placement of the mushroom is. if its right down behind the light module you will get the cold air coming in from the bumper i would have thought. some ITG fire proof foam might be a good mod for it
-
My understanding is that it's the boost settings you would need to reduce in the absence of a HPFP but with an aftermarket high flow intake, but I am a bit out of my depth.
:happy2:
Likewise i don't feel qualified to elaborate. I'm sure Kev, Carl or Nick at Revo could explain, but when my car was being used to get stage 1 rolling I remember them having to work with the fuelling parameters to stop the car throwing DTC's.
-
I'll try and get some pics/videos sorted over the weekend. It is a superb piece of kit, but me being me, am making a few changes to it....I'm having a carbon heatshield made like the one used on the BSH true seal kit, but a damn sight lighter than their steel one! I'm also rotating the mushroom towards the original air intake vent behind the grille. At the moment it points towards the n/s/f corner.
My final mod may be to wrap it in something to prevent heat soak, but i'm not convinced it suffers anymore than the other systems on the market, and it will kind of ruin the look of the whole thing.
-
Here is a pic of the HKS mushroom
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdaz.co%2Fmedia%2Ftt74%2Fprepree1%2F6f8c5670587cf26b5d7e970da8f6694e_im.jpg&hash=77c91cf028286e6c9c23ca79e4553fe4e22bf757)
But doesn't it suck up relatively hot air from within the engine bay?
surely that would depend on where the placement of the mushroom is. if its right down behind the light module you will get the cold air coming in from the bumper i would have thought. some ITG fire proof foam might be a good mod for it
....I'd be inclined to leave the mushroom where it is shown, presumably clear of the headlight module, but to run a flexi hose duct up from the foglight panel (easy in mine as I'd just cut a hole in the carbonfibre and finish with an off-the-shelf rampipe end) and let the air flow towards the mushroom without any sealed attachment to it.
I would consider doing this to an ITG intake too.
Hmmm.... I wonder how it might effect performance.
-
I'm also rotating the mushroom towards the original air intake vent behind the grille. At the moment it points towards the n/s/f corner.
....I'm told that over about 70mph the airflow mostly goes over the bonnet and not much through the oem vent.
But I haven't seen any hard evidence.
-
....I'm told that over about 70mph the airflow mostly goes over the bonnet and not much through the oem vent.
But I haven't seen any hard evidence.
Andy at ITG was saying something along these lines too. Supposedly it was one of the reasons why my Carbonia intake was struggling at higher rpm's / speeds post stage 2+.
-
I was under the impression that with a stage 1 remap on the EA888 engine they had to be careful with the fuel settings as when accelerating under full load up a hill in say 5th gear you could get DTC's if the map was tuned too aggressively (lean fuel on bank XXX - apologies forget the exact error code). This was irrespective of any other mods.
The stage 1 map was still constrained by the limits of the pump in places. However, due to the efforts made to accommodate this in the mapping you did not need a pump for stage 1, even with a filter etc....
I had pump internals put in with stage 1 and TBH it felt very little different as the map was still compensating. Once stage 2+ map went on it was quite a difference to upper band torque. However for stage 1 I wouldn't even bother.
We have EA138 engines not EA888. EA888's as far as im aware as fitted in the mk6 gti have upgraded fuel pumps compared to the ones we have in our cars.
EA888's k03's remap straight to 275hp because of this.
-
....I'm told that over about 70mph the airflow mostly goes over the bonnet and not much through the oem vent.
But I haven't seen any hard evidence.
Andy at ITG was saying something along these lines too. Supposedly it was one of the reasons why my Carbonia intake was struggling at higher rpm's / speeds post stage 2+.
....My GTI 2.0T FSI K03 is running Revo2 (not 2+) with a Carbonio plus ITG panel filter but not struggling anywhere, except of course at around 130 plus.
-
I was under the impression that with a stage 1 remap on the EA888 engine they had to be careful with the fuel settings as when accelerating under full load up a hill in say 5th gear you could get DTC's if the map was tuned too aggressively (lean fuel on bank XXX - apologies forget the exact error code). This was irrespective of any other mods.
The stage 1 map was still constrained by the limits of the pump in places. However, due to the efforts made to accommodate this in the mapping you did not need a pump for stage 1, even with a filter etc....
I had pump internals put in with stage 1 and TBH it felt very little different as the map was still compensating. Once stage 2+ map went on it was quite a difference to upper band torque. However for stage 1 I wouldn't even bother.
We have EA138 engines not EA888. EA888's as far as im aware as fitted in the mk6 gti have upgraded fuel pumps compared to the ones we have in our cars.
EA888's k03's remap straight to 275hp because of this.
Really!!?
So there is an OEM fuel pump that is an upgrade for KO3 cars? :confused:
-
The Mk6 pump is different to the Mk5 one...
It's driven by four lobes vs 3 on the Mk5 hence the better fuel output.
-
The Mk6 pump is different to the Mk5 one...
It's driven by four lobes vs 3 on the Mk5 hence the better fuel output.
....I'm sure I'm not the only one now wondering if the Mk6 pump will work on the Mk5.
However, the intrinsic performance of a fuel pump is critical to the well-being of the FSI engine - Tolerances are super-critical. Mostly why I would favour the APR HPFP over KMD etc.
-
I was under the impression that with a stage 1 remap on the EA888 engine they had to be careful with the fuel settings as when accelerating under full load up a hill in say 5th gear you could get DTC's if the map was tuned too aggressively (lean fuel on bank XXX - apologies forget the exact error code). This was irrespective of any other mods.
The stage 1 map was still constrained by the limits of the pump in places. However, due to the efforts made to accommodate this in the mapping you did not need a pump for stage 1, even with a filter etc....
I had pump internals put in with stage 1 and TBH it felt very little different as the map was still compensating. Once stage 2+ map went on it was quite a difference to upper band torque. However for stage 1 I wouldn't even bother.
We have EA138 engines not EA888. EA888's as far as im aware as fitted in the mk6 gti have upgraded fuel pumps compared to the ones we have in our cars.
EA888's k03's remap straight to 275hp because of this.
Really!!?
So there is an OEM fuel pump that is an upgrade for KO3 cars? :confused:
The fuel pump on the EA138 is camshaft driven, whilst the EA888 is chain driven iirc.So not sure whether its able to be retrofitted/upgraded. However apparently the new leon cupra R will have a upgraded fuel pump over the standard cupras, s3's etc so we might be able to utilise that in the future as, as far as im aware all future K04 2.0T will still be using the EA138 architecture instead of the EA888 one. VW cite tuneability as their reasoning behind this but I think they are bluffing.
-
VW cite tuneability as their reasoning behind this but I think they are bluffing.
....Since when did VW design and manufacture things for ease of tuning?
Or is it for their ease of tuning the engine so it can be installed in different variants in the VAG range?
-
apparently the new leon cupra R will have a upgraded fuel pump over the standard cupras {/quote]
Does this mean that it will have the newer TSI version engine?
-
apparently the new leon cupra R will have a upgraded fuel pump over the standard cupras
Does this mean that it will have the newer TSI version engine?
Only going by my sources here, but no it should retain the EA118 architecture with the cam driven fuel pump.
-
Some pictures of my currently very mucky engine bay, but showing the HKS kit:
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdaz.co%2Fmedia%2Fww41%2FBenVI%2FDSCF3788.jpg&hash=3bdd48c79266446ea537dcd8fb9438636a6990a1)
-
^^^^
:laugh: Looks like a horse's limp penis! :laugh:
Very impressive though! What about heat on that pipe?
Looks like the pipe tapers towards the MAF too.
Thanks for posting a pic :happy2:
-
what a strange place to run the piping, that s the only intake ive seen that goes over the top. Id say that could do with a bit of heat rap, plus i reckon it could have done with going furehr towards the headlamp
-
I'm sure everyone has their own opinion on all these systems, but I dont think many people have definative answers as to their real weaknesses.
All I'll say is that the likes of Forge and definately, if not more so HKS, do a massive amount of R&D into these products before they go to market, and they certainly dont sell £475 intake systems which dont cut the mustard. HKS especially, were founded by racing engineers, and I've no doubt they'd be mortified to be selling inferior products.
The pipework on my HKS system is extremely thick in comparison to the BSH system and has an extremely different filter to the likes of a K&N design, anyone who's had a HKS 'mushroom' on another car will know what I mean :grin:
As I've said there's improvements I personally may make to the system, but I do question whether if they were of any benefit the manufacturer wouldnt have already combatted these issues before it left the factory.
Its a never ending debate but this thread has made me very keen to do the test on various different kits with stock and modded cars, so I'll happily take the lead on it and maybe speak to a magazine and see if they'll support us and feature it? We would just need a few cars and a techy with a laptop to do the logging....sure we can sort that though, and pretty sure the manufactuters would support such a test.
-
Some pictures of my currently very mucky engine bay, but showing the HKS kit:
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdaz.co%2Fmedia%2Fww41%2FBenVI%2FDSCF3788.jpg&hash=3bdd48c79266446ea537dcd8fb9438636a6990a1)
looks to me like HKS have tried to smooth the 90 degree bends that every other intake has. Its a case of which is worse in IMO, smooth the bends out and risk some heat soak, or avoid the engine and have the sharp bends. Which gives the best results is open to debate :smiley:
-
to be fair its nothing some reflective tape wouldnt solve. i quite like it
-
Some pictures of my currently very mucky engine bay, but showing the HKS kit:
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdaz.co%2Fmedia%2Fww41%2FBenVI%2FDSCF3788.jpg&hash=3bdd48c79266446ea537dcd8fb9438636a6990a1)
looks to me like HKS have tried to smooth the 90 degree bends that every other intake has. Its a case of which is worse in IMO, smooth the bends out and risk some heat soak, or avoid the engine and have the sharp bends. Which gives the best results is open to debate :smiley:
dubtek, is yours a KO3? im very very interested in that system!!
-
looks to me to be k03, cant see the relocated DV upfront there
-
yep, looks like K03 :smiley:
-
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdaz.co%2Fmedia%2Fww41%2FBenVI%2FDSCF3788.jpg&hash=3bdd48c79266446ea537dcd8fb9438636a6990a1)
Hmmm....Well I've already got some of that gold tape ready to wrap.
looks to me like HKS have tried to smooth the 90 degree bends that every other intake has. Its a case of which is worse in IMO, smooth the bends out and risk some heat soak, or avoid the engine and have the sharp bends. Which gives the best results is open to debate :smiley:
....I think you've hit the nail on the head there, gaz :happy2: - Less bendy and shorter (and tapered?) route to the MAF. Also, the mushroom filter is served by both the front grill vent and from around the headlight area but not too close to the heat of it.
Bit of extra hassle if you need to change a coilpack though. Still, can't be much worse than taking the stock engine cover on and off.
-
Yep, K03....for now.... :laugh:
-
The 90 degree bends in the pipe are a BIG issue, and one of the ways ITG have tried to counteract this in their design in by maximising the intake piping diameter all the way up to the MAF (which has to be a defined diameter to give accurate readings: 67mm). Using larger diameter piping means that as the air has more space in which to flow through the corners there is less slowing of the air than with restricted piping.
By using thick silicone piping and a heat shield some of the intake air temps have been lowered slightly, but the lightweight pipework will need reflective taping at some point. I've been looking at the various options on the Agriemach site but feel the gold tape is probably still the best option.
Whilst keeping temps down in the CAI is a good thing, (as is reducing the disruption in the flow path of the incoming air to a minimum as the HKS solution appears to have done very well), I am next going to look at something similar to what is used in Subaru's, and get a spray bar fitted to the IC. I think chilling the intake air in the space MAY have a greater effect than dropping the intake temps through the CAI by a couple of degrees.
Plans to look at this are October, so I'll post back if it works well or not.
-
Thwn why not get water meth injection. does that not cool intake temps.
Im not sure about that gold reflective tape. id have to get some plain silver
-
Twintake will come powder coated black as opposed to polished ally(I,m expecting on real soon).
This will help in dissipate heat.
Isn't a black surface the best absorber of heat?? :confused:
-
Twintake will come powder coated black as opposed to polished ally(I,m expecting on real soon).
This will help in dissipate heat.
Isn't a black surface the best absorber of heat?? :confused:
....And white the best reflector of heat?
That's what I thought too. Wearing a white Tshirt on a really hot day is cooler than black.
-
seems a little expensive....
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/HEAT-BARRIER-REFLECTIVE-GOLD-TAPE-2-x-30ft-010397_W0QQitemZ310166308530QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUK_CarsParts_Vehicles_CarParts_SM?hash=item48375a46b2&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14
but i suppose with 30ft we could all do our cars! :signLOL:
-
The 90 degree bends in the pipe are a BIG issue, and one of the ways ITG have tried to counteract this in their design in by maximising the intake piping diameter all the way up to the MAF (which has to be a defined diameter to give accurate readings: 67mm). Using larger diameter piping means that as the air has more space in which to flow through the corners there is less slowing of the air than with restricted piping.
By using thick silicone piping and a heat shield some of the intake air temps have been lowered slightly, but the lightweight pipework will need reflective taping at some point. I've been looking at the various options on the Agriemach site but feel the gold tape is probably still the best option.
Whilst keeping temps down in the CAI is a good thing, (as is reducing the disruption in the flow path of the incoming air to a minimum as the HKS solution appears to have done very well), I am next going to look at something similar to what is used in Subaru's, and get a spray bar fitted to the IC. I think chilling the intake air in the space MAY have a greater effect than dropping the intake temps through the CAI by a couple of degrees.
....I'm assuming all your post is referring to the imminent ITG and not the Forge Twincooler.
Re the ITG, when you say "chilling the intake air in the space", do you mean in the space in which the ITG foam filter sits? Because if so, this could surely be significantly assisted by the addition of an inlet from the foglight panel via a flexi air hose (an easy mod) which would then blow/deliver cooler (but not artificially cooled) air into that space and additionally feed the ITG foam filter.
This additional air feed from below could possibly assist any type of high flow tubular intake which has an open filter in that 'front-of-battery' area (but obviously not the Forge Twintake). In theory it's virtually the same as those 'lollipop-on-a-stick' intakes which extend the filter cone lower down except that it would no longer have the disadvantages of exposing the cone filter to water ingress nor having a longer pipework route to the MAF.
Am I right in thinking that whatever temperature the air arrives at the turbo at, it will then be heated; But the cooler it arrives, the less heated it continues its journey?
Please someone correct me if I'm barking up the wrong tree. :happy2:
-
seems a little expensive....
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/HEAT-BARRIER-REFLECTIVE-GOLD-TAPE-2-x-30ft-010397_W0QQitemZ310166308530QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUK_CarsParts_Vehicles_CarParts_SM?hash=item48375a46b2&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14
but i suppose with 30ft we could all do our cars! :signLOL:
....You should be able to pipe wrap 2 cars per roll, so about £44 per intake. It does depend on the design of the intake though because I don't think you would wrap the flexible silicone hosing sections.
Sorry Joe but the temptation is too great!.... www.4cheapgold.com :evilgrin:
Gold always has been relatively expensive and never cheap - Even large countries have been established on the stuff!
-
Always gets me how they narrow the pipe towards the inlet, thats a sure fire way to increase inlet temps. Boyles law and all that
-
Always gets me how they narrow the pipe towards the inlet, thats a sure fire way to increase inlet temps. Boyles law and all that
....Isn't it a matter of trying to achieve the best compromise between cooler inlet temperatures and the advantages (flow?) of narrowing/tapering?
-
The 90 degree bends in the pipe are a BIG issue, and one of the ways ITG have tried to counteract this in their design in by maximising the intake piping diameter all the way up to the MAF (which has to be a defined diameter to give accurate readings: 67mm)
This is a very important point and one of the things that has put me buying an EVOMS or the old Forge. Here is a quote from golfmkv.com
Faulty MAF readings. Any alteration of the MAF housing diameter from it's specified size in the software will alter the readings. I just saw a link posted in another thread to an article written by Cobb Tuning. Check this out, it applies to our vehicles too for the most part:
Aftermarket Intakes
The use of Aftermarket Intakes on 2002+ Subaru factory-turbocharged vehicles
by Trey Cobb
How it works
One critical design feature of this system, which differs from those used on most other vehicles, is the installation of the Mass Air Flow (MAF) sensor into the Upper Air Cleaner Case - instead of its own housing which has been traditionally the case with MAF equiped vehicles. It is primarily due to this design feature that problems may arise from modifying the factory air cleaner system.
When changing the factory air cleaner system out for an aftermarket system, you are required to relocate this MAF sensor into the new system. Due to this relocation, we have now opened up the potential for problems to occur.
The Mass Air Flow (MAF) sensor is a critical sensor used by the engine management system. The job of the MAF sensor is to monitor the Mass of air that is entering across the intake system. This is important because all of the fuel, timing and other critical engine management decisions are based primarily on what the MAF is reading. If this reading is off, then so will the fuel, timing, etc which has the potential to cause poor driving conditions or worse, engine damage.
Potential Problems caused by Aftermarket Intakes
MAF Sensor Housing Size
The MAF sensor only samples a small portion of the air coming into the system. From that sample measurement, the engine management system can calculate how much air is actually entering the system because it knows the inner diameter of the MAF sensor housing it is sampling from.
If the MAF sensor housing inner diameter changes in any way, the calculation performed by the engine management system will be incorrect. This means that the amount of air actually entering the system will be different from what the computer thinks is entering the system. This is critical because the computer determines how much fuel and timing to run based on this value of air. When it's wrong, it can cause the engine to run richer, or leaner, than it should.
With aftermarket intakes, it's extraordinarily common for the piping used to have a different inner diameter than the MAF sensor housing incorporated in the factory air box. This is due to the fact that the exact inner diameter of the factory MAF sensor housing is different than what's commonly available in the standard metal piping used for aftermarket intake systems.
It is true that some aftermarket intakes show an increase in power when installed on a stock vehicle. This power increase is due to the fact that the aftermarket intakes have a larger inner diameter for the MAF sensor housing to mount into which in turn leans out the Air/Fuel mixture because of this error in calculating how much air is actually entering the system.
Please note this is NOT due to the fact that the aftermarket intake is so much less restrictive than the stock air box and therefore more air is getting in but rather that the computer does not know it's now sucking from a larger tube and therefore more air is getting in.
So to recap, whenever the MAF sensor housing size is increased compared to stock, more air will enter the system than the engine management has been calibrated for and you will run leaner. If the MAF sensor housing size is decreased compared to stock, less air will enter and you will run richer.
Fortunately, there are corrections that can be made for changing the size of the MAF sensor housing to allow the engine to run properly which we will discuss later on in this article.
Turbulence
In order to accurately measure the amount of air coming into the system, it is important for the air to flow smoothly across the MAF sensor. Any turbulence in this air flow will create errors in the amount of air measured versus what is actually entering the system.
In the factory air box, the Subaru engineers utilizes a smooth velocity stack style inlet and internal ribbing on the inner sections of the cases to dampen pressure waves and promote a laminar air flow into the MAF sensor housing. The MAF sensor housing itself is straight and smooth internally and positions the sensing portion of the MAF sensor properly in the air flow stream (ie: not offset to any angle left/right or up/down).
For aftermarket intake systems, turbulence across the MAF sensor is an all too common occurrence. Often times the MAF sensor is placed in close proximity to a bend, pipe joint, or weld. In the case of some hot air intakes (ie: Short Ram), the MAF sensor is mounted directly after a conical intake -- well before the air has a chance to smooth out.
When this turbulence occurs, the MAF sensor will suddenly see more or less air then it had previously. This will cause the engine management system to respond by making the engine run leaner or richer for as long as the error from turbulence occurs. The most noticeable driving characteristic associated with this would be a hesitation or flat-spot in the engine's power deliver. A worse case scenario would be the engine suddenly leaning out while under full throttle that resulted in engine damage.
Unlike the errors created by the different size of piping, there are no corrections one can make for an intake design that allows turbulence across the MAF sensor.
Other Considerations
The other issues to consider with upgraded intakes are the filtration capabilities of the element used, the chance for water ingestion or damage from road debris.
Location of the MAF sensor in terms of its distance to the inlet of the turbocharger (or some other point of reference) is not critical so long as the system is free from leaks. Having it too close to the turbocharger inlet can of course create errors from turbulence as can having the plumb-back line from the compressor bypass valve (aka blow-off valve) too close.
Potential Solutions
Now that most of the common problems associated with aftermarket intakes have been outlined, let's discuss what possible solutions there may be for those that run one.
When dealing with the issue of a different MAF sensor housing inner diameter, the best solution we've found is to simply recalibrate the factory engine computer for the new air flow. The factory engine management system has a rather large table of data that basically tells the computer how much air is coming in per sample read. By recalibrating this information, the engine will run correctly -- so long as there isn't also a problem with turbulence.
For those intakes that generate turbulence across the MAF sensor, there unfortunately is no easy solution. Since this turbulence can occur at different points in the power band, based on both engine RPM and engine load, all that can be done to make the engine run safely is to recalibrate the engine with a relatively rich overall tune. While this isn't the best for power, it will help protect the engine.
Conclusion
The best solution for an aftermarket intake will be either one that has been designed to use the stock inner diameter for the MAF sensor housing or one that has a tuning program behind it to support the change in MAF sensor housing size. If there is any turbulence in the design, however, this will negate any usefulness of the intake.
TechnobabbleAddendum
For those still looking for something a little more in-depth.
The MAF sensor generates 0-5V based on measured air flow. The engine management system then determines the actual air flow based on this sensor's voltage. This mass air flow value can be represented as g/sec or lb/min, based on your preference. The voltage vs mass air flow value is not linear but rather more exponential in form.
To correct for a change in size of the MAF sensor housing diameter, we must modify the mass air flow values held within the ECU for each given voltage. These values are defined approximately every 0.1V of the MAF sensor range.
There is also a limit to the amount of air that can be read across the factory MAF sensor when using the factory MAF Sensor Housing diameter. This limit is reached at approximately 38.64 lb/min (293 g/sec). Those with the ability to manipulate the ECU tables will be able to maximize the MAF's sensor capabilities up to 39.6 lb/min (300 g/sec) but that's the ceiling of the factory ECU's programming. Using our AccessTUNER technology, we actually have the ability to rewrite the ECU software for a limitless MAF sensor calibration.
The MAF sensor itself does not need to be considered a limitation, even in large turbo applications. All one has to do is simply run the appropriate size intake diameter to the turbocharger and recalibrate the MAF sensor for that intake's inner diameter. If someone cannot properly recalibrate the MAF, then the limitation is in the tuner…not the hardware.
Link to the thread:
http://www.golfmkv.com/forums/showthread.php?t=91500&page=8
Does the ITG intake also have an oval shaped housing for the maf like OEM?
-
....
Regarding the Forge Twintake - Although I have no doubt that Forge have very extensively tested this intake, I do seriously question whether every single one supplied will achieve an even and equal air flow as a result of the junction of those two pipes.
I suggest this on the basis of what I found with the Milltek quad pipes from the back box - A well engineered and manufactured 'Y' junction in the pipework but nevertheless one branch carried no gases whatsoever. Hence the version of independent pipes I've been testing now and is without any such problems, but several improvements. Of course the direction of flow was 1>2 rather than Forge's 2>1.
Also, wouldn't the superior flow of one pipe over the other cause a back draft in the 'inferior' pipe? It's understood that which pipe delivers a 'superior' flow to the other will vary according to vehicle speed and conditions etc. BUT.. I'm not an engineer and this may not matter anyway.
All fascinating stuff though :smiley:
-
^^^^
What I just posted pales into insignificance in the MAF considerations which KRL just posted :notworthy:
Extremely educational post, KRL :drinking:
-
Does the ITG intake also have an oval shaped housing for the maf like OEM?
....I don't know the definitive answer to that question but in the light of your excellent posted info about MAF tuning parameters etc, I'm fairly confident it's no longer a secret that ITG have been working closely with Revo in the development of their latest intake.
-
which has to be a defined diameter to give accurate readings: 67mm
With aftermaket intakes this 67mm internal diameter is a best guesstimate as these intakes all come with circular cross sectional piping whereas the oem air box has the maf sited where the cross section is not circular but ellipitical.
-
does anybody have the HKS part numbers? :smiley:
-
which has to be a defined diameter to give accurate readings: 67mm
With aftermaket intakes this 67mm internal diameter is a best guesstimate as these intakes all come with circular cross sectional piping whereas the oem air box has the maf sited where the cross section is not circular but ellipitical.
Which is why I asked if the ITG was oval shaped :happy2:
-
....I don't know the definitive answer to that question but in the light of your excellent posted info about MAF tuning parameters etc, I'm fairly confident it's no longer a secret that ITG have been working closely with Revo in the development of their latest intake.
A pertinent question to put to Revo when deciding on an intake then would be how do they calibrate the MAF on their remaps? Is it left at OEM (67cm diameter) or do they change it?
-
....I don't know the definitive answer to that question but in the light of your excellent posted info about MAF tuning parameters etc, I'm fairly confident it's no longer a secret that ITG have been working closely with Revo in the development of their latest intake.
A pertinent question to put to Revo when deciding on an intake then would be how do they calibrate the MAF on their remaps? Is it left at OEM (67cm diameter) or do they change it?
....Very pertinent indeed! :happy2:
And furthermore, how do the other tuners calibrate the MAF on their remaps.
-
I know that APR use the standard OEM calibration for the MAF :happy2:
-
I know that APR use the standard OEM calibration for the MAF :happy2:
TBH I can't see any tuner doing anything different, but I have asked the question of Revo :happy2:
-
Good man Steve, will be interested to hear the answer.
-
I know that APR use the standard OEM calibration for the MAF :happy2:
True but for completeness, their stage 3 BT kit uses an APR bespoke calibration.
-
I do! And deal directly with HKS Europe. I may also have a 2nd hand one for sale in the next few weeks too...
does anybody have the HKS part numbers? :smiley:
-
Hi Steve;
Thanks for the mail; I’ll keep it short and straight to the point as i've got work coming out of me ears!
Scaling the maf to a larger size is a pointless task and would require tuning to suit, the stock maf housing is perfectly suitable for almost any given application unless you're going for a massive turbo setup (GT35+) and in which case you may as well run without a maf..
Hope this helps guys!
-
I do! And deal directly with HKS Europe. I may also have a 2nd hand one for sale in the next few weeks too...
does anybody have the HKS part numbers? :smiley:
For the K04?
-
It doesnt specify either way, I'll find out.
-
which has to be a defined diameter to give accurate readings: 67mm
With aftermaket intakes this 67mm internal diameter is a best guesstimate as these intakes all come with circular cross sectional piping whereas the oem air box has the maf sited where the cross section is not circular but ellipitical.
Which is why I asked if the ITG was oval shaped :happy2:
No, as far as I am aware its circular tubing, but the diameter of the pipework chosen was based around the consideration of MAF requirement and not around restriction of pipework. I would imagine a calculation has been done to evaluate the internal area of the oval pipework, and then this has been replicated. I can speak to Andy Jackson at some point to ask the question, but the reason for the late reply is I'm currently overseas on annual leave, so access to t'internet for the next couple of weeks will be sporadic.
-
Hi Steve;
Thanks for the mail; I’ll keep it short and straight to the point as i've got work coming out of me ears!
Scaling the maf to a larger size is a pointless task and would require tuning to suit, the stock maf housing is perfectly suitable for almost any given application unless you're going for a massive turbo setup (GT35+) and in which case you may as well run without a maf..
Hope this helps guys!
Thanks Carl,
I have heard of cases in America where running an intake with a larger MAF diameter is causing performance problems on both Revo and APR SW running K03 and K04 turbos although I have not heard of any cases yet in the UK.
If you look at the fuel trims with the Long Term trim (VCDS block 31 or 32) being the most important. A highly positive fuel trim might show deviations from what the ECU is expecting to see and from my knowledge a simple increase in LTFT should be considered an increase in air flow. If it actually zeros down after a few miles when the ECU has had a chance to adapt to the new intake it should not cause any problems. A constant LTFT that just refuses to zero possibley means there is a problem.
-
which has to be a defined diameter to give accurate readings: 67mm
With aftermaket intakes this 67mm internal diameter is a best guesstimate as these intakes all come with circular cross sectional piping whereas the oem air box has the maf sited where the cross section is not circular but ellipitical.
Which is why I asked if the ITG was oval shaped :happy2:
No, as far as I am aware its circular tubing, but the diameter of the pipework chosen was based around the consideration of MAF requirement and not around restriction of pipework. I would imagine a calculation has been done to evaluate the internal area of the oval pipework, and then this has been replicated. I can speak to Andy Jackson at some point to ask the question, but the reason for the late reply is I'm currently overseas on annual leave, so access to t'internet for the next couple of weeks will be sporadic.
Would you be able to have a look at your long term fuel trims after you have done a few miles? AFAIK the ITG is the only full intake system I know which conforms to the OEM MAF diameter but I would like to now if the MAF housing not being oval has any ramifications.
The only intake which uses an oval MAF housing is the Carbonio but this is because it uses the OEM engine cover and MAF housing.
-
Seeing as this ITG is being developed in conjunction with revo, why not have a bigger MAF pipe diameter and just adjust the settings for it in the ecu?
-
Seeing as this ITG is being developed in conjunction with revo, why not have a bigger MAF pipe diameter and just adjust the settings for it in the ecu?
....Yes, but the new ITG intake needs to be available for cars with other tuner's remaps as well. Otherwise ITG's sales will be somewhat restricted.
:happy2:
[The subject of ITG's intake seems to have hijacked the discussion of Forge's]
-
True lol, sorry probably my fault.
-
True lol, sorry probably my fault.
....No, don't get me wrong - Personally I quite welcome it!
I'm interested in both intakes (and others) and the discussion has thrown up some very interesting info which helps all our choices.
Keep it coming! :happy2: 8) :happy2:
-
A constant LTFT that just refuses to zero possibley means there is a problem
Unless you have just cleared the ecu of faults (even if there aren't any), you will find in most cases that neither of the fuel trim values are zero.
Ross Tech suggests a +/-10% deviation is acceptable though I think +/-5% is a better value.
-
A constant LTFT that just refuses to zero possibley means there is a problem
Unless you have just cleared the ecu of faults (even if there aren't any), you will find in most cases that neither of the fuel trim values are zero.
Ross Tech suggests a +/-10% deviation is acceptable though I think +/-5% is a better value.
Yes thats correct, prehaps I did not explain myself very clearly. Ideally the LTFT needs to stabalise at a value and the closer to zero the better. Even on completely stock cars you will not see a value of zero. If your LTFT is constantly climbing or falling it will eventually hit an upper limit of 25% or lower limit of -25% which causes a fault code and CEL.
So if we have a look at the LTFTs of people who already have various intakes installed we should get a decent idea of how the ECU is coping with the different sized MAF housings :happy2:
-
This is why I asked jonnyc to check his values for me seeing that he has the twintake.
Unfortunately he's yet not gotten back to me on this...
-
Would you be able to have a look at your long term fuel trims after you have done a few miles? AFAIK the ITG is the only full intake system I know which conforms to the OEM MAF diameter but I would like to now if the MAF housing not being oval has any ramifications.
The only intake which uses an oval MAF housing is the Carbonio but this is because it uses the OEM engine cover and MAF housing.
I ran the Carbonia pre-ITG, and whilst it ran OK in stage 1 spec, it just couldn't successfully deliver air supply at over 300bhp.
I don't have VAGCOM, so I will need to hook up with someone in the West Berkshire / South Oxfordshire area once I get back from holiday. I've only just got here o wont be back in the UK for a while. Apologies.
-
Seeing as this ITG is being developed in conjunction with revo, why not have a bigger MAF pipe diameter and just adjust the settings for it in the ecu?
....Yes, but the new ITG intake needs to be available for cars with other tuner's remaps as well. Otherwise ITG's sales will be somewhat restricted.
:happy2:
[The subject of ITG's intake seems to have hijacked the discussion of Forge's]
I was thinking that was the most logical answer, wonder if though ITG would ever make one specifically to suit the revo software or vice versa though. All that lovely big piping only to get quite a size reduction in diameter because of the maf seems wasteful to me.
-
Seeing as this ITG is being developed in conjunction with revo, why not have a bigger MAF pipe diameter and just adjust the settings for it in the ecu?
....Yes, but the new ITG intake needs to be available for cars with other tuner's remaps as well. Otherwise ITG's sales will be somewhat restricted.
:happy2:
[The subject of ITG's intake seems to have hijacked the discussion of Forge's]
I was thinking that was the most logical answer, wonder if though ITG would ever make one specifically to suit the revo software or vice versa though. All that lovely big piping only to get quite a size reduction in diameter because of the maf seems wasteful to me.
A rather nice Divergent Duct. Therefore the pressure will Decrease, Velocity of the airflow will increase, and airflow temp will also decrease.
-
Seeing as this ITG is being developed in conjunction with revo, why not have a bigger MAF pipe diameter and just adjust the settings for it in the ecu?
....Yes, but the new ITG intake needs to be available for cars with other tuner's remaps as well. Otherwise ITG's sales will be somewhat restricted.
:happy2:
[The subject of ITG's intake seems to have hijacked the discussion of Forge's]
I was thinking that was the most logical answer, wonder if though ITG would ever make one specifically to suit the revo software or vice versa though. All that lovely big piping only to get quite a size reduction in diameter because of the maf seems wasteful to me.
You obviously havn't measured the inlet diameter of the K04 then if you think the MAF pipe is a restriction..
-
Seeing as this ITG is being developed in conjunction with revo, why not have a bigger MAF pipe diameter and just adjust the settings for it in the ecu?
....Yes, but the new ITG intake needs to be available for cars with other tuner's remaps as well. Otherwise ITG's sales will be somewhat restricted.
:happy2:
[The subject of ITG's intake seems to have hijacked the discussion of Forge's]
I was thinking that was the most logical answer, wonder if though ITG would ever make one specifically to suit the revo software or vice versa though. All that lovely big piping only to get quite a size reduction in diameter because of the maf seems wasteful to me.
You obviously havn't measured the inlet diameter of the K04 then if you think the MAF pipe is a restriction..
I drive my car not take it apart :driver:
-
Seeing as this ITG is being developed in conjunction with revo, why not have a bigger MAF pipe diameter and just adjust the settings for it in the ecu?
....Yes, but the new ITG intake needs to be available for cars with other tuner's remaps as well. Otherwise ITG's sales will be somewhat restricted.
:happy2:
[The subject of ITG's intake seems to have hijacked the discussion of Forge's]
I was thinking that was the most logical answer, wonder if though ITG would ever make one specifically to suit the revo software or vice versa though. All that lovely big piping only to get quite a size reduction in diameter because of the maf seems wasteful to me.
A rather nice Divergent Duct. Therefore the pressure will Decrease, Velocity of the airflow will increase, and airflow temp will also decrease.
I see so something useful does come of it.
-
I drive my car not take it apart :driver:
:notworthy:
-
I have logged my ITG intake so will post the details in the ITG thread to save this one going any more off topic :happy2:
-
I don't have VAGCOM, so I will need to hook up with someone in the West Berkshire / South Oxfordshire area once I get back from holiday. I've only just got here o wont be back in the UK for a while. Apologies.
How dare you be on holiday when the modding community needs you :mad:
Have a good holiday buddy hope you enjoy it :drinking:
-
I have logged my ITG intake so will post the details in the ITG thread to save this one going any more off topic :happy2:
Top man Steve I shall come and have a look...
-
I know that APR use the standard OEM calibration for the MAF :happy2:
Hello everyone! I'm sure this is what KRL meant but I'll clarify his post regarding APR calibrations and maf diameters and try to provide some additional info.
APR calibrates our Stage 1, Stage 2, Stage 2+ and ED30 Conversion ECU Upgrades within the OEM maf diameter (the physical maf housing) and by maintaining the original sizing parameters and scaling of the calibration surfaces in the ecu (the software attributes of the maf).
The ecu has over 2400 load and rpm dependent maps that depend upon readings from the maf in some way, shape or form. These readings are assumed to have been collected from a car with an identical cross sectional area as the oem maf. If the cross sectional area of the maf housing has changed, the ecu won't know it unless re-calibrated properly and all of these interconnected and interdependent maps will be miscalculated causing a slew of potential problems to include proper running, emissions control and power delivery.
Our Stage 3 ECU Calibrations incorporate new map scaling, algorithm adjustment, computational calculations, variable adjustment and over 78 additional ecu coding changes to accommodate for the new maf diameter.
What concerns us the most is when intake manufacturers don't properly recreate the cross sectional area, diameter, shape and inherent airflow characteristics of the oem maf housing in their product offerings. We feel its best to either leave the oem maf housing alone, properly re-manufacture it for your intake or have the ability to control both ends of the spectrum, hardware and software development, so you can make a new maf and recalibrate the ecu to operate correctly with it.
The problem most of you guys face is that you have companies that make intakes and companies that make software. These companies can't do both and aren't working together nor would you want them to.
Sure, you can buy an APR/Carbonio intake and APR software and know that they will always work perfectly together but why would you want to buy Neuspeed's intake and APR software made to work with Neuspeed's intake?
What I really think needs to happen for the betterment of all is for intake manufacturers to simply step up to the plate and use manufacturing processes that are capable of reproducing all of the inherent properties of the oem maf or to not change the maf with their intake offering.
-
What I really think needs to happen for the betterment of all is for intake manufacturers to simply step up to the plate and use manufacturing processes that are capable of reproducing all of the inherent properties of the oem maf or to not change the maf with their intake offering.
Totally agree, would be a step forward.
-
Adds some more info there keith, thanks.
What has striked me as odd though is the fact that APR seem to lack a proper cai for k04 based cars. I know on your BT kits you guys have your own specific cai's, but I would have though a company like apr who do software and hardware would have had a pukka cai out by now and not that carbonia stuff which seems to be form over function.
-
I agree with what you have said, but there are a load of cars out there, mine included running aftermarket intakes that make more power than the stock intake system, with no problems related to MAF scaling..
What I really think needs to happen for the betterment of all is for intake manufacturers to simply step up to the plate and use manufacturing processes that are capable of reproducing all of the inherent properties of the oem maf or to not change the maf with their intake offering.
So with that said, when will you be releasing your intake? :grin:
-
What I really think needs to happen for the betterment of all is for intake manufacturers to simply step up to the plate and use manufacturing processes that are capable of reproducing all of the inherent properties of the oem maf or to not change the maf with their intake offering.
Totally agree, would be a step forward.
If you've seen the issues regarding ko4 FSI's and aftermarket intakes you'll find this interesting:
We've been testing this issue for some time. We've only ever offered an intake that replaces the front scoop of the oem intake and leaves the oem maf housing in tact. Some people have been complaining of misfires at high rpm with ko4 upgrades to their ko3 2.0T FSI engines. We've been spear heading the issue and have found that only people with ko4's and aftermarket intakes that replace the maf housing have experienced the high rpm misfire. Our testing is showing that 3 things are contributing to the issue:
maf housing diameter being an unrepeatable tolerance. We've tested 20 intakes across 5 manufacturers and not a single maf housing diameter was consistent amongst all 20! That means even the ones made by the same company were different from each other!! None were within 7% of the OEM diameter.
shape of the maf housing. seems like it must be oval
turbulence generator. alot of people think the screen in the maf housing on the FSI is to straighten the airflow, its for the exact opposite.
-
I know that APR use the standard OEM calibration for the MAF :happy2:
Hello everyone! I'm sure this is what KRL meant but I'll clarify his post regarding APR calibrations and maf diameters and try to provide some additional info.
APR calibrates our Stage 1, Stage 2, Stage 2+ and ED30 Conversion ECU Upgrades within the OEM maf diameter (the physical maf housing) and by maintaining the original sizing parameters and scaling of the calibration surfaces in the ecu (the software attributes of the maf).
The ecu has over 2400 load and rpm dependent maps that depend upon readings from the maf in some way, shape or form. These readings are assumed to have been collected from a car with an identical cross sectional area as the oem maf. If the cross sectional area of the maf housing has changed, the ecu won't know it unless re-calibrated properly and all of these interconnected and interdependent maps will be miscalculated causing a slew of potential problems to include proper running, emissions control and power delivery.
Our Stage 3 ECU Calibrations incorporate new map scaling, algorithm adjustment, computational calculations, variable adjustment and over 78 additional ecu coding changes to accommodate for the new maf diameter.
What concerns us the most is when intake manufacturers don't properly recreate the cross sectional area, diameter, shape and inherent airflow characteristics of the oem maf housing in their product offerings. We feel its best to either leave the oem maf housing alone, properly re-manufacture it for your intake or have the ability to control both ends of the spectrum, hardware and software development, so you can make a new maf and recalibrate the ecu to operate correctly with it.
The problem most of you guys face is that you have companies that make intakes and companies that make software. These companies can't do both and aren't working together nor would you want them to.
Sure, you can buy an APR/Carbonio intake and APR software and know that they will always work perfectly together but why would you want to buy Neuspeed's intake and APR software made to work with Neuspeed's intake?
What I really think needs to happen for the betterment of all is for intake manufacturers to simply step up to the plate and use manufacturing processes that are capable of reproducing all of the inherent properties of the oem maf or to not change the maf with their intake offering.
Thanks Keith :happy2:
That is what I meant just with more info :smiley:
-
I agree with what you have said, but there are a load of cars out there, mine included running aftermarket intakes that make more power than the stock intake system, with no problems related to MAF scaling..
Please could you show what your LTFTs were?
-
Adds some more info there keith, thanks.
What has striked me as odd though is the fact that APR seem to lack a proper cai for k04 based cars. I know on your BT kits you guys have your own specific cai's, but I would have though a company like apr who do software and hardware would have had a pukka cai out by now and not that carbonia stuff which seems to be form over function.
Due to the expense and other issues with remanufacturing the maf housing we decided to offer a Stage 1 intake for the FSI that allows you to keep your oem maf housing.
We do make a solid 10-15bhp gain on the stock turbo with our current intake for the 2.0T FSI. People have just chosen to assume it doesn't do anything because of how it looks and not by actually testing the results. All tests that have been done have been very favorable.
HOWEVER!
We are releasing a new 2.0T FSI intake that is dual stage like our recently released intake for the 2.0 TSI:
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.goapr.com%2Fincludes%2Fimg%2Fproducts%2Fcarbonio_intake_mkv_tsi_017.jpg&hash=6625b8ea96f8f70d560e3087b5714555e4df3135)
Link: http://www.goapr.com/products/....html (http://www.goapr.com/products/intake_carbonio_20tsi.html)
Follow us on Facebook for more updates! (http://www.facebook.com/pages/APR-LLC/75900685355)
APR is pleased to present our Stage 2 Carbon Fiber Intake System to compliment our popular Carbon Fiber Intake for the 2.0 TSI and 2.0 TFSI engine. (http://www.goapr.com/products/intake_carbonio_20tsi.html)
Building upon the excellent gains in power delivery and linear improvement delivered by our Stage 1 Carbon Fiber Intake System that addresses the portion of the induction system ahead of the Mass Air Flow sensor, APR’s Stage 2 Carbon Fiber Intake System replaces the remaining portion of the OEM induction system from the rear of the MAF to the Turbocharger Inlet.
Constructed of aerospace grade carbon fiber and designed to remove intake restriction, APR’s Stage 2 provides smoother transitional airflow, increased air velocity, superior insulation of the incoming air to reduce intake air temperatures, laminar and turbulent airflow at key points to reduce negative incoming air pressure and a larger volume of available air to aid throttle response and turbocharger spool.
* Increased Horsepower and Torque
* Reduced Intake Air Temperatures
* Increased Air Velocity
* Smoother Transitional Airflow
* Increased Throttle Response
* Reduced Turbocharger Spool Time
Testing Video
http://www.goapr.com/media/vid...B794/ (http://www.goapr.com/media/videos/D69781F1EAEF5601/950D6888D881B794/)
Testing Results
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.goapr.com%2Fincludes%2Fimg%2Fproducts%2Fdyno%2F20tsi_apr_s1_93_carbonio1_vs_carbonio2_wheel.gif&hash=ef0eecc99616cfb75009ac87029b43ffc72c2fad)
Product Images
Stage I
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.goapr.com%2Fincludes%2Fimg%2Fproducts%2Fcarbonio_intake_mkv_tsi_005.jpg&hash=2c011f9ed04fe1a8536134cec92b7b2dc1331c9e)
Stage II
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.goapr.com%2Fincludes%2Fimg%2Fproducts%2Fcarbonio_intake_mkv_tsi_016.jpg&hash=84490c6b77686d199dbaa1858009e711252b40d8)
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.goapr.com%2Fnews%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2009%2F09%2Fcarbonio_in_stock_1.jpg&hash=90d3db36e01049410368877dd2ce5443afa8875f)
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.goapr.com%2Fnews%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2009%2F09%2Fcarbonio_in_stock_2.jpg&hash=1750f50f3b9edaec340495711c432e91288db086)
Yes, we've been working on a properly sized, shaped and flow inducing maf housing replacement for the 2.0T FSI for a long time. I feel it will be the best on the market as it will be the only one with a proper maf housing and will work for all ko3 and ko4 cars.
-
I agree with what you have said, but there are a load of cars out there, mine included running aftermarket intakes that make more power than the stock intake system, with no problems related to MAF scaling..
True, true. The ecu does have the ability to work around it but ask BPY and BWA guys that replace their ko3 with a ko4 how they work. Alot of them are finding that regardless of whose intake as long as it replaces the maf housing and regardless of whose software, misfires at high load and high rpm occur. The culprit has been determined to be improperly sized maf.
I'm not saying everyone will ever even notice running issues but as KLR suggested, you can see it in abnormal fuel trims.
What I really think needs to happen for the betterment of all is for intake manufacturers to simply step up to the plate and use manufacturing processes that are capable of reproducing all of the inherent properties of the oem maf or to not change the maf with their intake offering.
So with that said, when will you be releasing your intake? :grin:
We have one in the works and we've been working on it for a long time. Even if we didn't decide to finally invest the money into manufacturing a proper maf housing, we would still make people aware of the issues. We have to deal with it with our ED30 conversions clients so we had to find out why they were misfiring.
-
I agree with what you have said, but there are a load of cars out there, mine included running aftermarket intakes that make more power than the stock intake system, with no problems related to MAF scaling..
True, true. The ecu does have the ability to work around it but ask BPY and BWA guys that replace their ko3 with a ko4 how they work. Alot of them are finding that regardless of whose intake as long as it replaces the maf housing and regardless of whose software, misfires at high load and high rpm occur. The culprit has been determined to be improperly sized maf.
I'm not saying everyone will ever even notice running issues but as KLR suggested, you can see it in abnormal fuel trims.
What I really think needs to happen for the betterment of all is for intake manufacturers to simply step up to the plate and use manufacturing processes that are capable of reproducing all of the inherent properties of the oem maf or to not change the maf with their intake offering.
So with that said, when will you be releasing your intake? :grin:
We have one in the works and we've been working on it for a long time. Even if we didn't decide to finally invest the money into manufacturing a proper maf housing, we would still make people aware of the issues. We have to deal with it with our ED30 conversions clients so we had to find out why they were misfiring.
Its interesting that its the K04 conversion guys that are suffering, what else is different? Seems strange that its more common in those situations..
-
....
Hi Keith@APR,
What isn't clear to me from your Reply #207, is whether you now offer an intake for the 2.0T FSI (not the later TSI as in your posted pics and links).
I've been running 'your' first Carbonio ram feeding the oem airbox with ITG flat panel filter on a Stage2 Revo without any problems, but I'm interested in upgrading.
:smiley:
-
I had the carbonio and std airbox previously and the difference was pretty much negligable bhp wise, but a little bit more responsive maybe, then i swapped to the code red intake which utilised the carbonio ram scoop that i already had and the diference was vast. so this new one could be good.
Did someone mention in a previous thread that at speed, the air passes up over the grill by passing the scoop in the slam panel, hence a filter sitting behind the headlight( although mine seems ok, and ive been off the clock on numerous occasions on the autobahns)
-
Did someone mention in a previous thread that at speed, the air passes up over the grill by passing the scoop in the slam panel, hence a filter sitting behind the headlight( although mine seems ok, and ive been off the clock on numerous occasions on the autobahns)
....Yes, I've heard that to be so but never seen any 'scientific' evidence.
-
that carbon fibre intake piping looks a bit flimsy IMO, although im pretty sure they wouldnt sell it if it was. Id feel a littlie more secure with the ally piping on the ITG, Forge, HKS etc
-
....
Hi Keith@APR,
What isn't clear to me from your Reply #207, is whether you now offer an intake for the 2.0T FSI (not the later TSI as in your posted pics and links).
I've been running 'your' first Carbonio ram feeding the oem airbox with ITG flat panel filter on a Stage2 Revo without any problems, but I'm interested in upgrading.
:smiley:
Hi Robin, I believe the answer is that APR have a stage 2 for the TSI and are still developing the stage 2 for the FSI. So it is work in progress.
-
^^^^
Cheers, KRL :happy2:
-
that carbon fibre intake piping looks a bit flimsy IMO, although im pretty sure they wouldnt sell it if it was. Id feel a littlie more secure with the ally piping on the ITG, Forge, HKS etc
Its aerospace grade. Light and strong, rigid like um (use your own imagination) :happy2:
-
It seems amazing that the MAF can cause so many problems with respect to getting air into the system.
Is there such a thing as a VAG tech data manual which stipulates the operating parameters / reasons for MAF's being the size / shape they are etc???
It seems strange that the TFSi MAF's are causing so much issues, I know they have always had questionable reliability but it's amazing that the OEM intakes seem to work perfectly well when the design is nothing to write home about.
I feel in some respects I've been chasing my tail with this car, as first it was fuelling related issues, then it was arbitrary misfires, now it could be airflow related issues. Once I get back to Blighty I will head up to Storm Developments and get some logs run to see what's what as the car has had time to settle.
-
It seems amazing that the MAF can cause so many problems with respect to getting air into the system.
The maf is quite possibly the most important sensor on the engine. It measures how much air and oxygen is coming in to the combustion chamber and the ecu then bases the following operations from that info:
How much fuel to inject
when to inject the fuel
what timing angle to apply
when to fire the spark plug
So, if the maf reading is wrong, all of those really important things will be wrong too. The good news is that its a redundant system. The primary o2 sensor verifies that the calculation was correct based on the results of exhaust gas analysis and the ecu makes adjustments if things don't add up. That's why you see people talking about long term fuel trims. That's the ecu's way of saying, "everytime I calculate how much fuel to use I am running lean or richer than I am supposed to. I don't know why I need more or less fuel and my calculations will still be wrong but I'll add or take some fuel out anyways."
So, when the ecu is working this way, its not working from optimal running maps, its working from band aids to try and fix a problem it doesn't understand.
-
Are jkm stocking these yet? Are they open saturdays? Random sorry lol
-
Hmm
If the MAF sensor is measuring how much air is going into the combustion chamber (this sensor is pre turbo don't forget...still got pipework/intercooler to go through) then what is the job of the MAP (Manifold Absolute Pressure) sensor on the IC/TB pipe??
Surely that sensor is more accurate in measuring how much air is heading into the intake manifold and chamber??
-
Are jkm stocking these yet? Are they open saturdays? Random sorry lol
....JKM are closed on Saturdays and Sundays.
I don't think they've got stock yet but can order. Best you phone them on Monday and ask - 023 9263 9933
-
Cheers robin, ile get on the phone monday me thinks! Now you lot can carry on talkin the techy stuff! Lol
-
Cheers robin, ile get on the phone monday me thinks!
....If you order a Forge Twintake, don't forget that JKM are giving a forum discount.
:happy2:
-
According to Forge they still wont be available for several more weeks :-(
-
....
A comment from across the pond : -
"As far as forge quality goes.... when I got the forge box for my blow off valve spacer for my twincharger and opened the lid, I was amazed at the perfection and precision of the object.
It fitted like they had measured my cars turbo area with a laser. Such a well made product. I am sure the intake will have similar quality.
At least for the price its going to look "bespoke".
-
Hmm
If the MAF sensor is measuring how much air is going into the combustion chamber (this sensor is pre turbo don't forget...still got pipework/intercooler to go through) then what is the job of the MAP (Manifold Absolute Pressure) sensor on the IC/TB pipe??
Surely that sensor is more accurate in measuring how much air is heading into the intake manifold and chamber??
The total air volume/oxygen content hitting the combustion chamber is calculated by the maf and modelled in the ecu based on the requested boost pressure. The ecu knows that x amount of g/s through the maf will be compressed to y psi and will therefore equal x total air volume/oxygen content.
The MAP's job is to report to the ecu that requested boost is met and all in the boost pressure system is acting as it should. The ecu doesn't calculate based on actual psi, it calculates based on requested psi as long as there are no faults.
-
....
A comment from across the pond : -
"As far as forge quality goes.... when I got the forge box for my blow off valve spacer for my twincharger and opened the lid, I was amazed at the perfection and precision of the object.
It fitted like they had measured my cars turbo area with a laser. Such a well made product. I am sure the intake will have similar quality.
At least for the price its going to look "bespoke".
agreed on that, every forge product I've seen is machined brilliantly, another bonus things is that their British and I'm sure many other companies produce quality kit but I'd like to keep as much of the money I spend in British engineering and manufacturing.
-
agreed on that, every forge product I've seen is machined brilliantly, another bonus things is that their British and I'm sure many other companies produce quality kit but I'd like to keep as much of the money I spend in British engineering and manufacturing.
....I'm afraid that I'm much more inclined to go with what I think is the most suitable product for my car irrespective of where its produced.
-
agreed on that, every forge product I've seen is machined brilliantly, another bonus things is that their British and I'm sure many other companies produce quality kit but I'd like to keep as much of the money I spend in British engineering and manufacturing.
....I'm afraid that I'm much more inclined to go with what I think is the most suitable product for my car irrespective of where its produced.
Agreed, its just a added bonus that forge are british :smiley:
-
Looks hefty. How does it sound? I'd have those forge stickers off straight away
-
I put mine on over the weekend.
Looks good IMO.
Not really had chance to get my opinion on the performance as yet..
Cheers to NickBarnes :happy2:
Hi Monk,
What wouyld be really interesting is you posting up some VCDS logging, specifically the mass air flow readings (g/s) :happy2: alongside enrgine rpm/load
-
Sorry mate didn't mean to offend just not my bag with the logo
-
It's just me being a fussy bugger. Don't mind me ;)
-
Where did you get it from im tryin to track one down?! Looks awsome by the way
mitch
-
....
Where's the opening for air in the 'branch' from the battery area?
Is it underneath?
-
I believe a load will be for K03 cars powder coated black.
....The best coating for heat resistence would be ceramic, not powdercoated.
I've got some of that gold tape though.
-
I put mine on over the weekend.
Looks good IMO.
Not really had chance to get my opinion on the performance as yet..
Cheers to NickBarnes :happy2:
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdaz.co%2Fmedia%2Fd179%2Fmillview2002%2FPhoto132.jpg&hash=01f2d81ea9c9c6d62f1d25a07e88283795b9f5d1)
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdaz.co%2Fmedia%2Fd179%2Fmillview2002%2FPhoto131.jpg&hash=b10c7d2321a732b4ea70547d1a74ff565c83eefd)
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdaz.co%2Fmedia%2Fd179%2Fmillview2002%2FPhoto129.jpg&hash=b64516363ce95e6c350b02d81d2e2b8c90de676f)
looking good, :drool: , how did the car hunting go????
-
Yeah
It's a big "Y" piece.
I believe a load will be for K03 cars powder coated black.
your correct, i beleive they are making 20 or so at the moment, most if not all will be for k03 cars, i think the k04 take of pipe is an extra cost if wanted (dont quote me on that though as i am not 100% sure) and i think they may mostly be black as well, whick looks very very good in the engine bay, sort of blends in with the oe colours
-
According to Forge they still wont be available for several more weeks :-(
This is just the impatient child in me, but the wait is wearing thin.
Especially when bundles exist with the VF k04 intake, hpfp and an ed30/Pirelli remap from GIAC that specifically works with the different diameter intake:
http://www.eurospeed.net.au/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=4_5&products_id=13
Intake only (the GIAC remap reference is to get the best results from the specific VF intake):
http://www.eurospeed.net.au/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=4_5&products_id=14
AWE just released their CCB and APR have a few new goodies arriving.
... yet i'm still keen on the Forge... in black.
-
According to Forge they still wont be available for several more weeks :-(
This is just the impatient child in me, but the wait is wearing thin.
Especially when bundles exist with the VF k04 intake, hpfp and an ed30/Pirelli remap from GIAC that specifically works with the different diameter intake:
http://www.eurospeed.net.au/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=4_5&products_id=13
Intake only (the GIAC remap reference is to get the best results from the specific VF intake):
http://www.eurospeed.net.au/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=4_5&products_id=14
AWE just released their CCB and APR have a few new goodies arriving.
... yet i'm still keen on the Forge... in black.
Interesting links TINTO, GIAC are the first tuner I've heard of to release intake specific remaps for the K04.
-
....
Some interesting info from 'Mike@Forge' from across the pond : -
"..there are other benefits to a twin filter setup; rather having the largest possible surface area to the filtering media. Consider that a given filter size will pose a given level of restriction to airflow, based primarily on the density of the filtering media. This will result in a given level of vacuum after the filter. Two identical filters, of the same level of restriction, applied to the same application as in this case, will double the effective airflow possible by decreasing the restriction by roughly half. This will equate to more power potential."
I'm sure that many of us were wondering how this twin pipe stuff worked - I know I was.
:happy2:
-
That GTi 2.0T Pirelli Edition with HFP upgrade & VF K04 Intake link above seems a little odd seeing that they quote a huge variation of 55-95HP and 55-120 FT/LBS gain instead of a single approximate number for each parameter.
-
The GIAC results for their race map with the VF intake on an S3 recently were surprisingly low even allowing for the dyno lottery.
-
It is very vague.
I'm basing my interest on an Aussie Pirelli owner who went for the k04 intake, hpfp and specific giac tune and has said it was a phenomenal leap in the mid range grunt. I don't know what his baseline was (eg stock or stage 1), so take it with a grain of salt...
Other discussions on vortex and golfmkv have been regarding maf issues specifically on aftermarket intakes. Where one software/hardware tuner saying they stick to the stock sizing with their intake to not confuse the sensor, and that all intake manufacturers should follow their example if they want to work with their software...
but here you have two separate companies working together on hardware and software with decent (if vague) results.
Robern, do you know if that was with the k04 specific intake and map? I believe they are both pretty new.
It's not the same diameter as a normal intake, and presumably not the normal tune.
Don't take my comments as an endorsement.
I'm just a bit bogged down reading as much as I can about intakes before taking the plunge myself.
-
it was indeed the K04 intake (its an S3) and the latest stage 2 map.
-
Cant wait to get my hands on one of these! Cars booked in to have one fitted and a milly 3" dp stage 2 here i come!
-
Where you getting it all fitted Mitch? Are you remapping too?
-
Im tryin out AMD woking mate, offering a good price and its local, i was going with jkm but i cant get the time off in the week where as amd are able to do saturdays, im going stage 2 blufin as im already with them but im open minded about it as im considering a revo trial aswell i dont think blufin is going to be aggressive enough?! Watch this space maybe a blufin hand set forsale soon lol
-
Mitch,
is yours booked in to have the forge twin intake fitted, only I was led to believe there's still no official release date yet.
-
Its booked in mate but havnt got 100% that the intake will be released by then so i wont no till near the day! I just booked in for a slot just incase it is realy! Fingers crossed tho.
-
http://www.forgemotorsport.co.uk/content.asp?inc=product&product=FMIND12_[FMIND12D]_[New%20Code]&cat=
Its now available :happy2: :happy2: for some anyway
-
gorgeous in black :happy2: but £350 :surprised:
-
I agree it looks mint but After a phone call to Forge yesterday I can't justify the £359 to my doorstep :surprised:
-
Dave at the TT Shop forwarded this to me from Forge Motorsport yesterday.
Hi Dave
The Edition 30 is a different one and I believe these will all be vehicle specific without any compatibility with other 2.0 applications. There are engine considerations for the Golf 2.0 being the CCTA and CBFA engines requiring our FMIND12A part number. The following is a breakdown of when the various 2.0 twintakes are estimated to be available.
Scirocco - available now
Golf - 3 weeks
Golf Ed. 30 - 4 weeks
Leon Cupra - 7 weeks
S3 - 3 months
4 weeks :sad1:
Neil
-
£350 quid is ok, i can deal with that. especially as my intake, carbonio and engine cover have a buyer willing to pay 200 for it, which makes the price look so much more attractive.
was just about to order one, but i see the waiting lists which do not include the vRS. Im presumiong it will fit though as the evoms intake for the GTI is exactly the same as the vRS.
Whos selling cheapest. or are they all being sold atthe same price(I would phone but im stil waiting for sky to activate my phone two weeks on) and what suppliers have we found so far??
forge
JKM
AmdTechnik
any more
-
If someone near to me buys the twintake and is interested in letting me borrow it, I'll be able to fabricate a quick "singletake" variant in a week or so.
-
Im ordering mine on monday, the wife gave the go ahead(not that I had to ask for permission......but i did :ashamed:) but I was wandering where abouts the second filter was attached to behind the lamp. I havent had a detailed look yet. Does the filter just hang there, secured by the ram scoop top filter, or is it bolted somewhere. just hoping its a direct swap from GTI to vRS. they usually are. if not ill no doubt be pestering the fabricators in work to make me a bracket
-
bad news if you have an octavia vRS and want the twein take as although the pipework will fit, the parts which bolt into the slam panel and behind the rear light will not fit.
looks like ill be buying the ITG intake then.
-
i dont think thats a bad price to be honest... may well invest as a christmas present to myself :drinking:
-
Hey Guys!
18 pages, wow!
If anyone would care to Cliff Notes them for me I'll reply to any unanswered questions remaining.
Thanks!
-
Hey Guys!
18 pages, wow!
If anyone would care to Cliff Notes them for me I'll reply to any unanswered questions remaining.
Thanks!
Keith if you have a spare 5 mins you could answer this one Thanks
http://www.seatcupra.net/forums/showthread.php?t=238124
-
Hey Guys!
18 pages, wow!
If anyone would care to Cliff Notes them for me I'll reply to any unanswered questions remaining.
Thanks!
Keith if you have a spare 5 mins you could answer this one Thanks
http://www.seatcupra.net/forums/showthread.php?t=238124
Got it!
-
Hey Guys!
18 pages, wow!
If anyone would care to Cliff Notes them for me I'll reply to any unanswered questions remaining.
Thanks!
Keith if you have a spare 5 mins you could answer this one Thanks
http://www.seatcupra.net/forums/showthread.php?t=238124
Got it!
Thanks for the update Just off to read you post :happy2:
-
Well I'm a bit bored and on the puter in the TT Shop at Bedford having the Forge Twintake and catch can fitted.
Can I just say while it's great for us all to have the opportunity to improve the performance of our cars through the development of these parts (jonny c), you really need to consider - SOME OF US HAVE JOINT BANK ACCOUNTS !!!
:signLOL:
I've had a thought though; when she sees the bank statement I'm going to tell her it's any early Christmas present for her, a down payment for a boob job at the Terrific Tit Shop. :happy2:
Looking forward to the drive home
Neil
-
nice one Neil :happy2:
care to share why you went Forge rather than ITG?
I reckon some members on here are already honourary members of the T T S , cos they are right t*** :grin:
JKM on my bill : 'Johns Knob Modification' ? :surprised: , would the misses be happy with that :signLOL:
-
nice one. let us know how you get on with it as im thinking of having this put on mine too
-
Well I'm a bit bored and on the puter in the TT Shop at Bedford having the Forge Twintake and catch can fitted.
Can I just say while it's great for us all to have the opportunity to improve the performance of our cars through the development of these parts (jonny c), you really need to consider - SOME OF US HAVE JOINT BANK ACCOUNTS !!!
:signLOL:
I've had a thought though; when she sees the bank statement I'm going to tell her it's any early Christmas present for her, a down payment for a boob job at the Terrific Tit Shop. :happy2:
Looking forward to the drive home
Neil
:grin: :congrats:
-
....
For those seeking the cheapest price, IIRC, JKM are offering forum members a discount but I forgot how much.
T: 023 9263 9933
The Forge looks soooo much better in black and much tidier than the ITG, but I wonder what the differences are in performance, if any.
-
Well I'm a bit bored and on the puter in the TT Shop at Bedford having the Forge Twintake and catch can fitted.
Can I just say while it's great for us all to have the opportunity to improve the performance of our cars through the development of these parts (jonny c), you really need to consider - SOME OF US HAVE JOINT BANK ACCOUNTS !!!
:signLOL:
I've had a thought though; when she sees the bank statement I'm going to tell her it's any early Christmas present for her, a down payment for a boob job at the Terrific Tit Shop. :happy2:
Looking forward to the drive home
Neil
Neil, give Justin a prod from me and ask him to return my e-mail! :wink:
-
....
For those seeking the cheapest price, IIRC, JKM are offering forum members a discount but I forgot how much.
T: 023 9263 9933
The Forge looks soooo much better in black and much tidier than the ITG, but I wonder what the differences are in performance, if any.
you reckon the ITG looks untidy? :surprised:
-
I think it's more because of the black colour - appears hidden behind the grille where as the ITG one is visible.
-
I think it's more because of the black colour - appears hidden behind the grille where as the ITG one is visible.
What grille Stealth you've lost me? :confused:
-
....
For those seeking the cheapest price, IIRC, JKM are offering forum members a discount but I forgot how much.
T: 023 9263 9933
The Forge looks soooo much better in black and much tidier than the ITG, but I wonder what the differences are in performance, if any.
you reckon the ITG looks untidy? :surprised:
+2 :innocent:
-
The Forge looks soooo much better in black and much tidier than the ITG, but I wonder what the differences are in performance, if any.
you reckon the ITG looks untidy? :surprised:
....Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the ITG isn't very good but, purely aesthetically (for anyone who considers such aspects), it's a collection of many pieces with lots of clips etc (raiding a parts bin?) whereas the Forge has much tidier pipework even with its branch.
Regardless of the degree of under bonnet eye-candy I'm genuinely interested what the performance differences might be between the two.
-
What grille Stealth you've lost me? :confused:
Ignore me. I misread twintake as twintercooler. I blame it on the four hours of sleep per 24 hr period for the last 9 days!
Anyhoo, yeah RR was on about tidyness. I do admit, the foam baffle IMO doesn't look particularly neat or fancy but the rest of the kit looks good.
-
nice one. let us know how you get on with it as im thinking of having this put on mine too
x2 I was close to ordering the ITG offering but was speaking to the chap who will be doing the warranty work for my blown miltek exhaust asked him about fitting the ITG for me and advised me against it saying the open foam cone they use is ideal for race cars as they have their engines rebuilt frequently but for a road car it is less practical due to what can get through the filter..
confused now as had my mind set on the itg - he is in no way connected to forge etc just a small independent garage who is a milltek and bilstein agent
so is the twintake a safer option as it uses two closed filters rather than a open cone?
-
nice one. let us know how you get on with it as im thinking of having this put on mine too
x2 I was close to ordering the ITG offering but was speaking to the chap who will be doing the warranty work for my blown miltek exhaust asked him about fitting the ITG for me and advised me against it saying the open foam cone they use is ideal for race cars as they have their engines rebuilt frequently but for a road car it is less practical due to what can get through the filter..
confused now as had my mind set on the itg - he is in no way connected to forge etc just a small independent garage who is a milltek and bilstein agent
so is the twintake a safer option as it uses two closed filters rather than a open cone?
What do you think to the Dbilas??
-
Dbilas is alright had a few issues which I have noticed others have experienced which is the stutter when upshifting under WOT (dsg)
the filter is also rather small - smaller than oem - now I'm stage 2+ I'm not sure it can supply the required air flow
For what it costs c£320 the quality is nothing on the itg or forge twintake
But probably is the quietest CAI on the Market
-
Dbilas is alright had a few issues which I have noticed others have experienced which is the stutter when upshifting under WOT (dsg)
the filter is also rather small - smaller than oem - now I'm stage 2+ I'm not sure it can supply the required air flow
For what it costs c£320 the quality is nothing on the itg or forge twintake
But probably is the quietest CAI on the Market
You expecting gains over the Dbilas? Had dbilas on my APR Stage 2+ for a while and had no bother...
-
nice one. let us know how you get on with it as im thinking of having this put on mine too
x2 I was close to ordering the ITG offering but was speaking to the chap who will be doing the warranty work for my blown miltek exhaust asked him about fitting the ITG for me and advised me against it saying the open foam cone they use is ideal for race cars as they have their engines rebuilt frequently but for a road car it is less practical due to what can get through the filter..
confused now as had my mind set on the itg - he is in no way connected to forge etc just a small independent garage who is a milltek and bilstein agent
so is the twintake a safer option as it uses two closed filters rather than a open cone?
there are different grades of foam they use in the open filters, Andy at ITG assured me the grade they use for the road applications is spot-on :smiley:
-
nice one. let us know how you get on with it as im thinking of having this put on mine too
x2 I was close to ordering the ITG offering but was speaking to the chap who will be doing the warranty work for my blown miltek exhaust asked him about fitting the ITG for me and advised me against it saying the open foam cone they use is ideal for race cars as they have their engines rebuilt frequently but for a road car it is less practical due to what can get through the filter..
confused now as had my mind set on the itg - he is in no way connected to forge etc just a small independent garage who is a milltek and bilstein agent
so is the twintake a safer option as it uses two closed filters rather than a open cone?
there are different grades of foam they use in the open filters, Andy at ITG assured me the grade they use for the road applications is spot-on :smiley:
correctomundo. there are lots of different thickness and density foam filters available dependant on the type of engine.
I remember him saying about turbo'd cars needing a better grade of foam to limit the amount of microns that can get through the filter, whereas the a normally aspirated engine does not require the same amount of filtration on the filter.
-
For the people that are after the forge twintake type design, they might aswell save a bit of money and go for a dbilas. They are both pretty much identical and share similiar flaws.
-
For the people that are after the forge twintake type design, they might aswell save a bit of money and go for a dbilas. They are both pretty much identical and share similiar flaws.
....And those flaws are?
Sorry but I don't see how "they are both pretty much identical" but I'm willing to learn. :smiley:
-
For the people that are after the forge twintake type design, they might aswell save a bit of money and go for a dbilas. They are both pretty much identical and share similiar flaws.
....And those flaws are?
Sorry but I don't see how "they are both pretty much identical" but I'm willing to learn. :smiley:
The only real difference between the dbilas and the twintake, is that the forge has that extra filter gimmick attached to it. Both share the flaw of non oem maf housing size, unless forge have changed that since, as I lost interest in their product as they kept dragging their feet. August was a long time ago :signLOL:
Also, forge used to bang on about how their original cai was in the best position and of the best decision. And now they are coming out with the twintake. Change of heart or what.
-
The only real difference between the dbilas and the twintake, is that the forge has that extra filter gimmick attached to it. Both share the flaw of non oem maf housing size, unless forge have changed that since, as I lost interest in their product as they kept dragging their feet. August was a long time ago :signLOL:
....Indeed, Forge usually take what seems like forever to release their products after first announcing them. They would say that they believe in very extensively testing them to their own satisfaction before launching and I have no reason to think that this is not the case.
Do you have any hard facts to support your view that the extra side filter is merely a gimmick? - It may be so but such a claim does deserve evidence.
Perhaps I should re-read the (long) ITG filter thread to re-acquaint myself with any discussions about MAF housing sizes but IIRC aren't ITG claiming to be one of the very few who use the same size as oem?
Whatever the strengths and weaknesses of the new Forge Twintercooler, to be fair I don't think we know enough about its performance yet, or at least I don't.
-
The only other CAI know that uses the correct Inner Diameter for the MAF housing (67mm) is the BSH True Seal intake.
-
...forge...and...dbilas....share similiar flaws.
What are the flaws? Don't have much knowledge on CAIs.
-
Granted I never to logging or detailed testing but ive never had trouble with my Dbilas. Pretty certain I had gains over the
carbonio panel filter...
-
whats the MAF housing diameter for the EVOMS???
-
whats the MAF housing diameter for the EVOMS???
I might be miles off but I was talking to Regal today about there stage 2 and I am sure he said they replace the MAF with a 3" item. :confused: :ashamed:
Also with a Turbo back system and uprated fuel pump can get 370 BHP from a Edition 30! :driver: :evilgrin:
-
I might be miles off but I was talking to Regal today about there stage 2 and I am sure he said they replace the MAF with a 3" item. :confused: :ashamed:
GIAC do a specialised map for the VF Engineering intake where they change the MAF tables to suit the diameter of the VF Engineering Intake's MAF housing so my guess would be that this is what Regal were referring to as they are a GIAC dealer.
-
I might be miles off but I was talking to Regal today about there stage 2 and I am sure he said they replace the MAF with a 3" item. :confused: :ashamed:
GIAC do a specialised map for the VF Engineering intake where they change the MAF tables to suit the diameter of the VF Engineering Intake's MAF housing so my guess would be that this is what Regal were referring to as they are a GIAC dealer.
Thanks for clearing that up buddy :smiley:
-
I might be miles off but I was talking to Regal today about there stage 2 and I am sure he said they replace the MAF with a 3" item. :confused: :ashamed:
GIAC do a specialised map for the VF Engineering intake where they change the MAF tables to suit the diameter of the VF Engineering Intake's MAF housing so my guess would be that this is what Regal were referring to as they are a GIAC dealer.
This is correct, was just about to post the same.
The only real difference between the dbilas and the twintake, is that the forge has that extra filter gimmick attached to it. Both share the flaw of non oem maf housing size, unless forge have changed that since, as I lost interest in their product as they kept dragging their feet. August was a long time ago :signLOL:
....Indeed, Forge usually take what seems like forever to release their products after first announcing them. They would say that they believe in very extensively testing them to their own satisfaction before launching and I have no reason to think that this is not the case.
Do you have any hard facts to support your view that the extra side filter is merely a gimmick? - It may be so but such a claim does deserve evidence.
That sounds so similiar to what they were saying about their first CAI, when people were criticising forge for where the cone was positioned. It just seems all a bit contradictory to what they have said before.
Im not good enough at maths and science to tell you why its flawed, but going by what I have read about the twintake, it makes sense to me.
-
Im not good enough at maths and science to tell you why its flawed, but going by what I have read about the twintake, it makes sense to me.
....Do you have any links to what you have read about the twintake, please?
I'm not totally convinced yet about whether the extra 'side' intake adds a significant advantage but neither can I dismiss it yet - We need more information and evidence of its results. A Search in the forum across the pond may yield more info - I don't remember the exact detail but Mike @ Forge posted explanations.
Regarding the MAF housing size factor, it appears that either aftermarket intake products keep to the same size or it's accommodated via the remap? But either way, I don't think we hear of loads of failures due to aftermarket air intakes < I stand to be corrected.
I'll see if I can find Mike @ Forge's post and copy it here.
-
^^^^
Found something already - Quoted from Mike @ Forge (USA) : -
"The incorporation of a second filter doesn't introduce more airflow volume. The 70mm piping, which is the max allowable for proper MAF calibration, will only flow a finite volume of air regardless of the number of filters used. Higher flowing air filters, however, provide for a reduction in effort required to draw air through them due to a decrease in flow restriction. A larger surface area through which airflow is introduced, provides for the least possible restriction in flow.
The main idea, though, is to create sealed inlets that allow for the introduction of the coolest ambient air possible.
Believe it or not, the addition of the second sealed inlet behind the headlight showed an increase in airflow and power over a single ram air design used previously on our Scirocco.
Just about 3 hp over stock with the single inlet, and an additional 10 hp moreso than that with the dual setup."
I'll keep reading and add any more info but what he's saying does make some sense imo.
-
see i dont get that, its taken this long for the intake folk to work out the available filter area was a limitation?
3 bhp for 1 inlet , or 13 bhp for both is a huge difference!
wonder if that is specific to the type of filters used for the twintake , or applies to others as well???
great info RR :happy2:
-
....
I also picked up the suggestion by someone non-Forge : -
"You have to look at it as there is now less load or restriction per filter so in my mind it may reduce the N75 duty cycle making the turbo have to work less sucking in that air from outside. I do love the bolted completely sealed intake air tract though. Only fresh air hitting the filters this is pretty much the only true ram air style intake."
Also, according to Mike @ Forge : -
- All pipes will be powdercoated BLACK - all polished pipes shown to date have been prototypes or the initial pre-production run of 10 kits.
- The logos will no longer be rivetted to the cannisters - they will be stickers that you can affix yourself.
I have to say that I'm warming to this intake.
-
see i dont get that, its taken this long for the intake folk to work out the available filter area was a limitation?
3 bhp for 1 inlet , or 13 bhp for both is a huge difference!
wonder if that is specific to the type of filters used for the twintake , or applies to others as well???
....I think the intake folk knew already but none of them, until Forge, had worked out how to dramatically increase the filter area beyond a cone's surface area versus a panel filter's surface area (restricted by the oem airbox).
Sometimes those simple and obvious solutions are the best. The penny has suddenly dropped in my mind about having two filters - It's not the quantity but the increased total area.
-
see i dont get that, its taken this long for the intake folk to work out the available filter area was a limitation?
3 bhp for 1 inlet , or 13 bhp for both is a huge difference!
wonder if that is specific to the type of filters used for the twintake , or applies to others as well???
....I think they knew already but hadn't worked out how to dramatically increase the filter area beyond a cone's surface area versus a panel filter's surface area (restricted by the oem airbox).
Sometimes those simple and obvious solutions are the best. The penny has suddenly dropped in my mind about having two filters - It's not the quantity but the increased total area.
:happy2:
The twintake simply has the largest effective sealed filter area of any intake on the market as far as I understand it.. No matter what some people seem to think, it works, its been proved over and over and thats the end of it..
Buy one Robin, you wont regret it mate :smiley:
-
andy at ITG said the same, when it comes to filtering you its all about surface area, and the removal of hot air from the equation. Andy even said the idea of the twintake is a very good concept and solves the problem. His only issue was he thought where the two filters merged in the pipework could be improved on in his mind. but that was his only issue with it
@ robin I reckon this is the filter for you, it looks the part, and IMO if its capable of supplying enough air to jonnyc S3 which is prob around 240bhp more than your GTI, then it must give a good increase over the stock intake
-
I get the reasoning guys, but I'm surprised it took so long, as from initial dyno runs with no filter at all vs one filter, would have immediately shown the limitation.
Anyways undoubtedly a great product.
for me the two factors are
1 : filter medium used by both (Forge preferred)
2 : MAF sizing (ITG preferred)
what I want is the ITG tubing with the Forge upstream piping and filters......
ITG vs Forge twintake , we need a dyno comparison :happy2:
-
for me the two factors are
1 : filter medium used by both (Forge preferred)
2 : MAF sizing (ITG preferred)
what I want is the ITG tubing with the Forge upstream piping and filters......
ITG vs Forge twintake , we need a dyno comparison :happy2:
....We'd need to install each intake on the same car on the same dyno on the same day to get a true relative comparison. That's quite a bit of work. But I agree that it would be very interesting. The ITG and Twintake appear to be the strongest current rivals for the #1 spot.
I'm not hearing of any MAF issues on the FSI engine from the Forge Twintake. They did initially have issues on their TSI version but have now solved them, they say. So, although ITG are right to be proud of how they retain the MAF sizing, there is more than one way to skin a cat [Have I ever? you may ask].
-
The twintake simply has the largest effective sealed filter area of any intake on the market as far as I understand it.. No matter what some people seem to think, it works, its been proved over and over and thats the end of it..
Buy one Robin, you wont regret it mate :smiley:
....You happen to be someone who's advice in such matters I take notice of and I know you were running one on your Ed30 and reported being very pleased.
I have a couple of other financial committments I need to deal with first before buying an intake but the Twintake has now risen on my never ending list of mods for serious consideration.
:happy2: 8) :happy2:
-
@ robin I reckon this is the filter for you, it looks the part, and IMO if its capable of supplying enough air to jonnyc S3 which is prob around 240bhp more than your GTI, then it must give a good increase over the stock intake
....You know me well, Sy! :smiley: - I like both reliable performance and eye-candy under my bonnet. Some say that they don't care how things look under the bonnet and I do understand that it's stupid to primarily go for only eye-candy, but I get asked to open my bonnet quite often just because I have a carbon one and because many car enthusiasts like to look at engine bays - Me included. It's not a show car though - It's just that the owner likes to pose :wink:
I currently run a Carbonio with ITG panel filter and IF I buy a Twintake it will be from JKM* and we'll do dyno runs and probably on-road logging before and after. But I'll be turning down my Revo2 Boost to 4 because I don't want to rush into the expense of an APR fuel pump (I'm not interested in the other pump) nor the extra stresses of Stage 2+. I'm not being a 'hater' of Revo2+ - It's just that it will make everything work that much harder.
I know jonnyc was/is running a Twintake on his Ed30 but not if on his S3. But either way, he's running waaaay more power than me.
Btw, I've spotted your name on the forum across the pond (which I only frequent occasionally if there's an interesting subject).
:happy2:
* JKM are offering a discount on the Forge Twintake for this forum's members.
-
all good advice but is the MAF housing thing an issue or not?
either it is and ITG have it right , or its not an issue and Forge have taken advantage of this....
if its not Id like to know how forge have worked around it.
RR you also need to consider that jonnyc's car was way above the mid point for 'modded' cars.
so maybe not each intake works well for each spec std / stage1 / stage2+ / BT etc
just looking for answers :happy2:
-
Im going to take the car down to Forge to have an intake made on the car, looking forward to having the Twintake on there to see the difference it makes..
-
all good advice but is the MAF housing thing an issue or not?
either it is and ITG have it right , or its not an issue and Forge have taken advantage of this....
if its not Id like to know how forge have worked around it.
RR you also need to consider that jonnyc's car was way above the mid point for 'modded' cars.
so maybe not each intake works well for each spec std / stage1 / stage2+ / BT etc
just looking for answers :happy2:
....I think it was Keith from APR who posted some detailed explanations about potential MAF issues. I now want to search for and read again - It may even be somewhere in this loooong thread we're in here!
In loose terms I'm thinking that such MAF issues aren't necessarily black & white. Mike @ Forge USA has certainly stated quite clearly that the FSI version Twintake has no MAF issues but that the TSI version had and they have been solved by moving its position in the stream and this has of course quite rightly delayed final production.
ITG's solution of maintaining the MAF housing etc is excellent and would appear to be foolproof. However, I put it to you that by emphasising they have done this, ITG potentially gain more credibility and hence market < I hasten very quickly to add that there is absolutely nothing wrong at all in such an approach (imo). In marketing it's called product differentiation.
I'm not an expert - Very few of us here are and even experts in the same industry don't always agree.
Good point about jonnyc's car and how different intakes will work best with different cars - Not just their remaps (or not) but also high-flow exhausts and other mods. To that end I am already in discussion with someone regarding my individual car and the effect of intakes.
Like you, I'm just looking for answers too and can afford to be objective.
[Don't forget about cat skinning :evilgrin:]
-
I'd love to see some flow figures for the Twintake.
Anything over 290g/s at 6900rpm and I'd be interested. :jumping:
-
I'd love to see some flow figures for the Twintake.
Anything over 290g/s at 6900rpm and I'd be interested. :jumping:
....Keep an eye on the forum across the pond, John - Forge's Mike over there is a dude who obliges with such info. [The majority of the rest either just nod their heads and keep saying "sick!" or have verbal fights with each other which don't get moderated].
:happy2:
-
The thing is Robin, we need to see flow figures for both K03 and K04, as they will not be the same. Mike @ Forge may have an answer for both though :happy2:
-
I'd love to see some flow figures for the Twintake.
Anything over 290g/s at 6900rpm and I'd be interested. :jumping:
what were the flow figures for the ITG on stevep's car
-
Heard Simons ITG last night. Very tempting. Think if im spending c£300 on another inlet I need
to see which may give gains or ensure there are no losses over my Dbilas
-
The flow figures will not be accurate unless the MAF housing size is set correctly! The MAF tables are calibrated to the OEM MAF housing size therefore if you change the size of the MAF housing the reading will not be accurate. So if Forge do not have a MAF housing ID of 67mm (I do not know what the ID is on the twintake) the figures will be skewed just as they are for any other intake with incorrect MAF housing sizes.
-
Heard Simons ITG last night. Very tempting. Think if im spending c£300 on another inlet I need to see which may give gains or ensure there are no losses over my Dbilas
....I don't know how the ITG compares but theoretically the basic assumption that the Twintake has more surface area than the Dbilas, due to having two filters (I don't think they are tiny), strongly suggests that the Twintake will give you gains over your Dbilas.
I think that most of us consider four things when choosing an intake (each of us having a different order of preference) : -
- Performance.
- Looks and build quality.
- Sound.
- Cost.
Currently, considering all the air intakes available, it seems to me to be just a two-horse race with the Twintake running as favourite over ITG. But the tote can change.
Expect to see quite a few other brands of previously used air intakes listed for sale.
-
The flow figures will not be accurate unless the MAF housing size is set correctly! The MAF tables are calibrated to the OEM MAF housing size therefore if you change the size of the MAF housing the reading will not be accurate. So if Forge do not have a MAF housing ID of 67mm (I do not know what the ID is on the twintake) the figures will be skewed just as they are for any other intake with incorrect MAF housing sizes.
....Presumably it's quite a simple question to ask Forge about how they accommodate the needs of the MAF.
But I for one am not forgetting that even industry experts can disagree and that cats may be skinned in more than one way.
-
.....
Whilst searching for some specific MAF info about the Twintake, here's some other info from Mike @ Forge which offers explanations about how twin filters work : -
"There are other benefits to a twin filter setup; rather having the largest possible surface area to the filtering media. Consider that a given filter size will pose a given level of restriction to airflow, based primarily on the density of the filtering media. This will result in a given level of vacuum after the filter. Two identical filters, of the same level of restriction, applied to the same application as in this case, will double the effective airflow possible by decreasing the restriction by roughly half. This will equate to more power potential."
HTH - Now back onto my searching..............
-
iirc the MAF ID is 70mm for the twintake... :smiley:
-
I'd love to see some flow figures for the Twintake.
Anything over 290g/s at 6900rpm and I'd be interested. :jumping:
what were the flow figures for the ITG on stevep's car
We need to wait on SteveP for that as I think the last set of flow rates didn't go up to 6900rpm.
The EVOM's intake I have flows around 280-285g/s.
A rough calculation of flow rate at 0.8 / g/s gives the bhp of the car, so on a Stage 2+ ED30......
280 / 0.8 = 350bhp
285 / 0.8 = 356.25bhp
290 / 0.8 = 362.5bhp
295 / 0.8 = 368.75bhp
Only a rough calculation, but generally close.
-
^ Yes but you can't trust those figures Hurdy because the EVOMS does not have a 67mm MAF housing.
-
^ Yes but you can't trust those figures Hurdy because the EVOMS does not have a 67mm MAF housing.
This is true. With a larger diameter MAF pipe it most likely would be flowing more :confused:
-
iirc the MAF ID is 70mm for the twintake... :smiley:
....Aha! That 70mm value rings bells but there's so much stuff to wade through to find it myself. You are usually correct in the info you post, bacillus.
:happy2:
-
^ Yes but you can't trust those figures Hurdy because the EVOMS does not have a 67mm MAF housing.
This is true. With a larger diameter MAF pipe it most likely would be flowing more :confused:
....I'm probably barking up the wrong tree, but does the MAF dia consequently influence plotted results on a rolling-road?
Sorry if it's a stoopid question - I'm a bit confused by how important the MAF size is or not and I still need to read APR Keith's posts about it.
-
^ Yes but you can't trust those figures Hurdy because the EVOMS does not have a 67mm MAF housing.
Really? I thought it was standard size. :surprised:
-
^ Yes but you can't trust those figures Hurdy because the EVOMS does not have a 67mm MAF housing.
This is true. With a larger diameter MAF pipe it most likely would be flowing more :confused:
....I'm probably barking up the wrong tree, but does the MAF dia consequently influence plotted results on a rolling-road?
Sorry if it's a stoopid question - I'm a bit confused by how important the MAF size is or not and I still need to read APR Keith's posts about it.
The MAF diameter has nothing to do with the RR results you get.
The MAF sensor measures flow based upon the set OEM inside cross-sectional area (CSA) of the MAF housing.
The MAF measures speed and the calculation with the MAF housing CSA gives a resultant volume of air passing at that point in time.
If the MAF housing is larger than stock then the MAF will still measure the actual speed of air being drawn in but will still use the OEM CSA of the MAF housing to calculate the volume flow instead of the larger CSA of the aftermarket intake.
The problem with going much larger will be that the air fuel ratio (AFR) will be wrong and could cause running issues with the car, like running lean,hot etc.
:happy2:
-
The info you seek is in this very thread :smiley:
I posted about MAF houses sizes and the problems a wrong MAF housing size can cause here:
http://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=6546.msg114369#msg114369
Then Keith posted a load more info about how APR calibrate the MAF tables here:
http://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=6546.msg115074#msg115074
-
The MAF sensor measures flow based upon the set OEM inside cross-sectional area (CSA) of the MAF housing.
The MAF measures speed and the calculation with the MAF housing CSA gives a resultant volume of air passing at that point in time.
If the MAF housing is larger than stock then the MAF will still measure the actual speed of air being drawn in but will still use the OEM CSA of the MAF housing to calculate the volume flow instead of the larger CSA of the aftermarket intake.
The problem with going much larger will be that the air fuel ratio (AFR) will be wrong and could cause running issues with the car, like running lean,hot etc.
....Thanks for explaining that, John.
So, the MAF isn't SMART technology but does its calculations according to OEM presets which don't take aftermarket air intakes into account.
However, if the AFR plots an undesirable shape on a rolling-road, the remap can be adjusted accordingly to possibly solve the problem. JKM have done exactly that via my Revo settings but that's not the same as recalibrating ECU tables of information (is it?). But it would appear that some tuners such as APR do take the MAF into account in their code by using the recalibration method.
So by strictly adhering to the OEM 67mm MAF dia, ITG may have an important advantage.
I want to try and get some comments on the Twintake's MAF solution from Forge.
Given the retail cost of many of the aftermarket high-flow tubular air intakes, you would have thought that most of them would have bothered to get piping manufactured which matched the OEM 67mm size!
-
you would have thought that most of them would have bothered to get piping manufactured which matched the OEM 67mm size!
Indeed
-
you would have thought that most of them would have bothered to get piping manufactured which matched the OEM 67mm size!
Indeed
The point is that it works though, there are zero issues and it makes good power.. So whats the problem?? :confused:
Its a similar situation to people complaining of the RS4 injectors, the point is, 90% of highest HP 2.0T FSI cars run on them faultlessly, so again, where is the issue?
Sorry if that comes over as a rant, its not, just confused thats all.. I don't see the point in discussing it over and over..
-
Says on Forge web site not available yet for leon Cupra :sad:
-
Says on Forge web site not available yet for leon Cupra :sad:
There working hard on the fitments, if you like I can see what I can do for you.. You could be 'the chosen one' if you know what I mean..
-
Went for the Forge set up yesterday, I had a Carbonio before which looks nice but its unlikely that it performs much better than the OEM.
I've had Forge stuff before (Twintercooler etc) and it always looks well engineered and good quality, I also saw that JonnyC had tested 2 previous versions for Forge before they settled on the Twintake.
Its all black now which looks a lot better and I thought it would be the quieter of the intakes, you'll notice I use the word 'thought'.
F**king hell the first time I nailed it I thought I'd kicked Satan in the nuts! As well as the noise it defiantly pulls better from mid range and seems to rev a lot more freely, I dont know if a normal bonnet has some insulation in it but I think a carbon one may let some more noise through. :laugh:
Also going to try and sort out a carbon engine cover, looks a bit untidy without one.
It'll be interesting to see if it improves lap times and what its putting out now, I'll be at the RR day in Surrey on the 28th. :happy2:
May try to get some video sorted.
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdaz.co%2Fmedia%2Foo163%2Fneilmelvin%2F1-9.jpg&hash=429eb7128000f16a107aaf77fde98179459cdab5)
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdaz.co%2Fmedia%2Foo163%2Fneilmelvin%2F5-7.jpg&hash=95d03c1c904930b03c9469007f1ae058f6532473)
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdaz.co%2Fmedia%2Foo163%2Fneilmelvin%2F4-7.jpg&hash=50297f8b407f7b4e0d694ea68ff6c5e033815f7f)
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdaz.co%2Fmedia%2Foo163%2Fneilmelvin%2F2-9.jpg&hash=5f71e8ed49e1d6371c675609e5734bbf76e1b8db)
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdaz.co%2Fmedia%2Foo163%2Fneilmelvin%2F6-7.jpg&hash=b51af8eeb7c2e75b9f0803b6610869f48fc012b4)
Neil :smiley:
-
Says on Forge web site not available yet for leon Cupra :sad:
There working hard on the fitments, if you like I can see what I can do for you.. You could be 'the chosen one' if you know what I mean..
PM'd
-
Neil, give Justin a prod from me and ask him to return my e-mail! :wink:
Greenouse did Justin get back to you?
Also if your at The TT Shop get Dave to show you his White Ducati 1198 :drool: :drool: :drool:
-
Lookin good mate!
-
see i dont get that, its taken this long for the intake folk to work out the available filter area was a limitation?
3 bhp for 1 inlet , or 13 bhp for both is a huge difference!
wonder if that is specific to the type of filters used for the twintake , or applies to others as well???
great info RR :happy2:
:signLOL:
Is it just me that can pick holes in this?
Only a extra 3hp for 1 inlet, but then add a second and you magically get another 10 hp. If anything it should be the other way around.
-
looking at those pics of the intake finsihed in black, and i actually think the ITG looks better.
it looked the mutts nuts in chrome, really dont think it suits matt black piping, with shiny carbon filter housings, that small bit of silicone in the middle of the pipe looks out of place.
I think the prototypes looked better than this finished product
-
Went for the Forge set up yesterday, I had a Carbonio before which looks nice but its unlikely that it performs much better than the OEM.
I've had Forge stuff before (Twintercooler etc) and it always looks well engineered and good quality, I also saw that JonnyC had tested 2 previous versions for Forge before they settled on the Twintake.
Its all black now which looks a lot better and I thought it would be the quieter of the intakes, you'll notice I use the word 'thought'.
F**king hell the first time I nailed it I thought I'd kicked Satan in the nuts! As well as the noise it defiantly pulls better from mid range and seems to rev a lot more freely, I dont know if a normal bonnet has some insulation in it but I think a carbon one may let some more noise through. :laugh:
Also going to try and sort out a carbon engine cover, looks a bit untidy without one.
It'll be interesting to see if it improves lap times and what its putting out now, I'll be at the RR day in Surrey on the 28th. :happy2:
May try to get some video sorted.
Neil :smiley:
Yes please :happy2:
-
looking at those pics of the intake finsihed in black, and i actually think the ITG looks better.
it looked the mutts nuts in chrome, really dont think it suits matt black piping, with shiny carbon filter housings, that small bit of silicone in the middle of the pipe looks out of place.
I think the prototypes looked better than this finished product
[/quote
Agreed, it did look better before than it does now. The ITG also looks alot more purposeful. The big bhp jap guys all run similiar items as the ITG, so IMO it has more credibility also from a purely aesthetic point of view.
Also on SCN it has been noted that some people have had issues with intakes that dont retain the same as oem MAF housing size, and others havent.
-
you would have thought that most of them would have bothered to get piping manufactured which matched the OEM 67mm size!
Indeed
The point is that it works though, there are zero issues and it makes good power.. So whats the problem?? :confused:
Its a similar situation to people complaining of the RS4 injectors, the point is, 90% of highest HP 2.0T FSI cars run on them faultlessly, so again, where is the issue?
Sorry if that comes over as a rant, its not, just confused thats all.. I don't see the point in discussing it over and over..
....I hear what you're saying, Jonny. And no, it doesn't come over as a rant but just a very valid view.
Personally I very much favour the Twintake but I also want to be very sure and am keen to find out as much as I can. I've been an early adopter of mods quite a few times and it hasn't always worked out for the best longer term.
Probably the people I take the most notice of advice from regarding anything involving my ECU, is my Revo tuner JKM. They have loads of logged data etc on my individual car and they haven't been able to test the Twintake yet. It says a lot for their impartiality that they haven't tried to sell me one when they so easily could.
As you already know, I'm very encouraged by your strong recommendation.
-
Went for the Forge set up yesterday, I had a Carbonio before which looks nice but its unlikely that it performs much better than the OEM.
I've had Forge stuff before (Twintercooler etc) and it always looks well engineered and good quality, I also saw that JonnyC had tested 2 previous versions for Forge before they settled on the Twintake.
Its all black now which looks a lot better and I thought it would be the quieter of the intakes, you'll notice I use the word 'thought'.
F**king hell the first time I nailed it I thought I'd kicked Satan in the nuts! As well as the noise it defiantly pulls better from mid range and seems to rev a lot more freely, I dont know if a normal bonnet has some insulation in it but I think a carbon one may let some more noise through. :laugh:
Also going to try and sort out a carbon engine cover, looks a bit untidy without one.
It'll be interesting to see if it improves lap times and what its putting out now, I'll be at the RR day in Surrey on the 28th.
Neil :smiley:
....Nice one, Neil!
Like you, I've got the Carbonio too....... And the carbon bonnet....... Bring on the noise!!
Re the engine cover, the EVOMS cover will apparently fit with the Twintake. It's black sheet metal and will take a carbon or oem centre strip. Do you want me to find and post pics for you or are you familiar?
Looking forward to seeing you on the 28th :happy2:
-
....I hear what you're saying, Jonny. And no, it doesn't come over as a rant but just a very valid view.
Personally I very much favour the Twintake but I also want to be very sure and am keen to find out as much as I can. I've been an early adopter of mods quite a few times and it hasn't always worked out for the best longer term.
Probably the people I take the most notice of advice from regarding anything involving my ECU, is my Revo tuner JKM. They have loads of logged data etc on my individual car and they haven't been able to test the Twintake yet. It says a lot for their impartiality that they haven't tried to sell me one when they so easily could.
As you already know, I'm very encouraged by your strong recommendation.
I was on the phone to Keith at JKM the other day actually, he seems like a really good genuine guy.. Thats the type of people that I like to deal with so im not surprised at all that your doing the same..
Ill see what I can do about getting some logs from my Golf with the Twintake fitted, obviously its not a K03 car but it should give some insight for you.. Ill discuss it with Keith and send them over to him to look over, hopefully that will help you out with your decision some..
Jonny
-
....I hear what you're saying, Jonny. And no, it doesn't come over as a rant but just a very valid view.
Personally I very much favour the Twintake but I also want to be very sure and am keen to find out as much as I can. I've been an early adopter of mods quite a few times and it hasn't always worked out for the best longer term.
Probably the people I take the most notice of advice from regarding anything involving my ECU, is my Revo tuner JKM. They have loads of logged data etc on my individual car and they haven't been able to test the Twintake yet. It says a lot for their impartiality that they haven't tried to sell me one when they so easily could.
As you already know, I'm very encouraged by your strong recommendation.
I was on the phone to Keith at JKM the other day actually, he seems like a really good genuine guy.. Thats the type of people that I like to deal with so im not surprised at all that your doing the same..
Ill see what I can do about getting some logs from my Golf with the Twintake fitted, obviously its not a K03 car but it should give some insight for you.. Ill discuss it with Keith and send them over to him to look over, hopefully that will help you out with your decision some..
Jonny
Echo Jonny and Robin's sentiments about Keith at JKM, he is definitely one of the good guys. I have had nothing but impeccable service from JKM and great conversation son the phone with Keith who is always very supportive and knowledgable. :happy2:
-
looking at those pics of the intake finsihed in black, and i actually think the ITG looks better.
it looked the mutts nuts in chrome, really dont think it suits matt black piping, with shiny carbon filter housings, that small bit of silicone in the middle of the pipe looks out of place.
I think the prototypes looked better than this finished product
Agreed, it did look better before than it does now. The ITG also looks alot more purposeful. The big bhp jap guys all run similiar items as the ITG, so IMO it has more credibility also from a purely aesthetic point of view.
Also on SCN it has been noted that some people have had issues with intakes that dont retain the same as oem MAF housing size, and others havent.
....What you call "credibility" and "aesthetics" are not the same. This NASCAR beast which was at Spa has 'credibility' and totally wiped out everything else, but it's monstrously fugly in my opinion : -
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fdaz.co%2Fmedia%2FRedRobin_05%2FTrack%2FNascar_nl.jpg&hash=e8053638af1778f8812cbfd187186a46579e134d)
We can debate what we each think looks good until the cows come home (I like the ITG pipework but really detest the foamwork). So best to accept and respect our different tastes.
The big question about non-OEM MAF sizes has to be judged in the context of each intake imo.
:happy2:
-
@jonnyc
could you maybe do the same logs that stevep did with his ITG intake. then we wil have logs for both intakes on stage 2+ ko4.
id be very interested to see the difference. And the ratio of diference between them would be very similiar for the k03
-
Probably the people I take the most notice of advice from regarding anything involving my ECU, is my Revo tuner JKM. They have loads of logged data etc on my individual car and they haven't been able to test the Twintake yet. It says a lot for their impartiality that they haven't tried to sell me one when they so easily could.
I was on the phone to Keith at JKM the other day actually, he seems like a really good genuine guy.. Thats the type of people that I like to deal with so im not surprised at all that your doing the same..
Ill see what I can do about getting some logs from my Golf with the Twintake fitted, obviously its not a K03 car but it should give some insight for you.. Ill discuss it with Keith and send them over to him to look over, hopefully that will help you out with your decision some..
Jonny
....I've been talking to Keith today - He's off on honeymoon overseas long distance on Thursday and won't be back until mid December.
I'm sure he will welcome any logs/info you can send him - He's known as a bit of an expert on the 2.0T FSI platform and as you have recognised, is very genuine indeed. Incidentally I'm glad to hear you have contact with Keith. He's another great mind to have on your 'team'.
I'm 90% decided but want to hear what Keith recommends for my car. Plus the cashflow ain't pretty this week.
:drinking:
-
The flow figures will not be accurate unless the MAF housing size is set correctly! The MAF tables are calibrated to the OEM MAF housing size therefore if you change the size of the MAF housing the reading will not be accurate. So if Forge do not have a MAF housing ID of 67mm (I do not know what the ID is on the twintake) the figures will be skewed just as they are for any other intake with incorrect MAF housing sizes.
....Therefore some questions to Mike @ Forge across the pond : -
RR to Forge : - The oem MAF housing size is apparently 67mm dia and I think I've read that yours is 70mm. As the ECU isn't dynamically SMART and runs according to oem preset calibration tables (all over my head!), how does this not adversely effect things?
Reply : - "The OEM MAF housing incorporated into the stock intake/airbox assembly is actually ovoid in shape and is roughly equivalent to just under 70mm(inside diameter). The piping we use is 70mm (outside diameter). Once you factor in the wall thickness of the pipe, this is as close as we can get to the stock MAF size, and it's virtually identical. This is the same size piping we've been using in all of our 2.0T specific intakes for years now. There are no issues with MAF calibrations whatsoever."
RR to Forge : - If someone modified the Twintake's metal duct end behind the headlight and fed a hose from an air inlet below (foglight panel for example), would that be likely to upset the Twintake's function? Doubtless you may ask why do such a thing. Is there such a problem as having too much air?
Reply : - "I have thought about trying this myself, however, there are some plastic pieces that protrude forward from the bottom of the battery tray that sit just below this carbon cannister, and prevent the cannister from being angled downwards to facilitate this. Unfortunately, the terminal end of this cannister also sits so far towards the inner fender/wing that you would not be able to easily bend any ducting down without kinking it either. It may be possible to do some modifications such as cutting off these plastic pieces of the batter tray to help accomplish this this, but I haven't yet had a chance to try it myself."
Very good to learn that the MAF housing size is 'safe' on the Twintake. ITG not the only ones to achieve this then.
Interesting too that Mike (who likes to mod) is interested in the extra air feed idea.
:happy2: 8) :happy2:
-
Thanks RR, some good info there. So we now have three intakes that with the correct MAF housing :)
-
Thanks RR, some good info there.
So we now have three intakes that with the correct MAF housing :)
....My pleasure :happy2:
I've forgotten which the third is : -
1 - ITG
2 - Forge Twintake
3 - ?
-
BSH?
-
Thanks RR, some good info there.
So we now have three intakes that with the correct MAF housing :)
....My pleasure :happy2:
I've forgotten which the third is : -
1 - ITG
2 - Forge Twintake
3 - ?
BSH?
-
^^^^
So we think it's BSH, but do we know for certain?
Any others that peeps know of?
Obviously Carbonio uses oem airbox so is MAF-friendly. Also GruppeM.
-
Yes the BSH is 67mm throughout :happy2:
-
^^^^
Cheers, KRL :happy2:
On the subject of trying to feed more air to the Twintake's 'side' filter currently behind the headlight: I've now heard of a guy who says he has done it. AND he has OSIR carbon foglight panels (NeilM The Dremelist take note). I'm waiting for more info and hopefully pics and will post here accordingly - I'll probably start a new thread under How-To and link it from here.
Mike @ Forge is also very interested to see our efforts and says he may try it himself if we don't.
(https://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Ffarm3.static.flickr.com%2F2554%2F4100547393_42cae213c5_b.jpg&hash=c3d372f621e1a757cce1d8c9c592e1df4af2b625)
-
Fitting unstruction for the twintake can be found here:
http://www.forgemotorsport.com/media/TWINtake.pdf
-
the twintake doesnt have a fixing bracket on the RHS next to engine ficing it to the block (when viewing from the front looking to back of car) which the ITG does.
Is this a good or a bad thing ?
and would anyone buying it want to enhance the kit with an additional bracket?
-
I guess it depends on how securely fixed it is by the other brackets. Without engine mounts the engine will move a lot so maybe this is why they have not attached it to the block as the engine movement could cause problems for the other fixings as well?
-
the twintake doesnt have a fixing bracket on the RHS next to engine ficing it to the block (when viewing from the front looking to back of car) which the ITG does.
Is this a good or a bad thing ?
and would anyone buying it want to enhance the kit with an additional bracket?
....The Twintake pipework is made up of less components and joins than the ITG, and so I wonder if this is a factor making an additional bracket possibly unnecessary. Or, will we find it necessary? I don't think jonnyc did on the prototype he had for months.
-
I would have thought the number of joins isnt really a factor, as its still a single long piece from MAF to filters.
but I dont know? thats why I have asked...
-
^^^^
Well, I'm not sure about the joins factor either (why I wrote "I wonder") but logically more joins = more opportunities for flexing/movement < Just thinking aloud and offering suggestions.
EDIT: I've just checked out the ITG pipework - There are massive flexible silicone hoses either side of the bracketed short metal pipe run - That whole section would definitely benefit from anchoring!
-
the flex in the silicon hoses is a good thing as the we know the engine moves around alot, so some "give" is needed from somewhere. If the intake was mounted rigidly to the car body and the intake rigidly to the engine it would be long before something gave way
-
the flex in the silicon hoses is a good thing as the we know the engine moves around alot, so some "give" is needed from somewhere. If the intake was mounted rigidly to the car body and the intake rigidly to the engine it would be long before something gave way
....Yes, you shouldn't have to dial out all engine movement by going to the added cost of aftermarket engine mounts.
In the case of the ITG, the extra side mounting will help keep the pipework itself stable but not allow it to move too much due to the greater number of silicone components and their tendency to flex.
In the case of the Twintake, necessary allowance for movement is elsewhere and so a side mounting isn't needed (at least in theory until tested < Though already very thoroughly tested by jonnyc and others).
-
In the case of the Twintake, necessary allowance for movement is elsewhere
where is that then? , do you mean within the rubber tubing at either end?
the pipe is only attached at one end to the intake after MAF , and at the other to the front grille /side area.
AFAIK, everything else 'hangs' between those 2 points.....
-
In the case of the Twintake, necessary allowance for movement is elsewhere
where is that then? , do you mean within the rubber tubing at either end?
the pipe is only attached at one end to the intake after MAF , and at the other to the front grille /side area.
AFAIK, everything else 'hangs' between those 2 points.....
would that mean that nearly all the flex is going to be occuring on the silcone hose attachment at the turbo. if something is wiggled for long enough it could end up disconnecting from the turbo.
tprobably unlikely to occur unlessovcer a prolonged period of time, and even less so on a car with engine mounts.
but the standard mounts allow the engine moves round like crazy
-
In the case of the Twintake, necessary allowance for movement is elsewhere
where is that then? , do you mean within the rubber tubing at either end?
the pipe is only attached at one end to the intake after MAF , and at the other to the front grille /side area.
AFAIK, everything else 'hangs' between those 2 points.....
....No, as you'll see in my review when it's posted, there are a total of 6 silicone hose sections - Quite sufficient to take up any flexing. The production Twintake is slightly different from the prototypes you may have seen.
Running upstream from the turbo the first is splitting the straight section after the MAF and then one at the side can branch and a further one at each end of each of the two filter cans. All very tidy.
-
I have been running the Twintake for approx 6k miles now, the last 3k of them have been on stock engine mounts and its 100% fine.. :congrats:
-
@ jonnyc : Im not saying it isnt ok, just asking the questions.
@ RR : I think youve missed my point Robin , and I have seen the completed article. maybe I just havent explained it well enough.
a long piece of pipe is normally supported in someway between 2 end points , either rigid or flexible
(bit like an exhaust I guess). its just a difference between the 2 kits, Im not pushing either side as better.
many dont have a support bracket , but then thye dont have as much as 2 filters_casings to support
all good :happy2:
-
@ RR : I think youve missed my point Robin , and I have seen the completed article. maybe I just havent explained it well enough.
a long piece of pipe is normally supported in someway between 2 end points , either rigid or flexible
(bit like an exhaust I guess). its just a difference between the 2 kits, Im not pushing either side as better.
many dont have a support bracket , but then thye dont have as much as 2 filters_casings to support
all good :happy2:
....I think I see the point you are making but it seems to me that the overall 'load' is spread. Indeed the branch to the headlight serves to triangulate the structure as a whole - like a 'y' - The side branch works like an additional strut. That's the theory but the bottom line is that no breakages have been reported so far after lots of road miles with prototypes.
:happy2:
-
Got mine fitted this morning absolutly love it!
-
Got mine fitted this morning absolutly love it!
sounds good mitch, any more info?? sound or power increase?? is you car heathy now mitch we are worried for you!! :smiley:
-
Got mine fitted this morning absolutly love it!
:worthless:
how is it. did youcome from stock airbox as well. come on do tell??
-
Well for performance i cant say loads as i was running with a buggerd dv (that was my issue btw not fueling as suspected!)so now its just a completly diferent drive anyway! It does feel very responsive tho! Buuuut! The noise it makes is just to die for its unreal! I love it! The kit itself sits very tidy into the engine bay tho looks very good in the black rather than the polished alloy look as seen at first! Ile try get some pics up its abit hard as time i leave for work and get back its always dark! Ile try tho.... I LOVE IT!
-
picture in my thread in members rides!