MK5 Golf GTI

All Things Mk5 => Modifications & Technical Area => Performance Modifications => Topic started by: 99hagued on July 28, 2017, 02:09:41 PM

Title: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: 99hagued on July 28, 2017, 02:09:41 PM
Just got this delivered for my ed30 thought I'd have a peek in the box to find this

https://flic.kr/p/VXq6Bc

£440 and you have to cut holes in it for the dv pipe. Not impressed
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: r5gtt on July 28, 2017, 02:23:03 PM
Ridiculous pricing for a bit of alloy cr** and worst still you have to mod it  :signLOL: send it back  :sick:

Better the ramair  :happy2:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on July 28, 2017, 02:31:48 PM
Nothing wrong with those fittings, I used them years ago to good effect when a pipe wasn't available off the shelf.   They are supplied to VWR from here I suspect - http://www.revotec.com/acatalog/Self-Sealing-Fittings-with-Threaded-Fitting.html

Whether or not you should have to do that to a £440 intake....hmmmm.... personally I feel it is a bit of a hack job, but I understand why from a business sense they did it that way.  It's cheaper to make a generic turbo inlet hose for the K03, and then just bung a fitting in the box for a KO4 people.  It does the job though, so no harm done really, just not 'premium' as VWR make themselves out to be.

That's the least of your worries.   Issue no.2 is the fact it can snap off the coolant elbow just by the engine cover, and issue no.3 is there is no fricking flex coupling to soak up engine movement.  What is it with intake makers and overlooking that most obvious of obvious requirements??! :stupid:

Still, I was about to buy one of these and address these issues myself, because aside from those issues, it is a good intake.  Obviously a resprayed ITG kit, but very good none the less.

If you stick with it, let me know what it's like from a noise/performance perspective.

If you're thinking of offering VWR some feedback, don't bother.  You won't get a response or even 1 sh*t given. 
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: shoaybmakda on July 28, 2017, 02:32:52 PM
I have one and I love it - fitted on a k03.

Granted the design is flawed - make sure it dosnt knock out a coolant pipe.

Then again I only paid £200 for it  :smiley:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Dave J on July 28, 2017, 10:07:38 PM
A very timely post - have been very happy with mine until now...

http://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/index.php/topic,86480.msg1090741.html#msg1090741

Great intake for subtle sounds - think it needs waaay more modding to surrounding coolant pipes, etc than VWR give care to even mention. It really just needs a smaller filter box that doesn't rub on everything. Whether I will live with mine in future depends on Tuesday's inspection as to whether the lines around the kit can be suitably reworked.
Mine has been on the car since last September until causing problems of this week...
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Adam0604 on July 28, 2017, 10:07:51 PM
WTF ... dude send it back and get a RAMAIR 90mm for less than half the price!
Absurd price to pay when RAMAIR is just as good (proved to add 10bhp on my car).
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: RetroRaz on July 28, 2017, 11:08:01 PM
Another vote for ramair! Cheap, easy to install and yes my car made 10 extra bhp on the dyno with it :)

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk

Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on July 29, 2017, 10:52:08 AM
Open filters are noisy though.  Very irritating for a daily driver.   I think for the sake of 10hp I'd rather stick with the factory airbox that doesn't break anything  :smiley:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: golfmck1980 on July 29, 2017, 02:24:57 PM
Gotta agree on the noise front im running a ramair myself and bloody hell is it noisey. Gonna see about fitting some sound deadining to the underside of my bonnet
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: MIJ_JAGGER on July 29, 2017, 02:46:36 PM
I have Ramair 90mm, good piece of kit, noisy defo, marmite...
I'll probably be selling it on though as I've almost had enough of the noise lol
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: AJP on July 29, 2017, 05:09:40 PM
I have Ramair 90mm, good piece of kit, noisy defo, marmite...
I'll probably be selling it on though as I've almost had enough of the noise lol
http://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=113291.msg1087789.msg#1087789
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: shoaybmakda on July 29, 2017, 11:49:05 PM
I have Ramair 90mm, good piece of kit, noisy defo, marmite...
I'll probably be selling it on though as I've almost had enough of the noise lol

@RetroRaz (http://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=6494)
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Shoduchi on July 30, 2017, 01:56:19 PM
My LHD Ed. 30 didn't have any noticeable fitting problems with the canister rubbing the coolant elbow. Also, the turbo intake silicone tube has enough flex to remove the rest of the intake pipe from the front grill bracket, so I think there're enough flex in the pipes for the engine to move around. Also, the canister isn't stuck to the front grill bracket so it can move a few centimetres forward and backward, if needed.

Love the sound it makes and I got 20 BHP after removing the OEM air box with a ITG/VWR panel filter. Can't really complain here other than its price. I just ordered one on the Black Friday sale, so it was a bit cheaper. :smiley:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: 99hagued on July 30, 2017, 06:40:50 PM
Fitted it today took my time with it to make sure there's plenty of clearance and I'm happy with it the only thing I'm not happy with is where it goes into the front grille, I think it should be attached in some way instead of just resting in there I feel like it's ether going to pop out or knock with any engine movement but saying that I took it for a good run today and all is good. Also cutting the hole for the dv pipe was a pita. I still feel for £440 which I think is the most expensive intake you can buy for these cars should be made to fit better and not have to cut holes in it.

(https://preview.ibb.co/cVMDPk/IMG_2128.jpg) (https://ibb.co/inihH5)
(https://preview.ibb.co/kRfjVQ/IMG_2129.jpg) (https://ibb.co/nyFJqQ)
(https://preview.ibb.co/k79dqQ/IMG_2130.jpg) (https://ibb.co/mmiSjk)
(https://preview.ibb.co/b9dSjk/IMG_2134.jpg) (https://ibb.co/jbAJqQ)
(https://preview.ibb.co/fq5Ux5/IMG_2135.jpg) (https://ibb.co/dHVwc5)

Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: r5gtt on July 30, 2017, 07:20:09 PM
I've had  to remove my ramair several times for whatever reason and glad I haven't got these fancy filters as it'd drive me crazy taking it off all the time to do simple tasks   :doh:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: MIJ_JAGGER on July 30, 2017, 07:52:14 PM
Fitted it today took my time with it to make sure there's plenty of clearance and I'm happy with it the only thing I'm not happy with is where it goes into the front grille, I think it should be attached in some way instead of just resting in there I feel like it's ether going to pop out or knock with any engine movement but saying that I took it for a good run today and all is good. Also cutting the hole for the dv pipe was a pita. I still feel for £440 which I think is the most expensive intake you can buy for these cars should be made to fit better and not have to cut holes in it.

(https://preview.ibb.co/cVMDPk/IMG_2128.jpg) (https://ibb.co/inihH5)
(https://preview.ibb.co/kRfjVQ/IMG_2129.jpg) (https://ibb.co/nyFJqQ)
(https://preview.ibb.co/k79dqQ/IMG_2130.jpg) (https://ibb.co/mmiSjk)
(https://preview.ibb.co/b9dSjk/IMG_2134.jpg) (https://ibb.co/jbAJqQ)
(https://preview.ibb.co/fq5Ux5/IMG_2135.jpg) (https://ibb.co/dHVwc5)
Result overall looks good matey
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on July 31, 2017, 09:26:48 AM
Also, the turbo intake silicone tube has enough flex to remove the rest of the intake pipe from the front grill bracket, so I think there're enough flex in the pipes for the engine to move around. Also, the canister isn't stuck to the front grill bracket so it can move a few centimetres forward and backward, if needed.

You'd be surprised.  The previous owner of mine had some kind of intake on it and there are gouge marks on the battery cover where the intake rubbed on it.  A VWR kit I reckon, judging by where the jubilee clamps sit.  Stuff like that really bugs me as it's just not necessary if things are designed properly in the first place.  And charging people nearly £500 for a bit of 'That'll do' engineering.  And Revo intake users are finding the mounting lug is snapping off, or snapping the chain cover.  Aftermarket parts makers always underestimate engine movement, and also exhaust movement when it comes to flex joint sizing.  It's VERY basic stuff  :stupid:

I'm thinking of building my own intake that fits properly.  I just need to find out the internal bore of the MAF tube to get the scaling right.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Shoduchi on July 31, 2017, 11:29:34 AM
You'd be surprised.  The previous owner of mine had some kind of intake on it and there are gouge marks on the battery cover where the intake rubbed on it.  A VWR kit I reckon, judging by where the jubilee clamps sit.  Stuff like that really bugs me as it's just not necessary if things are designed properly in the first place.  And charging people nearly £500 for a bit of 'That'll do' engineering.  And Revo intake users are finding the mounting lug is snapping off, or snapping the chain cover.  Aftermarket parts makers always underestimate engine movement, and also exhaust movement when it comes to flex joint sizing.  It's VERY basic stuff  :stupid:

I'm thinking of building my own intake that fits properly.  I just need to find out the internal bore of the MAF tube to get the scaling right.

I agree with you, aftermarket companies should spend a bit more time developing their parts. I know my engine can't rock as much now due to the VibraTechnics subframe and dogbone mounts. The intake jubilees are close to the battery cover but I don't think mine rub against it at the moment.

The problem with the MAF scaling is that the OEM airbox has an ovoid shape where the MAF sits. If it was round, it would be much easier to replicate.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on July 31, 2017, 12:04:46 PM
You'd be surprised.  The previous owner of mine had some kind of intake on it and there are gouge marks on the battery cover where the intake rubbed on it.  A VWR kit I reckon, judging by where the jubilee clamps sit.  Stuff like that really bugs me as it's just not necessary if things are designed properly in the first place.  And charging people nearly £500 for a bit of 'That'll do' engineering.  And Revo intake users are finding the mounting lug is snapping off, or snapping the chain cover.  Aftermarket parts makers always underestimate engine movement, and also exhaust movement when it comes to flex joint sizing.  It's VERY basic stuff  :stupid:

I'm thinking of building my own intake that fits properly.  I just need to find out the internal bore of the MAF tube to get the scaling right.

I agree with you, aftermarket companies should spend a bit more time developing their parts. I know my engine can't rock as much now due to the VibraTechnics subframe and dogbone mounts. The intake jubilees are close to the battery cover but I don't think mine rub against it at the moment.

The problem with the MAF scaling is that the OEM airbox has an ovoid shape where the MAF sits. If it was round, it would be much easier to replicate.

Indeed they should, but it's the whole aftermarket thing in general.  Under developed products pushed out to the public for beta testing.

Anyway.....yep, the oval MAF housing is interesting, but my plan was to leave that bit stock and develop the rest of it from there back to the grille.  Perhaps a BMC OTA mounted by the battery and some piping built into the engine cover, with the OEM plastic corrugated flex coupling for easy detachment, like stock.  Big heavy pipes flapping about above the engine only secured with 1 small bolt and no flexi is just rubbish for lifespan.



Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on July 31, 2017, 12:34:19 PM
Something like this, but OEM flex couplings in place of the red silicon.  And the filter will be mounted to the gearbox, not onto a flimsy piece of plastic with a 10mm bolt.  Obviously there will be a pipe leading under the cover to the MAF housing.

(http://www.admission-dynamique.com/images/bmc-ota-admission-4-650.jpg)
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Shoduchi on July 31, 2017, 01:21:40 PM
That might work. Not sure if you could use the pipe from a Revo intake (or from its cheaper replica from Creations Motorsport) and add the BMC OTA to it. I can tell you that the VWR intake only has 3.5% correction on the long term fuel trims, so it's under the preferable spec of <5%. :smiley:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: AJP on July 31, 2017, 01:38:28 PM
If you give @Dan_FR a shout he might be able to give you some starting points - he built his own intake, and I remember him talking about the MAF tube etc.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on July 31, 2017, 02:25:31 PM
Cheers guys.  Good to know the VWR is tuned correctly  :happy2:

MAFs and turbos.......they've always been a pain!  As long as the section of tubing the MAF bolts into is the correct cross sectional area/flow volume, you can do what you like to the pipes before and after that point, within reason.   MAFs don't like being too close to the compressor wheel either (hence the air straighten gauze upstream of the MAF), and is probably why they moved the MAF away from the engine on the EA888 installations.  After market intakes also dump that air straightener, which doesn't help.  No wonder people have so many stalling, timing pull, lean running issues with aftermarket intakes.



Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: grey golfster on July 31, 2017, 06:50:34 PM
Got a VWR intake from Awesome about 3 years ago now, they fitted it as part of a deal including an APR map 2.

The intake itself is very good, and ideal for a daily that covers long-haul motorway trips very regularly; has the flow performance, but it is not noisy at all. Still gives a nice "turbo whoosh" when you may fancy it.

AOK for about 18 months, until it snapped off the coolant elbow nipple....

No warning at all about this potential issue from Awesome, and worse still that a "VWR dealer" should fit the intake in such a way so as to allow this to happen. Seriously NOT impressed!
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on August 01, 2017, 09:24:48 AM
The canister needs a dent in it where it knocks the coolant pipe for clearance.  It wouldn't hinder flow, but it would certainly reduce the risk of people losing coolant.  If I thought VWR would actually give a sheet, I would report it, but perhaps instead we should contact ITG to see if they will sell us their version of it for half the price  :grin:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: r5gtt on August 01, 2017, 01:52:53 PM
If the canister needs a dent in it then that should have been done at factory as a design not a flaw for that kind of money don't you think?.

Just saying :smiley:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on August 01, 2017, 02:15:27 PM
If the canister needs a dent in it then that should have been done at factory as a design not a flaw for that kind of money don't you think?.

Just saying :smiley:

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

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

Sorry, not trying to offend any VWR owners...... this kind of thing just really bugs me because I can't believe such stupidity exists when £450 is changing hands.

Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: r5gtt on August 01, 2017, 02:25:09 PM
If the canister needs a dent in it then that should have been done at factory as a design not a flaw for that kind of money don't you think?.

Just saying :smiley:

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

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

Sorry, not trying to offend any VWR owners...... this kind of thing just really bugs me because I can't believe such stupidity exists when £450 is changing hands.
yea pudding I did rear that earlier in the post and thats exactly why people shouldn't buy them imho, why fund the greedy blood suckers when they can't be asked to resolve the issues customers are having and rectify the flaw as they'll still profit from these ugly boxes  :sick: yes I don't like anything boxed but by personal choice  :happy2:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on August 01, 2017, 02:38:21 PM
If the canister needs a dent in it then that should have been done at factory as a design not a flaw for that kind of money don't you think?.

Just saying :smiley:

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

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

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

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

The VWR is a good intake for performance and refinement, but I'm not paying them £450 to bug fix the product for them!  They should be paying us to do that.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Dave J on August 01, 2017, 04:17:14 PM
I agree with these comments - I would need to think very hard & do more research if buying anything VWR again. Live and learn. I'm just disappointed at the end of the day as we shouldn't be finding issues such as these. I know modifying is about compromises, but this is one too far! 
IMHO, the filter housing needs to be a bit smaller so it doesn't take up so much room, but guess there will be a reason it is the size it is.

It's a real shame as I like the subtle noise of the VWR compared to the open filter kits.

I've had a new coolant T-piece fitted today and top hose. The mounting bracket for the filter to the battery tray has now been shimmed to lift it off the coolant pipes, and the top coolant pipe rerouted also. Currently it's not rubbing on anything, so will monitor it much more closely than I have been.
Will make a decision by the next service (in a couple of months) as to whether it stays or goes.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: r5gtt on August 01, 2017, 04:24:39 PM
If the canister needs a dent in it then that should have been done at factory as a design not a flaw for that kind of money don't you think?.

Just saying :smiley:

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

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

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

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

The VWR is a good intake for performance and refinement, but I'm not paying them £450 to bug fix the product for them!  They should be paying us to do that.
revo?  :thinking: would have fitted mine but the pipe was way too large for my liking as it's too close to everything leaving no gaps and the filter doesn't fit nice imho. I'm happy with the ramair 70mm  :love:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Scottymon on August 01, 2017, 06:44:12 PM
The best OEM looking CAI imo was the Volant from the US, had it for a while :happy2:

(http://www.voodish.co.uk/misc/volant/volant4.JPG)
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Shoduchi on August 01, 2017, 07:40:11 PM
The best OEM looking CAI imo was the Volant from the US, had it for a while :happy2:

(http://www.voodish.co.uk/misc/volant/volant4.JPG)

Best looking indeed but not the best performance wise. :wink:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Scottymon on August 01, 2017, 07:44:12 PM
The best OEM looking CAI imo was the Volant from the US, had it for a while :happy2:

(http://www.voodish.co.uk/misc/volant/volant4.JPG)

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

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

Tbh with the snapped sensor on the HPFP I have at the moment due to the OEM Airbox,........ I wished I'd kept the Volant!
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: r5gtt on August 01, 2017, 08:17:15 PM
The best OEM looking CAI imo was the Volant from the US, had it for a while :happy2:

(http://www.voodish.co.uk/misc/volant/volant4.JPG)
:happy2:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: r5gtt on August 01, 2017, 08:25:38 PM
The best OEM looking CAI imo was the Volant from the US, had it for a while :happy2:

(http://www.voodish.co.uk/misc/volant/volant4.JPG)

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

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

Tbh with the snapped sensor on the HPFP I have at the moment due to the OEM Airbox,........ I wished I'd kept the Volant!
how much did u sell it for as that's one I really liked but the price was quite high  :surprised:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on August 02, 2017, 09:47:45 AM
I like the look of the Volant!   Some thought went into that.

I bet there's not even 5hp peak difference between any of the aftermarket intakes.  VWR claim 25hp and 500rpm reduction in lag, but I've not seen any data to verify that.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Shoduchi on August 02, 2017, 11:17:45 AM
I like the look of the Volant!   Some thought went into that.

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

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

With the remap my K04 peaks at 2500 rpm with the closed cone filter, while before the remap it only peaked at 3000 rpm. With the panel filter and the remap my turbo peaked at around 2600 rpm, so there's a difference but very subtle.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Scottymon on August 02, 2017, 11:37:41 AM
The best OEM looking CAI imo was the Volant from the US, had it for a while :happy2:

(http://www.voodish.co.uk/misc/volant/volant4.JPG)

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

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

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

I bought it direct from the US in 2013 for about £190 delivered. Sold it to lad in Ireland for £155 sometime later  :happy2:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on August 02, 2017, 11:51:29 AM
I like the look of the Volant!   Some thought went into that.

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

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

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

Not bad at all  :happy2:

Do you 'feel' the power and reduced spool time on your bum dyno?
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Shoduchi on August 02, 2017, 12:18:59 PM
I like the look of the Volant!   Some thought went into that.

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

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

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

Not bad at all  :happy2:

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

On top rpm, which means after the 6k rpm, it's a marked difference. The engine keeps pulling much stronger. :smiley:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: r5gtt on August 02, 2017, 11:13:40 PM
The best OEM looking CAI imo was the Volant from the US, had it for a while :happy2:

(http://www.voodish.co.uk/misc/volant/volant4.JPG)

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

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

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

I bought it direct from the US in 2013 for about £190 delivered. Sold it to lad in Ireland for £155 sometime later  :happy2:
thats silly cheap as I've seen the price a lot more than that  :surprised:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on August 07, 2017, 09:33:27 PM
OK, so I bought one of these kits to see what kind of problems you guys are having, and to satisfy my own curiosity  :smiley:

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

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

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

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

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

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

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4440/36294076311_cc08bdf8d3_b.jpg)

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

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4407/36294076541_e82d300d2e_b.jpg)

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

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

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4370/36034253630_5084769c09_b.jpg)

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

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4388/36034254090_357582c7ef_b.jpg)

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4412/36294076151_16bd60dd3b_b.jpg)

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

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

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

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

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

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

I'll report back with the improvements in due course  :happy2: 
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: 99hagued on August 07, 2017, 10:23:42 PM
I had every problem you have listed fitting mine absolutely shocking for the money this costs
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: 99hagued on August 07, 2017, 10:26:13 PM
Does yours not knock with no front mounting bracket pudding?
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Shoduchi on August 08, 2017, 08:51:43 AM
I can't say mine had any problems with the MAF housing. It fitted fine the MAF and according to my long term fuel trims all is well. I just had to trim a bit the front grille scoop because my thicker IC made the coolant radiator be more backwards. I can hear a bit of rumble when accelerating hard but while pottering around it's pretty quiet, specially compared with open cone intake that make much more noise all the time. If I have my windows closed and the radio playing I can hardly hear anything from the intake. :confused:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on August 08, 2017, 09:13:15 AM
Does yours not knock with no front mounting bracket pudding?

Yeah it does but for the time being it's just in the evaluation phase until I figure out what to do with the coolant elbow, so not too worried about the knocking.  If I can't do anything neat and OEM like, I'll just put the standard intake back on and throw the VWR in the trash can.

I've never seen anything like this before.  It's like having windows and doors fitted to your house, and the fitters just hammer chunks out of the bricks and lintles to make them fit.  It really is exceptionally poor.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on August 08, 2017, 09:26:05 AM
I can't say mine had any problems with the MAF housing. It fitted fine the MAF and according to my long term fuel trims all is well. I just had to trim a bit the front grille scoop because my thicker IC made the coolant radiator be more backwards. I can hear a bit of rumble when accelerating hard but while pottering around it's pretty quiet, specially compared with open cone intake that make much more noise all the time. If I have my windows closed and the radio playing I can hardly hear anything from the intake. :confused:

I don't see how that is possible with the MAF, unless yours is slightly different to mine?   

If you look at the OEM airbox where the MAF slots into the housing, you will notice the 2 sections for the screws are which are raised.  It's hard to explain in words. 

As you can see in this pic, just, the MAF mounting is completely flat, which means the weather seal isn't pressed down.  They haven't mirrored the OEM mounting profile at all, let alone issues with the hole not being ground out correctly!  If your long terms are OK, you must be lucky but either way, it's not right.

I'll take some pics of later of what I mean, and then it will make sense hopefully!

(https://vwpartsinternational.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/VWR-INDUCTION-KIT-GOLF-R-SCIROCCO-R-VWR12G60R.jpg)
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Shoduchi on August 08, 2017, 11:36:06 AM
I think I understood what you're trying to explain. My friend who fitted this intake already had plenty of experience fitting them. He made it look quite simple to do. Now I'm curious to check if mine is different but other than the hole in yours not being correctly grounded, I doubt mine will be different. :confused:

I'll check mine later and see if I can spot any difference.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Dan_FR on August 08, 2017, 12:24:34 PM
For such an expensive kit that is truly awful quality.

One good aspect of it is the MAF scaling is spot on with these kits from everything I have read about them over the years, so it doesn't ruin the drive. The RamAir however does not and has a detrimental affect on off boost and part throttle driving. Been there and tested it
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: shoaybmakda on August 08, 2017, 04:28:33 PM
I didn’t have issues with the MAF on mine..it was a little snug from what I remember but slotted I’m ok..
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: AJP on August 08, 2017, 07:12:55 PM
For such an expensive kit that is truly awful quality.

One good aspect of it is the MAF scaling is spot on with these kits from everything I have read about them over the years, so it doesn't ruin the drive. The RamAir however does not and has a detrimental affect on off boost and part throttle driving. Been there and tested it
Was it the 70mm or 90mm Ramair you tested? And were the scaling issues tangible during driving?
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on August 08, 2017, 07:18:41 PM
A picture paints a 1000 words.  As you can see, the VWR pipe had to be modified on mine to match the OEM airbox's MAF aperture.

If I didn't do that, the MAF wouldn't have sealed down onto the pipe at all.   I'm surprised no one else encountered the same issue!

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4432/35640692213_755f2c0717_b.jpg)

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4385/35640691743_7faf6a13ea_b.jpg)

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4405/35640691393_a6b179a013_b.jpg)

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4391/36311362731_94218508a4_b.jpg)
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Dan_FR on August 08, 2017, 09:35:16 PM
For such an expensive kit that is truly awful quality.

One good aspect of it is the MAF scaling is spot on with these kits from everything I have read about them over the years, so it doesn't ruin the drive. The RamAir however does not and has a detrimental affect on off boost and part throttle driving. Been there and tested it
Was it the 70mm or 90mm Ramair you tested? And were the scaling issues tangible during driving?

90mm, but it makes no difference, both use the same MAF pipe which results in the same issues. And yes very much so, turned my car from feeling spritely and eager to feeling sluggish and lethargic during day to day off boost driving..... Like how the car feels after having sat in traffic on a hot summers day... It lasted less than a day before i removed it and went back to my other intake which has long term fuel trims within 1%
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: AJP on August 08, 2017, 09:52:22 PM
For such an expensive kit that is truly awful quality.

One good aspect of it is the MAF scaling is spot on with these kits from everything I have read about them over the years, so it doesn't ruin the drive. The RamAir however does not and has a detrimental affect on off boost and part throttle driving. Been there and tested it
Was it the 70mm or 90mm Ramair you tested? And were the scaling issues tangible during driving?

90mm, but it makes no difference, both use the same MAF pipe which results in the same issues. And yes very much so, turned my car from feeling spritely and eager to feeling sluggish and lethargic during day to day off boost driving..... Like how the car feels after having sat in traffic on a hot summers day... It lasted less than a day before i removed it and went back to my other intake which has long term fuel trims within 1%
Hmmm. I've never really felt any loss of torque or response that I could categorically attribute to the 70mm version I've got - although I'm not saying you're wrong (in fact, I'm probably more receptive to reasoning against the thing, than for it). 

There have been odd occasions coming onto boost where I think "Is that it?", where it just feels a bit limp and not producing the thump of torque you expect, but this has been both before, and after the Ramair went on, so something I'd probably put down to heatsoak at the time and not given a second thought.

One thing that is consistent, is a marginally stronger pull from around 4k. So it's doing something. I'd give it maybe 10bhp/10lb/ft at 5252 going by the seat of the pants.

I like the noises on full chat, but rolling around - especially on a cold engine - can get tiresome. It's all a bit wheezy and chuffy.

I'm inclined to ditch it. Certain elbows are uncomfortably close to coolant hoses and other more important bits. I think if I went k04 and back to a standard box I wouldn't miss it.

Anyway, here's the real question. Why don't you and Pudding co-develop an intake that ticks all the boxes? You've both got the ability to make it happen. And I'd buy one. Undercut VWR for a start.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Dan_FR on August 09, 2017, 07:38:43 AM
Hmmm. I've never really felt any loss of torque or response that I could categorically attribute to the 70mm version I've got - although I'm not saying you're wrong (in fact, I'm probably more receptive to reasoning against the thing, than for it). 

There have been odd occasions coming onto boost where I think "Is that it?", where it just feels a bit limp and not producing the thump of torque you expect, but this has been both before, and after the Ramair went on, so something I'd probably put down to heatsoak at the time and not given a second thought.

One thing that is consistent, is a marginally stronger pull from around 4k. So it's doing something. I'd give it maybe 10bhp/10lb/ft at 5252 going by the seat of the pants.

I like the noises on full chat, but rolling around - especially on a cold engine - can get tiresome. It's all a bit wheezy and chuffy.

I'm inclined to ditch it. Certain elbows are uncomfortably close to coolant hoses and other more important bits. I think if I went k04 and back to a standard box I wouldn't miss it.

Anyway, here's the real question. Why don't you and Pudding co-develop an intake that ticks all the boxes? You've both got the ability to make it happen. And I'd buy one. Undercut VWR for a start.


What are your LTFTs? Maybe mine was a duff or early revision, but my LTFTs were +10 - 15%. On boost it made little difference, similar gains when accelerating briskly. It was that initial throttle response where it disappointed, where the MAF underread and the split second needed for what I expect to be the ECU jumping in to correct matters. Its something you would only lay your finger on when swapping back to back with another intake, I imagine you would soon get used to it but it was a big disappointment coming from another intake.

The funny thing is that both MAF pipes are identical in terms of I.D....... The only difference? Position of the MAF in the pipe. One has the Sensor opening in the centre of the pipe, the other has the MAF sitting much deeper so that the sensor opening is near the far edge of the pipe. Surprising the difference it makes to the readings
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on August 09, 2017, 10:17:22 AM
For such an expensive kit that is truly awful quality.

One good aspect of it is the MAF scaling is spot on with these kits from everything I have read about them over the years, so it doesn't ruin the drive. The RamAir however does not and has a detrimental affect on off boost and part throttle driving. Been there and tested it
Was it the 70mm or 90mm Ramair you tested? And were the scaling issues tangible during driving?

90mm, but it makes no difference, both use the same MAF pipe which results in the same issues. And yes very much so, turned my car from feeling spritely and eager to feeling sluggish and lethargic during day to day off boost driving..... Like how the car feels after having sat in traffic on a hot summers day... It lasted less than a day before i removed it and went back to my other intake which has long term fuel trims within 1%
Hmmm. I've never really felt any loss of torque or response that I could categorically attribute to the 70mm version I've got - although I'm not saying you're wrong (in fact, I'm probably more receptive to reasoning against the thing, than for it). 

There have been odd occasions coming onto boost where I think "Is that it?", where it just feels a bit limp and not producing the thump of torque you expect, but this has been both before, and after the Ramair went on, so something I'd probably put down to heatsoak at the time and not given a second thought.

One thing that is consistent, is a marginally stronger pull from around 4k. So it's doing something. I'd give it maybe 10bhp/10lb/ft at 5252 going by the seat of the pants.

I like the noises on full chat, but rolling around - especially on a cold engine - can get tiresome. It's all a bit wheezy and chuffy.

I'm inclined to ditch it. Certain elbows are uncomfortably close to coolant hoses and other more important bits. I think if I went k04 and back to a standard box I wouldn't miss it.

Anyway, here's the real question. Why don't you and Pudding co-develop an intake that ticks all the boxes? You've both got the ability to make it happen. And I'd buy one. Undercut VWR for a start.

I bet if you put the OEM airbox back on, you would feel a difference.  You get used to changes and forget what OEM was like.  The quietness and smoothness would be immediately welcomed, and then you will think to yourself, what was the benefit of the RamAir again?  :grin:

If I had the relevant test gear, I would see what the pressure drop is through the OEM airbox.  If it's more than 2psi (with filter) I would be very surprised.  4-5psi drop and I can see a benefit in ditching it, but VW wouldn't make something that restrictive as it would muck up their pressure ratio calculations for the turbo.

And as Dan said, it's not as simple as just plonking the MAF into a pipe.  VW were very specific about how and where they mounted the MAF.  Personally I would not have put it there.  Too much turbulence from these raspy little turbos.  Probably why they moved it off the engine on the MK6&7.  And how many aftermarket intakes have laminar flow correctors (the wire mesh upstream of the sensor)?  NONE.  It's a critical part.  Imagine a whirlpool inside a pipe.  Where is the majority of the flow?  On the outer diameter of the whirlpool, with a hole in the middle.  That's what laminar flow grids do.....straighten out the maelstrom, otherwise the sensor would be in that hole, reading way less air mass than it should be.  Without it you will get very wayward MAF readings at certain rpms/loads.  But of course, aftermarket tuners know better, right?  Nah, sod that, let's just take a random bit of guttering pipe, drill a hole in it, shove the maf in, shove a sponge on the end.  Job done. £400 please.

As I say, I bought this out of curiosity, and as usual, the small benefits are exaggerated and the negatives completely ignored.  I know I've stood steadfastly in favour of the OEM airbox on here for 2 years now, and sampling the VWR just compounds my original thoughts and experience even more!

I've played with many intakes over the years, and my crowning glory was running my VR6 Turbo with the factory airbox, and factory paper filter.  Everyone thought I was mad and it would kill the power.  They were wrong. It worked brilliantly.....and this was a GT3582R turbo on a 3 litre engine, not a piddly little K04 on a 2.0  :smiley:

I would love to make an intake but I would never make any money because my standards are too high  :grin:   I would never sell anything I wasn't happy fitting to my own car, and had real, tangible, repeatable, proven gains.  None of this "Up to 20hp gain". "Some cars have seen a 500rpm reduction in spool".  None of that wishy washy ifs buts and maybes.  Fit this, you get this.  Simple.

Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: AJP on August 09, 2017, 10:57:59 AM
Hmmm. I've never really felt any loss of torque or response that I could categorically attribute to the 70mm version I've got - although I'm not saying you're wrong (in fact, I'm probably more receptive to reasoning against the thing, than for it). 

There have been odd occasions coming onto boost where I think "Is that it?", where it just feels a bit limp and not producing the thump of torque you expect, but this has been both before, and after the Ramair went on, so something I'd probably put down to heatsoak at the time and not given a second thought.

One thing that is consistent, is a marginally stronger pull from around 4k. So it's doing something. I'd give it maybe 10bhp/10lb/ft at 5252 going by the seat of the pants.

I like the noises on full chat, but rolling around - especially on a cold engine - can get tiresome. It's all a bit wheezy and chuffy.

I'm inclined to ditch it. Certain elbows are uncomfortably close to coolant hoses and other more important bits. I think if I went k04 and back to a standard box I wouldn't miss it.

Anyway, here's the real question. Why don't you and Pudding co-develop an intake that ticks all the boxes? You've both got the ability to make it happen. And I'd buy one. Undercut VWR for a start.


What are your LTFTs? Maybe mine was a duff or early revision, but my LTFTs were +10 - 15%. On boost it made little difference, similar gains when accelerating briskly. It was that initial throttle response where it disappointed, where the MAF underread and the split second needed for what I expect to be the ECU jumping in to correct matters. Its something you would only lay your finger on when swapping back to back with another intake, I imagine you would soon get used to it but it was a big disappointment coming from another intake.

The funny thing is that both MAF pipes are identical in terms of I.D....... The only difference? Position of the MAF in the pipe. One has the Sensor opening in the centre of the pipe, the other has the MAF sitting much deeper so that the sensor opening is near the far edge of the pipe. Surprising the difference it makes to the readings
I haven't yet logged the fuel trims, Dan. If I was having perceivable performance issues with the intake I'd imagine I would have done so. Maybe I should anyway.

I'm going to keep an eye on things around the coolant hoses, and in all likelihood it'll soon be coming off. It's not terrible, and I can't point my finger to one glaring issue (k03 goose honk resonance aside) but let's just say there are numerous areas that could see improvement.

Kev - getting the word 'maelstrom' into an already comprehensive reply deserves my applause Brilliant stuff
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on August 09, 2017, 11:28:39 AM
 :grin:

The trims were very small with the VWR intake on mine, but that's only half the story.  The problem with CAIs is they slow down the air speed.   The sensor might still see the correct air mass, within a 5% tolerance, but that change in flow dynamics makes it feel lethargic off boost.
The initial hoorah this is great feeling I got from the VWR must have been placebo, because the car feels a lot better to drive with the OEM airbox  :happy2:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Dan_FR on August 09, 2017, 12:16:46 PM
I gotta say that comprehensive reply frazzled my head a little..... Couple of points:

@AJP (http://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=11926) No logging needed, just a check of block 032

How relevant is pressure drop on an airbox that is under vacuum and sees no positive pressure? Genuine question.

A flow straightener has very little effect.... tried one, tried multiple mesh designs as close to the OE design as I could find and it made suprisingly little difference to the MAF readings, trims and feel.

Out of curiousity, where does the MAF sit on the VWR intake, centre or nearer the edge of the tube?

As for gains from an intake, it is impossible to give a static number or % in terms of what can be gained as it depends entirely on the car and hardware setup.... A 500rpm difference in spool could be achieved on a larger turbo setup, but on a punchy little K03 that is hitting peak boost by around 2500 rpm - not a chance.

Gains are there in terms of peak numbers, especially when you are on the limit of what the compressor can flow. There are many back to back dyno charts out there proving the gains from an intake alone on a previously tuned car... But as with everything in life, there are negatives to consider but these are almost always overlooked as the priority for most is to chase peak numbers and full throttle performance...

Noise is another drawback for some, although personally I am 29 going on 19 and love all manner of turbo noises.... What is acceptable to me would not be for a lot... Its all about finding the compromise that best suits you.... Whether you want to chase numbers or enjoy the quiet, refined OE drive
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Shoduchi on August 09, 2017, 12:29:18 PM
:grin:

The trims were very small with the VWR intake on mine, but that's only half the story.  The problem with CAIs is they slow down the air speed.   The sensor might still see the correct air mass, within a 5% tolerance, but that change in flow dynamics makes it feel lethargic off boost.
The initial hoorah this is great feeling I got from the VWR must have been placebo, because the car feels a lot better to drive with the OEM airbox  :happy2:

I think you can only feel the difference on WOT. Other situations you don't get the benefit and I guess you notice more the lethargic response of the engine.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Shoduchi on August 09, 2017, 12:31:25 PM
I gotta say that comprehensive reply frazzled my head a little..... Couple of points:

@AJP (http://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=11926) No logging needed, just a check of block 032

How relevant is pressure drop on an airbox that is under vacuum and sees no positive pressure? Genuine question.

A flow straightener has very little effect.... tried one, tried multiple mesh designs as close to the OE design as I could find and it made suprisingly little difference to the MAF readings, trims and feel.

Out of curiousity, where does the MAF sit on the VWR intake, centre or nearer the edge of the tube?

As for gains from an intake, it is impossible to give a static number or % in terms of what can be gained as it depends entirely on the car and hardware setup.... A 500rpm difference in spool could be achieved on a larger turbo setup, but on a punchy little K03 that is hitting peak boost by around 2500 rpm - not a chance.

Gains are there in terms of peak numbers, especially when you are on the limit of what the compressor can flow. There are many back to back dyno charts out there proving the gains from an intake alone on a previously tuned car... But as with everything in life, there are negatives to consider but these are almost always overlooked as the priority for most is to chase peak numbers and full throttle performance...

Noise is another drawback for some, although personally I am 29 going on 19 and love all manner of turbo noises.... What is acceptable to me would not be for a lot... Its all about finding the compromise that best suits you.... Whether you want to chase numbers or enjoy the quiet, refined OE drive

My K04 is peaking its boost at 2500 rpm. It's only peaking at 1.4 bar with the ECU requesting 1.24 bar, where it drops after not long.

As I said previously, the noticeable gains happen between the 6.000 rpm to the limiter (mine as increased to 7.000 rpm).
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on August 09, 2017, 01:52:52 PM
Did you get a retune after fitting your intake?

I can see there'd be a gain at the top end as a piece of 3" pipe is easier to breathe through than a baffled airbox, but 95% of the time, people live in the idle to 5500rpm range.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Shoduchi on August 09, 2017, 02:02:48 PM
Did you get a retune after fitting your intake?

I can see there'd be a gain at the top end as a piece of 3" pipe is easier to breathe through than a baffled airbox, but 95% of the time, people live in the idle to 5500rpm range.

I didn't get a retune yet. The difference in power above 6.000 rpm is just from the VWR intake. If I add an octane booster additive the difference is bigger with the CAI than with the OEM airbox.

I'm still waiting to get one to take full advantage of higher octane fuel. I plan of filling up with race fuel on future track days.

I agree that on daily driving you don't notice anything with the CAI. I didn't feel any increased lethargy from the engine response but I rarely drive bellow 2.000 rpm. I prefer driving at least at 2.000 rpm.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on August 09, 2017, 02:10:07 PM
You are one of the lucky ones being completely happy with yours  :happy2:

Maybe I will hang onto it for when I finally fit the TTE420, but for now, OEM it is  :smiley:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Shoduchi on August 09, 2017, 02:19:11 PM
You are one of the lucky ones being completely happy with yours  :happy2:

Maybe I will hang onto it for when I finally fit the TTE420, but for now, OEM it is  :smiley:

I agree. I think the OEM airbox is good enough for up to 330 BHP. If you want more without pushing a lot of boost from the turbo, you'll need a good CAI. :smiley:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Shoduchi on August 21, 2017, 12:54:15 PM
My K04 VWR intake sold by Awesome GTI also needed the DV hose connector to be fitted.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on August 21, 2017, 04:25:07 PM
My K04 VWR intake sold by Awesome GTI also needed the DV hose connector to be fitted.

I thought they were all like that?

I just cut the hole in with a scalpel. The punch tool is fine on a straight pipe, but a complete pita on a 90 degree pipe. More dumb arse VWR crap right there  :stupid:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Shoduchi on August 21, 2017, 07:19:40 PM
My K04 VWR intake sold by Awesome GTI also needed the DV hose connector to be fitted.

I thought they were all like that?

I just cut the hole in with a scalpel. The punch tool is fine on a straight pipe, but a complete pita on a 90 degree pipe. More dumb arse VWR crap right there  :stupid:

There was a reply from another user with a print screen of a reply from VW Racing stating that a K04 VWR intake should come with the DV connector already fitted.

Not sure why it was deleted. :confused:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: AJP on August 21, 2017, 07:35:34 PM
My K04 VWR intake sold by Awesome GTI also needed the DV hose connector to be fitted.

I thought they were all like that?

I just cut the hole in with a scalpel. The punch tool is fine on a straight pipe, but a complete pita on a 90 degree pipe. More dumb arse VWR crap right there  :stupid:

There was a reply from another user with a print screen of a reply from VW Racing stating that a K04 VWR intake should come with the DV connector already fitted.

Not sure why it was deleted. :confused:
Cutting costs knowing there was healthy demand. £££ basically.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on August 22, 2017, 08:25:22 AM
My K04 VWR intake sold by Awesome GTI also needed the DV hose connector to be fitted.

I thought they were all like that?

I just cut the hole in with a scalpel. The punch tool is fine on a straight pipe, but a complete pita on a 90 degree pipe. More dumb arse VWR crap right there  :stupid:

There was a reply from another user with a print screen of a reply from VW Racing stating that a K04 VWR intake should come with the DV connector already fitted.

Not sure why it was deleted. :confused:

Personally I think we should all send the intakes back. They were never fit for purpose to begin with.  I think I might drive to their building and set fire to mine outside it  :grin:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on February 23, 2018, 07:11:54 PM
Home brew flex joint for my VWR intake  :happy2:   It's just a flex joint from the standard engine cover with the square section chopped off  :grin:   Costs about £15 from VW iirc.

The wine is a reward for my ingenuity  :grin: :drinking:

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4741/26572493148_3b4d1c868f_b.jpg)
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Shoduchi on February 23, 2018, 07:25:54 PM
It looks great! Maybe VWR should look at it seriously and improve their intake pipe. :congrats:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on February 23, 2018, 08:07:40 PM
Thanks  :smiley:   It's really flexible and being plastic, it won't collapse with heavy boost like rubber flexis do  :happy2:

I also have a couple of options for spacing the bracket up to clear the coolant line.  Rubber couplers to improve noise isolation  :smiley:

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4626/40399963692_af00668f2c_b.jpg)
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on February 24, 2018, 05:24:53 PM
OK, VWR intake installed today, with some entirely necessary tweaks and modifications to avoid being stranded from coolant loss.

Let's start with the positives. 

I actually quite like it after sorting the installation issues.   It's VERY VERY quiet, a tiny bit louder than the stock intake.  No silly squawks, hisses, or Darth Vader dirty breathing noises, which for a daily car is very appealing indeed. Refinement is king. Shouting is annoying.   

No loss of torque off boost and from 4000rpm onwards it feels like it's adding power.  Perhaps not the masses of extra power claimed, but definitely feels stronger than stock. So that's a win  :happy2:

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4723/40414670512_027873ef16_b.jpg)

Now let's discuss the negatives, and there are a lot of them, so to quote Gaskings....'Pull out your sacks, sit back and enjoy'  :popcornsoda:

Problem 1: With the intake pipe pushed into the Silicon elbow as far as it will go.....

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4695/39748231134_41c20eb901_b.jpg)

.... this section of pipe is pushed hard up against the battery.  You don't want parts that move touching parts fixed to the car because it's wears things out and transmits knocks and noises into the cabin.

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4625/40414738052_b863da6e6c_b.jpg)

To rectify that, I chopped this much off the elbow with a surgical scalpel (you need something super sharp and thin to cut silicon properly).  I used the clamp as a guide to ensure a dead straight cut.

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4708/39562758305_a256c60293_b.jpg)

Loads better.  It's hard to see in the pic but there is at least 10mm clearance on the battery side now.  Note the flex joint.  That is absolutely key to this intake not breaking the coolant elbow off, or pulling the canister out of the air guide attached to the grille.  VWR cannot be considered 'engineers' for ignoring such an obvious and vital component.  Do they think engines remain completely still when accelerating and changing gears?  :stupid:

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4666/25587505847_a2245397b8_b.jpg)

Problem 2: This fitting required for KO4 engines.  You have to fit it yourself, and in exactly the right place.  Inexcusable at this price point.  It was sheer luck that I got it in the right place on first attempt, but I can imagine some people being less fortunate.

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4662/40458540051_be3319be62_b.jpg)

Problem 3: Maybe it was just mine, but I had to completely reprofile the MAF mount.  As supplied, the MAF's weather seal wasn't even compressed when bolted down, which caused a huge air leak.  I also had to file out the hole as the MAF wouldn't even slide in.  Again, there is no excuse for crap like this on a £400 intake.

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4617/39562753635_05c3180689_b.jpg)

Problem 4: No provision is provided for securing the MAF harness.  It doesn't take a genius to figure out that if the harness flaps about from engine movement, it will eventually cause metal fatigue and snap one or more wires off at the plug  :stupid:   So a cable tie is the only quick and dirty solution here.  I will figure out something better and more OEM looking.  Why didn't VWR notice the fact VW rigidly clipped the MAF harness into the stock airbox for this very reason?

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4712/39562755575_3e3b99c552_b.jpg)

Problem 5: And now onto the most idiotic and well known issue - the coolant elbow clearance, or complete lack of.  This is embarrassingly poor.  I know it's just an rebranded ITG intake, but either way, zero f'cks given by both ITG and VWR that customers have had this elbow snap off.

Absolutely bugger all clearance, and it also rests on the radiator hose.  Yet more abrasion related issues  :doh:

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4662/39748230764_0ff8342eeb_b.jpg)

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4714/39748230244_e14f395db3_b.jpg)

And look how close it sits to the fuel pump bleed valve??  FFS, did VWR wear very dark sun glasses when fitting this to their development car??!  :stupid:

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4602/40414668862_e97c76d1b5_b.jpg)

I found a way to gain clearance.

If you fit the air guide plate as you would expect, i.e. with the 'lip' on top of the grille, you can't get the canister in far enough because it fouls the grille.

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4704/25587505067_40db88d218_b.jpg)

But if you fit the air guide like this, you can shove the canister in a further 10-15mm.

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4715/25587508287_6e9c2f67de_b.jpg)

Which gives you a lot more coolant elbow clearance.  This is more than enough room with a flex joint.  The canister will not move.  I gave the car some very hard acceleration forwards and backwards and the canister did not move from this position.  Without a flex joint, the canister will almost certainly pull out of the air guide and snap the elbow off.   Well done VWR  :congrats:

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4650/39562756325_b4577b7d46_b.jpg)

So in summary, it works great as a filter.  Refined and effective at freeing power off.  But as a retail product for DIY enthusiasts - costing over £400 let's not forget - it absolutely sucks. It is the worst fitting car product I have experienced in 23 years of modifying VWs. A product that can cause damage to people's engines should not even be allowed on the shelves.  It truly is awful and a complete embarrassment to British engineering.

Because of these issues, I would not recommend this intake to anyone.  However, if you are prepared to modify it in the same way I have, then I think it's worth considering.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Neil 54 on February 25, 2018, 12:00:05 PM
Hi Pudding great work and write up do you think the flexi would help the Revo intake to stop snapping at mounting point
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Shoduchi on February 25, 2018, 03:58:13 PM
Thank you @Pudding (http://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=10733) for explaining how you corrected the issues with the VWR intake. Mine fits a bit better, not sure why. I do think that the engine mounts need to be reinforced so the engine doesn't rock as much. My canister pops out if I don't fit the pipe in a certain position. :\
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on February 26, 2018, 03:02:52 PM
I think they have redesigned the air guide, which might move the canister forward a bit for more clearance.   It used to pop out of mine as well (even with 3 x Vibratechnics mounts) until I fitted the flex coupling  :smiley:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: 99hagued on March 01, 2018, 04:34:34 PM
I have been in contact with vwr/racingline about these issues and there is talk of a redesigned intake and swapping out for the ones that we have had issues with so watch this space.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Shoduchi on March 01, 2018, 06:52:44 PM
I have been in contact with vwr/racingline about these issues and there is talk of a redesigned intake and swapping out for the ones that we have had issues with so watch this space.

Nice! I hope they redesign the pipe, at least. It needs a flexible part.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Dave J on March 01, 2018, 09:54:55 PM
^^That would be a result if so! Is that some brand damage limitation coming in...? They are catering very much to the MK7R crowd now...

Great work Pudding, that's just such a good few tweeks to the kit. As you say, absolutely should NOT be needed at this price point.
I've been keeping a very close eye on mine for a while now. So a couple of questions if I may;

 - How much did you chop out of the solid intake pipe? Just interested in case I decide to follow this route!

 - When adjusting the grill mounting for the HUGE airfilter box, did you need to modify the bracket in any way?

Cheers for persevering with this... :drinking:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on March 02, 2018, 01:06:55 PM
Awesome news  :happy2:

The MK5 scene is still huge globally, so they can’t afford the bad publicity.

Dave, I didn’t have to chop any of the pipes  :happy2:   Yeah the air guide for the grille did need some hacking but nothing major.

Are awesome handling the swaps?
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: 99hagued on March 03, 2018, 11:42:02 AM
Someone from vwr/racingline is trying to replay to this post to let us know what’s going on, but because he’s not been on here for a few years his posts need to be accepted my a mod.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on March 05, 2018, 11:17:19 AM
Looking forward to his/her comments but the forum is borderline unusable at the moment!

Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: S19MDE on March 13, 2018, 09:44:08 AM
Hi All,

My name is Matt and I work for RacingLine Perforrmance (VWR, Racingline, Volkswagen Racing, many names over the years!) and Danny has brought this thread to my attention with everyone having issues with the intake.

I personally have this kit on my MK5 Golf GTI and fortunately haven't had any fitting issues, movement or rubbing. However, I do not have a K04 car and this may be what is causing the issue.

After reading through the thread, I can confirm that we have already fixed the DV pipe fitting issue. This is now moulded into the pipe for K04 cars as standard.

For the other bits, if you guys wouldn't mind putting a list together of what you think needs to be changed, we will go to our supplier and have all these changes made. I am happy to replace parts for all that have been involved with this thread so far once we have come to a full solution, I will also throw a bit of merch in there for you guys too for your support so far.

If we could put the list together in here, but email me with your proof of purchase, name and address and forum username then I can keep track of who needs replacements of what.

As I said previously, I appreciate the issues that everyone has had so far and for persevering. We strive for good products and customer service, but unfortunately it seems that you guys have received neither so far and I want to make sure that is rectified!

My email address is m.ellis@racingline.com. I look forward to hearing from you all soon and working towards a solution.

Thanks!
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: teo_parvu on March 13, 2018, 11:49:02 AM
Hi Matt,

I'm glad that someone from Racingline decided to get involved in this. Personally I don't have a Racingline intake, but I'm considering it. There were some other things that I tried to buy from Racingline on FB, some racing parts. I would exclusively use them for the Romanian Time Attack Challenge, but the discussion ended at "let me talk to a parts manager". I had to buy from somewhere else. There are some things that need to be improved, I should've at least get an answer.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on March 13, 2018, 04:57:38 PM
Hi All,

My name is Matt and I work for RacingLine Perforrmance (VWR, Racingline, Volkswagen Racing, many names over the years!) and Danny has brought this thread to my attention with everyone having issues with the intake.

I personally have this kit on my MK5 Golf GTI and fortunately haven't had any fitting issues, movement or rubbing. However, I do not have a K04 car and this may be what is causing the issue.

After reading through the thread, I can confirm that we have already fixed the DV pipe fitting issue. This is now moulded into the pipe for K04 cars as standard.

For the other bits, if you guys wouldn't mind putting a list together of what you think needs to be changed, we will go to our supplier and have all these changes made. I am happy to replace parts for all that have been involved with this thread so far once we have come to a full solution, I will also throw a bit of merch in there for you guys too for your support so far.

If we could put the list together in here, but email me with your proof of purchase, name and address and forum username then I can keep track of who needs replacements of what.

As I said previously, I appreciate the issues that everyone has had so far and for persevering. We strive for good products and customer service, but unfortunately it seems that you guys have received neither so far and I want to make sure that is rectified!

My email address is m.ellis@racingline.com. I look forward to hearing from you all soon and working towards a solution.

Thanks!

I am happy to be the spokesman for everyone.   

Everything I have documented from page 5 is the summary of the issues. 

The KO4 specifics involve the recirc valve plumbing only (I.e the Revotec self sealing fitting).  Everything else is the same as the K03 GTI.  Unless your filter canister is different to ours, I can't see how you don't have any fouling issues of the parts pictured (resting on coolant hoses, evap check valve, fuel pump bleed valve etc).

I think a ground up redesign is required, which will include a proper industry standard flex coupling and a canister that actually fits the available space with satisfactory clearance for engine movement.

It's safe to say every MK5 Golf was made the same way, so have there been any slight alterations to the intake since it's conception that could cause these fitting issues.  I mean, having to file the MAF aperture out to fit the MAF properly, really??



Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on March 13, 2018, 07:45:49 PM
I have emailed Matt some high res pictures and a lengthy summary of our experiences.

I don't think everyone has experienced *ALL* of the issues mentioned in this thread, but typically of my luck, I certainly did.  Maybe I had a duff one, but either way, enough people have had clearance problems and snapped off coolant elbows for this to be taken back to the drawing board.

I also appreciate Matt taking the time to take an interest in this, and hopefully some good will come of it  :happy2:

Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: 99hagued on March 14, 2018, 12:40:44 PM
I agree with all the points made on page 5 by pudding and think it would be best if one person was a spokesman for everyone.

Also thanks to Matt for wanting to sort this out, hopefully we can and make this a better intake. :happy2:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on March 14, 2018, 02:10:13 PM
I had a phone call / FaceTime to go over the issues with Matt today.   Really nice guy and he is extremely keen to get these issues resolved for us  :happy2:

In the near future, I will be visiting Racingline HQ for them to see the issues first hand on a customer's car, and also have them fit one of the most recent KO4 kits to see if that addresses any of the problems we've encountered.

I've already suggested a flex coupling and some clearancing 'dinks'  to the canister (they wouldn't restrict flow) as immediate improvements to take back to ITG, and following my visit, a couple more enhancements may be put forward, but from the chat on the phone, it sounds like some areas have already been addressed, such as the K04 silicon elbow and the MAF housing.

Once ITG/Racingline have had an opportunity to review the data and come up with a plan, we can go from there.   Obviously these things take time but I'm confident we will have better fitting intakes in the near future!

Watch this space  :smiley:

Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Shoduchi on March 14, 2018, 05:11:26 PM
I'm glad Matt posted here and asked for our feedback. I have this intake and it does rub one plastic elbow connected to the intake manifold. So far its the aluminium canister that is taking the damage, not the plastic elbow. In my can I have to be careful on how the pipe is fitted to prevent the canister from popping out of its front bracket.

Fortunately my MAF seated well and the canister doesn't hit the coolant elbow, although its close from hitting it. By fitting a thicker IC I had to trim a bit the front canister bracket to make it fit the rear of the front grill.

That's my feedback. I'm happy with the performance and noise. I do worry about water entering the intake pipe when under heavy rain. :smiley:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: 99hagued on March 14, 2018, 08:36:34 PM
Another thought my peron intercooler is slightly thicker than the original one and it pushes the radiator back towards the engine. Something else to consider for the revised intake.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Dave J on March 14, 2018, 08:42:53 PM
It is great news that Matt has joined this thread to resolve the issues. Thank-you Pudding for your time to be the spokesman and to work with Racingline directly.

I think you have covered the issues that have affected my intake; T-piece coolant pipe being damaged by the canister moving back and forth, rubbing on the hoses to the radiator as the canister was resting on them. My kit was improved by shims to the supporting bracket on the battery tray, and moving the air guide further to the passenger side. The canister still has sometimes popped out of it, so it would be good if there is a way of permanently fitting the canister to the snorkel.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on March 15, 2018, 12:26:48 PM
The position of the air guide does indeed influence the position of the canister, it's something I discussed with Matt.  As Dave J said, it needs to be moved over a bit to allow more clearance, but people with brand new intakes are somewhat fearful of drilling new holes, just in case they have to return it.
That relates to the older generation intake with the pressed ally air guide, which also as pointed out, can be affected by intercooler size.

The current MK5 intake adopts the moulded snorkel from the MK6 kit, which is a great addition imo!   Hopefully this will position the canister with a bit more clearance.

As for rain and snow getting into the canister, I had another look into that and I think it's an acceptable risk.  The snorkel is offset from the grille a bit, which will allow heavy water splashes to pass underneath the canister opening......I hope  :grin:  I wouldn't recommend chopping the grille slats out like some folk do.  I'd keep them there to keep twigs and leaves out.

(https://store.ngpracing.com/images/detailed/23/TSI-Intake-Installed.jpg)
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on March 15, 2018, 12:39:55 PM
And speaking of MK6 GTIs, I have the turbo pipework and MAF pictured above on the way, to see if it will fit the MK5.   

The reason for it to move the MAF away from the turbo.   When running a lot more boost than standard, the extra turbulence and wearing out turbo seals tends to dump oil onto the MAF, which is erm, not great!   Younger mileage cars may not exhibit this problem, so it's not essential.   Just an idea I want to experiment with. 

Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on March 15, 2018, 05:53:34 PM
More info on the MK6 GTi intake pipe.

It will definitely work, and there's even a nice little mounting to stop it from flapping about.  Something else aftermarket intake makers ought to look into as well.

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/797/40785738222_80a964e498_b.jpg)

The aforementioned input for a KO4 DV return.

(https://farm1.staticflickr.com/793/39932802565_9c449f6c78_b.jpg)

Just need to get a MK6 MAF housing and it's pretty much there.   Did a bit more digging on MK6 vs MK5 MAFs.   Same style of MAF, but different part numbers.  MK6 - 06J906461D.  MK5 - 06J906461A.   Hopefully the cross sectional area of the MK6 housing will work well in the MK5 and not throw the LTFTs off to much.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Dave J on March 15, 2018, 08:44:13 PM
The position of the air guide does indeed influence the position of the canister, it's something I discussed with Matt.  As Dave J said, it needs to be moved over a bit to allow more clearance, but people with brand new intakes are somewhat fearful of drilling new holes, just in case they have to return it.
That relates to the older generation intake with the pressed ally air guide, which also as pointed out, can be affected by intercooler size.

The current MK5 intake adopts the moulded snorkel from the MK6 kit, which is a great addition imo!   Hopefully this will position the canister with a bit more clearance.


Hmmm, I thought the current kits for the MK5 on Awesome's website looked different. I see it has a jubilee clip to tighten around the canister - I think that with your flex joint would definitely be a help. Mine is one of the kits with the air guide like the one in your picture above.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: JamesED30 on March 17, 2018, 10:53:27 PM
I received one of these kits 3x weeks ago, but the weather has been too poor to attempt fitting it every day I’ve been off.
When did VWR update the kits?
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on March 19, 2018, 09:24:54 AM
Not sure.  Definitely since August last year as that's when I got mine, and it's the older style.

It only takes about 30 mins to fit.  The weather is supposed to improve this week  :happy2:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: petem86 on March 20, 2018, 07:56:56 AM
i had ramair and vwr intakes on, the ramair made 4bhp after a map, but switching gave me an extra 20.

its also for sale if anyone is interested
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Bodyboarder81 on March 20, 2018, 08:12:11 PM
Let us all know the outcome @Pudding (http://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=10733)  , as I’m keen to purchase this kit but obviously would want the ‘revised ‘ one when it’s here  :happy2:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on March 21, 2018, 10:37:53 AM
Sure thing  :happy2:   I'm sure between ITG, Racingline and customer feedback, a decent solution can be found  :smiley:

Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on March 23, 2018, 06:33:16 PM
I met up with the Racingline team today and had a thoroughly decent 'cars and coffee' session with them.  Very accommodating and professional people  :happy2:

The areas arrowed in the pic below are now officially under development, and they were drafting up the modifications in CAD before I'd even left!

When the updates are available, I will pop back up there and test them on my car.  When we are happy with the revisions, they will go into production and owners of the old kits will be entitled to the new one FOC if proof of purchase is provided. i.e. an invoice from Awesome GTI or wherever you bought it from.   Naturally, these things take time but I will keep this thread updated with any developments  :smiley:

So, to break down the forthcoming changes:

MAF housing - This will be modified to correctly compress the weather seal. 

Intake pipe - A bracket will be made to rigidly mount the pipe to the grey peg on the heat shield.

Flex coupling - One will be supplied, but it may not be like mine.  They are looking into options for that.

Canister mount - Unfortunately the MK6 snorkel doesn't fit MK5s, so the existing mounting will be modified to allow more clearance for the coolant hoses etc.

(https://farm5.staticflickr.com/4771/40078948235_41fde8daf1_b.jpg)
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Bodyboarder81 on March 23, 2018, 06:37:02 PM
That’s great news ... well done to all parties involved and hats off to vwr for being professional about it all ... once the .2 comes out I’ll be sure to order  :happy2:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Shoduchi on March 23, 2018, 06:58:49 PM
Great work Pudding! I'll be waiting for your test on the revised version. :happy2:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Dave J on March 24, 2018, 03:07:59 PM
That's excellent news Pudding - thanks for evolving this kit with Racingline. I had been wanting to remove this from my car due to the fear of the coolant pipe snapping off again, but I'll wait for the outcome of this development work. I really like the look and sound of the kit, so hope the developments make it daily driver friendly!
I've already emailed Matt with my proof of purchase from Awesome and my details but have not heard back as yet.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: JamesED30 on March 25, 2018, 09:49:24 PM
That’s good news. My kit is still in the box not fitted. Only had it 5x weeks 🙈 although, good job if they’re gonna upgrade the kits and replace them FOC.
I’ve emailed matt too. So will hopefully get a reply tomorrow.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on March 26, 2018, 09:18:27 AM
It's probably best to wait until the kit has been revised before sending over your POPs  :happy2:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: S19MDE on March 26, 2018, 12:09:27 PM
Hi Guys,

First of all I would like to thank Pudding for all his time and effort on Friday, it was extremely helpful for us and he certainly knows what he is talking about!

We've already 3D printed a new MAF housing for us to test fit on and then put into the pipe drawing, which will be tested today. We've also got a new mount being printed to support the upper pipe as I type!

For everyone that has emailed me so far, I apologise for not replying. As Pudding said, I plan on emailing everyone separately with a full list of improvements an what is going to be done moving forward. I've filed all of your emails away, so when we are sorted I'll email you all back. For the time being though, I'll post any updates in here as I get them.

Thanks for your time everyone and I appreciate the positive feedback for us trying to fix the issue!   
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Shoduchi on March 26, 2018, 12:53:17 PM
@S19MDE (http://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=16526): Thanks for updating us. I'll send an email with the proof of purchase so you can file it with the others. :smiley:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: JamesED30 on April 02, 2018, 11:47:25 AM
Any updates on this??
Still have my kit in its box.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on April 04, 2018, 12:58:54 PM
I haven’t heard anything yet. Just giving them time to get the revisions tested and signed off. I wasn’t expecting it to be completed in less than a month tbh.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on April 18, 2018, 08:47:19 AM
FYI, I emailed Matt Ellis on Sunday but no response yet. Maybe he’s on holiday.
I’ve also emailed them via the contact form on their site to get an update.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on April 18, 2018, 06:08:20 PM
Got an update.  Things are still in progress and we should know more in the next week or two  :happy2:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: 99hagued on April 18, 2018, 10:54:27 PM
Got an update.  Things are still in progress and we should know more in the next week or two  :happy2:

Top work kev👍
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on April 19, 2018, 08:57:11 AM
Rather handily, their CAD chap has a standard MK5 GTI, so they are currently trial fitting the intake on that car.   I believe the pipes have been sent back to ITG for [MAF housing] modification and ITG are also sourcing flex couplings  :happy2:

Their 3D printer is currently occupied on other work, but when that's completed, they will start printing off the pipe [to heat shield] mountings, and the revised front grille scoop thingy.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: JamesED30 on April 23, 2018, 10:14:41 PM
Great news bud 👍🏼. Mine is still sat in its box. 🙈
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: JamesED30 on May 07, 2018, 09:55:45 PM
Anything new on this??
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on May 10, 2018, 09:50:17 AM
Blimey, where has 3 weeks gone  :surprised:   

You can't help but notice their rebranding and marketing on twitter and facebook at the moment, especially with MK7 parts, so I'm not surprised this is taking a while.  Clearly MK5 development is taking a back burner whilst they focus more on MK7 sales revenue.

I will chase them up again.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: JamesED30 on May 19, 2018, 05:28:55 PM
Still no news yet buddy???
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: csrigo on May 21, 2018, 01:55:05 PM
I'm also keen on any updates as they come.

I really need an intake asap, are racingline still providing the original version for sale to suppliers?? If so have they considered ammending the cost (which i presume they wont) and if not do they guarentee that if purchased say today they would still supply the modded version parts when available?

Cheers
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Dan_FR on May 21, 2018, 02:38:14 PM
Too much money to be made developing and testing new kits for the newest cars on the market, rather than 'wasting' it redesigning a product for a warranty fix aimed at a market that is pretty much dead....

I highly doubt it'll happen
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on May 21, 2018, 03:09:54 PM
Still no news yet buddy???

Not yet mate.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on May 21, 2018, 03:14:14 PM
I'm also keen on any updates as they come.

I really need an intake asap, are racingline still providing the original version for sale to suppliers?? If so have they considered ammending the cost (which i presume they wont) and if not do they guarentee that if purchased say today they would still supply the modded version parts when available?

Cheers

You would hope they halted supplies because of the fundamental flaws, but I suspect it is still available.


Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on May 21, 2018, 03:24:38 PM
Too much money to be made developing and testing new kits for the newest cars on the market, rather than 'wasting' it redesigning a product for a warranty fix aimed at a market that is pretty much dead....

I highly doubt it'll happen

It's far from a redesign, just some minor enhancements.    The market is far from dead.  They've only sold 5000 intakes worldwide, which is considerably less than the number of EA113 engined cars produced.  EOS, GTI, Jetta, Scirocco, ED30, Passat, A3, S3, VRS etc etc.   

It might not happen, but it's completely false to say there is no market for the intake.

Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on June 08, 2018, 10:57:48 AM
Yet another chase up email sent, via the main contact page this time.   

Given their initial interest and gumption to sort this kit out when I visited them in March, I now find their lack of follow ups very disappointing.  I was there - there was loads of people sat at computers.  How hard is it for one of them to keep us informed?  British companies have absolutely no concept of customer perception and retention.  I have no idea why such low standards are common place and deemed acceptable in this country.

I can guarantee if it was American customers making a stink about this, they would be bending over backwards to help them out.  I'm done with giving them the benefit of the doubt.  All they care about is raising their profile on social media.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Shoduchi on June 08, 2018, 11:30:33 AM
Gutted that VW Racingline doesn't correspond to your efforts and our hopes of a well sorted intake. :sad1:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on June 08, 2018, 11:40:27 AM
Well, to be honest, when I arrived Matt Ellis forgot who I was and why I was there.......when I had only spoken to him the week before!   Not a great start.   He is the Technical Sales manager.   Managers of sales ought to be switched on when it comes to their customer base, no?

And when we were assessing my kit, an engineer came out with quite a dismissive, abrupt and arrogant attitude and basically told me there is nothing wrong with the kit and then disappeared.  Yeah, thanks for that.   So why is it a revised intake pipe fresh out of the bag STILL had a totally wrong MAF aperture?

After that, Matt and a couple of other guys were extremely helpful and 100% acknowledged the issues I raised were unacceptable, so it is disappointing they haven't maintained that same momentum since.  I'm not that demanding of a person.  I get it, we all have busy lives, but in the retail world, even a simple "Sorry guys, no progress made this week due to X, Y and Z" goes a long way to placating customers.    Silence just creates a very bad impression.

I think Dan was right, it's not looking likely it will happen!
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Dan_FR on June 08, 2018, 12:08:34 PM
Profit is too important to 98% of companies in this world, and there's no money to be made in fixing an issue with something that they have already been paid for when the market for new intakes on this platform is tiny nowadays. Revo were the same when asking about RFD specific mapping - promises, promises, promises and it never happened. Always moving on to the newest market and rushing to be the first company to introduce X, Y and Z parts to maximise sales and revenue.

If it were 10 years ago when they were fresh on the market and people kicked up a fuss, it would have been fixed within days/weeks in order to not hamper sales.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Shoduchi on June 08, 2018, 12:20:44 PM
@Dan_FR (http://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=9513) I agree. We'd need to join many and make a big enough fuss to make VWR worry about this issue. :sad1:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: S19MDE on June 08, 2018, 01:15:07 PM
Hi All,

I have seen your emails, while also reading all of your comments on the forum.

We have not forgotten about the issue with this intake, nor would location of the customer correlate to the speed of the issues being fixed.

At the moment, we have a re-designed MAF housing which has been 3D printed, tested and approved. The new flexi-pipe is being sampled as we speak to make sure we have the correct shape and fitment. Next, the bracket will be re-designed to support the back pipe as we were not happy with our first effort attempt. The grill re-design is next on the list.

I understand your frustrations due to lack of update, but I ask for you guys to understand that we do have other projects to contend with to get new products to the market, not just raising our social media profile.

Pudding/Kevin - I planned on contacting you when I have a full, new manufactured kit in my hand for you to test personally. I expect this will be around 4-6 weeks away after final testing/manufacture, as I would not like to give you a kit with any unfinished/3D printed parts.

I will try to keep on top of updates for you guys in the future.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Shoduchi on June 08, 2018, 01:46:16 PM
@S19MDE (http://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=16526): Thanks for updating us. This relieves us a bit while we wait. :smiley:
[/quote]
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on June 08, 2018, 04:35:15 PM
Hi All,

I have seen your emails, while also reading all of your comments on the forum.

We have not forgotten about the issue with this intake, nor would location of the customer correlate to the speed of the issues being fixed.

At the moment, we have a re-designed MAF housing which has been 3D printed, tested and approved. The new flexi-pipe is being sampled as we speak to make sure we have the correct shape and fitment. Next, the bracket will be re-designed to support the back pipe as we were not happy with our first effort attempt. The grill re-design is next on the list.

I understand your frustrations due to lack of update, but I ask for you guys to understand that we do have other projects to contend with to get new products to the market, not just raising our social media profile.

Pudding/Kevin - I planned on contacting you when I have a full, new manufactured kit in my hand for you to test personally. I expect this will be around 4-6 weeks away after final testing/manufacture, as I would not like to give you a kit with any unfinished/3D printed parts.

I will try to keep on top of updates for you guys in the future.

Thanks Matt, this is all that we could have hoped for from you.  Just touching base with us occasionally to say you're still on it  :smiley:

I'm sorry to have resorted to strongly worded opinions in order to get a response from you, when really you could have mitigated that by being proactive with the updates.

I get that you have other projects on the go, but the MK7 isn't going anywhere.  It's still very current and ripe for development.  Gold service is looking after the people who have already paid a substantial sum for a substandard product before chasing new business.  The UK is too used to brown service, so be the better company  :happy2:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on June 08, 2018, 04:53:16 PM
Profit is too important to 98% of companies in this world, and there's no money to be made in fixing an issue with something that they have already been paid for when the market for new intakes on this platform is tiny nowadays. Revo were the same when asking about RFD specific mapping - promises, promises, promises and it never happened. Always moving on to the newest market and rushing to be the first company to introduce X, Y and Z parts to maximise sales and revenue.

If it were 10 years ago when they were fresh on the market and people kicked up a fuss, it would have been fixed within days/weeks in order to not hamper sales.

Agreed.  Imo, Revo appear to be a bit risk averse and won't venture out into the 'custom' arena.  RFD tuning is pretty niche to be fair.  Only a tiny proportion of people are prepared to remove their intakes (coz it's a ball ache!), which would result in fewer sales of that map vs the much larger sales of their vanilla 1 size fits all maps.   The usual cost benefit business model.

One thing a lot of companies overlook is forward thinking and customer retention.  GTI owners naturally progress onto Audis or other performance VW group cars.  Based on their experiences of company X during their GTI ownership, they are 10 times more likely to go back to them for a map or intake for their new RS3 if they were pleased with the service they received.  Or will move onto company Y if they weren't.

Compare the MK7 Racingline intake to the MK5's.  Night / day different in approach and quality, but I'd wager fewer MK7 intakes are sold vs MK5 because the bulk of them are leased.  So why all the diligence for the MK7 and not the MK5?  I don't get it.  Johnny 5 is still very much alive, especially with media outlets like Pistonheads, Evo and PPC magazine periodically doing peices on what a great car the MK5 is. 



Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: JamesED30 on June 12, 2018, 09:15:51 PM
Good news at last!!!
Unfortunately I thought the day would never come also so had the intake fitted by Will at VRS Northampton. Top bloke by the way!!
I can certainly see what you all have complained about. It’s not what you’d expect for double the price of others on the market.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: colesey on June 13, 2018, 05:53:55 AM
Not quite sure what to make of these large and well resourced firms churning out expensive but inadequately developed products some 10 years after the Mk5 went out of production. It seems to me that Racingline often rebrands another company’s product (eg ITG / vibratechnic / superpro / AST / Team Dynamics / Eibach) with some minor tinkering at most and adds an extra layer into the distribution chain to create a more expensive product.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on June 15, 2018, 04:56:57 PM
Good news at last!!!
Unfortunately I thought the day would never come also so had the intake fitted by Will at VRS Northampton. Top bloke by the way!!
I can certainly see what you all have complained about. It’s not what you’d expect for double the price of others on the market.

Rest assured, *all* of the snagging points were raised and duly noted by the VWR staff  :happy2:   





Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on June 15, 2018, 05:14:28 PM
Not quite sure what to make of these large and well resourced firms churning out expensive but inadequately developed products some 10 years after the Mk5 went out of production. It seems to me that Racingline often rebrands another company’s product (eg ITG / vibratechnic / superpro / AST / Team Dynamics / Eibach) with some minor tinkering at most and adds an extra layer into the distribution chain to create a more expensive product.

They have their own in-house CAD and 3D printing facilities, but volume producers they most definitely are not, hence contracting it out to established factories.
You can indeed ring DemonTweeks and buy ProRace 1.2s sans the embossed rims for less than what VWR charge for exactly the same thing.  Racingline don't try and disguise this fact though.  I suppose the advantage of Racingline is they are using their production contacts to bring everything together in a one stop shop style outlet, which for level 1 enthusiasts is a lot easier than spending hours searching for parts separately.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: csrigo on June 29, 2018, 01:51:18 PM
Any more updates on this from the Racingline rep with regards to an ETA at all... I see it was said 4-6 weeks after final testing however when is final testing going to be complete..do you have a more likely ETA?

Not wanting to be negative I get these companies are busy designing/building new kits etc but like a lot of people I have been holding out for months now on this and I've waited this long but I am considering going another route with the HPA v2 system from Germany if anyone is aware of this kit?...a bit more expensive tho.

A guy I was on draft with based in Germany runs one on his S3 and rates it....just kinda bored waiting on this tbh

Anybody else heard/used one of these kits?
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Dan_FR on June 29, 2018, 02:03:03 PM
The ETA was 4-6 weeks after they finish redesigning and changing bits, which they still had plenty to do 3 weeks ago. I wouldn't expect it to be ready until at least August, if not longer/ever.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: csrigo on June 29, 2018, 02:48:33 PM
The ETA was 4-6 weeks after they finish redesigning and changing bits, which they still had plenty to do 3 weeks ago. I wouldn't expect it to be ready until at least August, if not longer/ever.

Yeah that's what I'm thinking. TBH out of principle I would rather not buy one of these kits for the fact they kept supplying these unfit ones that could potentially damage the cooling system on the car which in my mind is ridiculous to start with. They know it is a flawed product that could potentially cause catastrophic damage and yet no recall as far as I am aware..could be wrong tho.
 
The problem being from reviews they work well (when modified to fit correctly) which is the point I suppose. Just garbage for the price.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on June 30, 2018, 12:59:33 PM
I haven't heard anything since the 15th, but I'm not expecting to for at least another 2 - 4 weeks tbh.

I like the Racingline intake because it's quiet as far as these drainpipe style intakes go, and it's MAF error is pretty reasonable compared to some.

The HPA v2 is a manifold btw, and definitely not worth the money or effort!  There are a couple of decent intakes from Germany, namely Diblas and HG motorsport, but they are something like 500 euros......which is an expensive Brexit price now that the Euro is almost £1.

I suspect most, if not all of the delays will be with ITG.  I've witnessed first hand how quickly Racingline work on things.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Dave J on June 30, 2018, 02:45:13 PM
I really do like the look and sound of this intake more than any other on the market, which is why I bought one. I'm still frustrated that the availability date of this revised version is still unknown. Surely VWR, with a good project planning team could confirm when the revised intake will be available.

I'm still worried about driving my car everyday & that the coolant nipple will be broken off again.

If this isn't sorted by August when my next service is due, I will go back to the standard filter now and chuck the VWR thing in the bin. I couldn't sell it on due to my conscience. Currently, I have no confidence that a revised kit will ever be issued to existing users, & I really worry about the reliability risk on my engine by a so called 'upgrade'. Where do we stand in terms of trading standards in terms of selling a product unfit for use, now that it has been acknowledged by VWR? How about if my engine blows up in the meantime due to this kit running the coolant dry?

Sorry to be so annoyed, but I am utterly frustrated that this is not moving quickly. I really do not care that VWR say they are balancing their time with our complaint against getting new products to market - there will be no market left for them if the products for the MK7R prove to be like this one...
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: csrigo on July 01, 2018, 03:02:10 PM
I haven't heard anything since the 15th, but I'm not expecting to for at least another 2 - 4 weeks tbh.

I like the Racingline intake because it's quiet as far as these drainpipe style intakes go, and it's MAF error is pretty reasonable compared to some.

The HPA v2 is a manifold btw, and definitely not worth the money or effort!  There are a couple of decent intakes from Germany, namely Diblas and HG motorsport, but they are something like 500 euros......which is an expensive Brexit price now that the Euro is almost £1.

I suspect most, if not all of the delays will be with ITG.  I've witnessed first hand how quickly Racingline work on things.

Lol apologies I meant the HG FSeries v2....predictive on the tablet must've put that in and I've not noticed....side note I have looked at the intake manifolds before out of curiosity and agreed didn't think they wld be worth the money.  Had a cast Dbilas..i think..on a 20vt mk4 that I didn't buy but noticed the port orrafices werent that much bigger...all about flow I guess.

After all my moaning I bought one of these intake kits and fitted it last night.. I will stick some pics up later...the bracket at the grill got chopped to adjust to my airtec cooler...n75 hose got trimmed that was fouling the most on mine.... I have about 10mm gap between the coolant elbow and box however it does come back and marginally touch it after a run. I may have  an idea..need to see. I will check my LTFT today with regards to the MAF sensor it defo should be profiled more...seems sealed 'ok' for now but I will wait till I vcds and change as needed.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on July 05, 2018, 07:23:16 PM
Yeah that looks like a good intake and no doubt fits a whole lot better  :grin:

In 2 VWR intake kits, my MAF was loose as hell.  The weather seal wasn't compressed at all.  I was seeing trims in the 5 - 8% region with my pipe modified to nip up the weather seal.  Would probably be higher if I left it!  For reference, my standard intake with a brand new MAF and running stock software is showing <1% trims.  8% is a big error if OEM is that close to zero.  The ECU is bunging in nigh on 10% more fuel than it needs to, and remember that's a long term average, so can spike to higher percentages.  Keep an eye out for black smoke, crap mpg and poor off boost throttle response etc.










Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Shoduchi on July 05, 2018, 10:41:50 PM
Yeah that looks like a good intake and no doubt fits a whole lot better  :grin:

In 2 VWR intake kits, my MAF was loose as hell.  The weather seal wasn't compressed at all.  I was seeing trims in the 5 - 8% region with my pipe modified to nip up the weather seal.  Would probably be higher if I left it!  For reference, my standard intake with a brand new MAF and running stock software is showing <1% trims.  8% is a big error if OEM is that close to zero.  The ECU is bunging in nigh on 10% more fuel than it needs to, and remember that's a long term average, so can spike to higher percentages.  Keep an eye out for black smoke, crap mpg and poor off boost throttle response etc.

I guess I was lucky mine was better finished. The last time I checked my LTFF with the TTE420 file they were <3%. :confused:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on July 06, 2018, 10:53:31 AM
Yeah that looks like a good intake and no doubt fits a whole lot better  :grin:

In 2 VWR intake kits, my MAF was loose as hell.  The weather seal wasn't compressed at all.  I was seeing trims in the 5 - 8% region with my pipe modified to nip up the weather seal.  Would probably be higher if I left it!  For reference, my standard intake with a brand new MAF and running stock software is showing <1% trims.  8% is a big error if OEM is that close to zero.  The ECU is bunging in nigh on 10% more fuel than it needs to, and remember that's a long term average, so can spike to higher percentages.  Keep an eye out for black smoke, crap mpg and poor off boost throttle response etc.

I guess I was lucky mine was better finished. The last time I checked my LTFF with the TTE420 file they were <3%. :confused:

Wow that's great  :happy2:   You definitely got one of the better intakes!
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: 99hagued on July 06, 2018, 12:49:33 PM
My LTFT is -6.3 hopefully the revised part rains it in a bit
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on July 06, 2018, 01:56:15 PM
A variety of differences there!  If the intake is as free flowing as claimed, a small positive adjustment is to be expected, but it shouldn't be any more than 5% when the engine isn't working very hard.

Shame the LTFTs only record idle and part throttle trims.  It would be interesting to see what the trims are at full throttle.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: csrigo on July 16, 2018, 12:59:30 PM
Been working away so not had much time to drive the car lately. I did note my LTFT values the day after fitting and it was sitting at 7% so not good at all.  The throttle response low down has dipped marginally....im away for a RR today at a place I never use for a comparison to my last run a few months ago pre intake so will see if there are any gains...it defo feels stronger in the higher RPM as you wld expect...will post my graph later
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on July 16, 2018, 01:41:39 PM
That’s a common theme with most intakes. Throttle response and overall day to day consistency takes a hit <2500rpm.  If you sit in urban traffic frequently, that quickly becomes annoying!  As you say, 3000 to 7000 feels better. Not blow your skirt up better, but enough to notice.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: csrigo on July 16, 2018, 06:50:09 PM
(http://i1308.photobucket.com/albums/s618/darrochvr6/Mobile%20Uploads/fj58zwb1_zpssblqodym_edit_1531761555497_zpstgyke1nw.jpeg) (http://s1308.photobucket.com/user/darrochvr6/media/Mobile%20Uploads/fj58zwb1_zpssblqodym_edit_1531761555497_zpstgyke1nw.jpeg.html)

Humidity was mental today 70% and 20 degrees so that why its down on power bhp wise, it is up on torque a little tho...im more concerened with the now irratic top end of the graph.

My previous run before this with the standard intake a few months ago on a different dyno was 330bhp and 340ftlbs  so it is down 8bhp but up 19ftlbs... il try get my last graph it was defo smoother up top
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Shoduchi on July 17, 2018, 12:28:10 AM
Different dynos make different graphics. Some smooth the lines to make them prettier, I think. :thinking:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: csrigo on July 17, 2018, 07:20:51 PM
Different dynos make different graphics. Some smooth the lines to make them prettier, I think. :thinking:

Yeah your right I've thght about that...also the differences in scaling. Not concerned with the numbers the car still feels good to me but I am going to check my LTFT tonight and see about profiling the MAF aperture.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Dan_FR on July 18, 2018, 07:55:29 AM
The car really does drive so much better the closer to zero the LTFT is. Mine currently sits/fluctuates between +-1.5% of Zero, depending on driving style and whether the WMI is in use, and the difference is night and day over the old RamAir which used to sit at around +12-14%

It feels like it did with the factory airbox low in the RPM range, but with the gains of a free flowing intake at the top end.

Hopefully the revised part from VWR will get you guys close
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Shoduchi on July 18, 2018, 12:02:11 PM
Seeing 2.7-3-.1% fluctuations on my LTFT, depending on the driving style as well. Your values are really good!  :surprised:

I hope VW RacingLine does deliver an as good intake as yours with the revised version. :smiley:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on July 18, 2018, 07:22:43 PM
That waviness looks like the ECU messing with the fuelling and/or timing.  Shame most dynos in the UK don’t measure lambda during the power run like they do in America.
If the MAF isn’t sealed properly, or if the scaling is off, that could be a cause. Or maybe the intake/egt temps were getting hot.

£450 is good value for -8hp and +19lbft 😂  Only kidding! I’m sure it will improve once the new intake is ready.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: JamesED30 on July 18, 2018, 08:58:27 PM
That waviness looks like the ECU messing with the fuelling and/or timing.  Shame most dynos in the UK don’t measure lambda during the power run like they do in America.
If the MAF isn’t sealed properly, or if the scaling is off, that could be a cause. Or maybe the intake/egt temps were getting hot.

£450 is good value for -8hp and +19lbft 😂  Only kidding! I’m sure it will improve once the new intake is ready.

Hope your right. And that they actually come through with it.
Mines only been on a few weeks, and I’m not very impressed.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: csrigo on July 19, 2018, 01:47:49 AM
The car really does drive so much better the closer to zero the LTFT is. Mine currently sits/fluctuates between +-1.5% of Zero, depending on driving style and whether the WMI is in use, and the difference is night and day over the old RamAir which used to sit at around +12-14%

It feels like it did with the factory airbox low in the RPM range, but with the gains of a free flowing intake at the top end.

Hopefully the revised part from VWR will get you guys close

Took my LTFT values and were at 10%....horrible. I'm going to reprofile the maf sensor orrafice like @Pudding (http://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=10733) and see if I can bring it down any...I would be delighted with your trim values with non standard intake mate very impressive...good to know it shld drive better.

That waviness looks like the ECU messing with the fuelling and/or timing.  Shame most dynos in the UK don’t measure lambda during the power run like they do in America.
If the MAF isn’t sealed properly, or if the scaling is off, that could be a cause. Or maybe the intake/egt temps were getting hot.

£450 is good value for -8hp and +19lbft 😂  Only kidding! I’m sure it will improve once the new intake is ready.

Lol I know mate i did have a wee chuckle myself. Not too fussed tbh it was a necessary evil since I've caved and I'm going the TTE420 route....may need to put it off tho for a bit since this torque steer with the spacers is doing my head in may need to use the cash for a diff first I'm leaning towards...but that's another topic.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: The Red Warrior on July 19, 2018, 12:32:56 PM
So, are VWR definitely going to replace parts with the new spec stuff for those of us who already have this intake if we ask them?
The reason I ask is I’ve just been emailed that it is now 47% off from a place that I’ve bought from before. US$280 is now the price (plus shipping) which seems too good to pass up.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on July 20, 2018, 09:22:42 AM
@JamesED30 (http://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=24028) I think they will, but it will take longer than we hoped.  Making false promises and not delivering is tantamount to professional suicide these days because of the huge choice we have.

@csrigo (http://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=15271) 10% is wildly off.  I reckon at full boost / rpm, the turbo is pulling in a lot of unmetered air past that weather seal, hence the wavy plots.  After you've reprofiled the MAF mounting, your trims will come down and it should pull a bit smoother to the redline - and hand you back that 8hp, plus a bit more!  I think there's a close up picture of what I did to my MAF housing in this thread, or my review thread.  Takes about 20 mins with a file.

@The Red Warrior (http://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=13002) Yep, that was their statement from the start.  If you can provide proof of purchase, they will exchange the old kit for the new one.  This will obviously mean buyers of used kits won't qualify.





Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: The Red Warrior on July 25, 2018, 10:47:05 PM
Looks like I stuffed around for too long about whether to buy one at ecstuning for their discounted price. They are now out of stock and the price has gone back up to what it was originally. The projected ship date is now 26th of September. I wonder if this is when the new ones are coming out.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: colesey on July 26, 2018, 11:00:46 AM
Nevermind, ECS would likely have charged you something ridiculous for shipping anyway.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Dan_FR on July 26, 2018, 11:22:47 AM
And still taken until September to deliver it!
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: The Red Warrior on July 30, 2018, 11:19:22 AM
Nevermind, ECS would likely have charged you something ridiculous for shipping anyway.

Yeah, they would have. Think it was US$125 from memory. They had them in stock though.
Have recently met a guy with a Pirelli Edition on a forum over here in NZ who is a flight attendant who goes to the USA every week or so. Could possibly get free shipping to him when over there and he could bring it back. Though he might install it on his car  :signLOL:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: john_o on August 14, 2018, 09:33:21 PM
@Pudding (http://www.mk5golfgti.co.uk/forum/index.php?action=profile;u=10733) any recent updates ?
looking for an intake for my Ed35 (which is just en Edition 30 really) , and this intake would be my first choice
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on August 14, 2018, 09:43:06 PM
Hi John

Sorry, I’ve been busy recently and forgot to post an update I got from Matt Ellis last week.  It’s definitely still in progress  :happy2:

Quote from: RacingLine
We’re putting a new MAF pipe into production as we speak as we had a few issues with some previous designs that we were not happy with during testing. Our CAD guy is also re-designing the Grill intake so we don’t have to use a different coupling in the middle (doing some testing showed that using a corrugated centre section between the filter and pipe caused excessive filter movement).
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: JamesED30 on October 04, 2018, 06:41:31 PM
Any updates????
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Dan_FR on October 05, 2018, 11:30:52 AM
6 months later and it's still not been dealt with..... 6 months!!!

As I said before - Too much money to be made in the newer platforms than resolving something that won't turn a profit on older platforms
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on October 06, 2018, 03:10:05 PM
Sorry guys, I'm afraid we need to suffer Racingline/ITGs indifference for a bit longer.

I'm trying to remain optimistic, but I'm struggling now.  As Dan said, 6 months to make some small changes is way over the top.  The last update I got from Matt was yesterday, to tell me the delay is with ITG and he's going to chase them up.  I'm not holding my breath. The Christmas wind down will start soon, so nothing will happen this year.

I note Awesome are still punting the old kit out at £438 (KO4 engine), and I also note Racingline have added big piles of manure to their marketing spiel. 'Simply the best'  :grin:

It's sh*tty business ethics imo.  The kit should be pulled from the shelves until it's sorted, but as it hasn't been, it shows what kind of company they are.   Chasing race team contracts and profit first, customers second.  I know that is pretty standard practice in greedy capitalist nations, but wouldn't it be nice, just for once, to have a company on the side of the customer?  It certainly started that way with the initial meeting, but we got kicked into the long grass unfortunately.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: AJP on October 06, 2018, 07:39:24 PM
This is disappointing. I've been keeping an eye on this with the fact in mind that there are loads of you guys in the crap predicament of having put the cash up for what you thought was a product deserving of the cost.

It was encouraging that they did listen initially. If there's one thing that sells a brand to me personally it's their aftercare. But it just seems to have fizzled out. All credit to Kev and the rest of you for persisting diplomatically though.

Maybe the thing that irks me most is that some of you guys on this forum could undoubtedly design and (with the kit and tooling) produce the proper revision that Racingline are dragging their heels on. And the majority of us don't even have day jobs in the tuning industry.

All you can do is be patient, keep knocking. Again, credit to you for pushing this. I hope something comes of it. Otherwise they're simply losing a swath of customers, and it doesn't take long for a good word or a bad word to spread far and wide in this day and age of instant information in a small world.

Maybe the best option is just the standard airbox like has been mentioned. It works. Ok, you might miss out on a bit of power right at the top, but is that caveat worse than the caveats the Racingline (and most other) intakes bring to the table?

Anyway. I'll keep checking the thread. Keep hoping things look up. Good luck.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: JamesED30 on October 22, 2018, 11:54:10 AM
Still nothing new yet?
This is quite poor really.
The rubber strap on mine broke within two weeks of VRS fitting it.
For the asking price you’d expect a really high quality product. 😩
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on October 24, 2018, 08:12:55 PM
This is disappointing. I've been keeping an eye on this with the fact in mind that there are loads of you guys in the crap predicament of having put the cash up for what you thought was a product deserving of the cost.

It was encouraging that they did listen initially. If there's one thing that sells a brand to me personally it's their aftercare. But it just seems to have fizzled out. All credit to Kev and the rest of you for persisting diplomatically though.

Maybe the thing that irks me most is that some of you guys on this forum could undoubtedly design and (with the kit and tooling) produce the proper revision that Racingline are dragging their heels on. And the majority of us don't even have day jobs in the tuning industry.

All you can do is be patient, keep knocking. Again, credit to you for pushing this. I hope something comes of it. Otherwise they're simply losing a swath of customers, and it doesn't take long for a good word or a bad word to spread far and wide in this day and age of instant information in a small world.

Maybe the best option is just the standard airbox like has been mentioned. It works. Ok, you might miss out on a bit of power right at the top, but is that caveat worse than the caveats the Racingline (and most other) intakes bring to the table?

Anyway. I'll keep checking the thread. Keep hoping things look up. Good luck.

Indeed! If I had access to their CAD gear and 3D printer, I could have made the changes myself months ago  :grin:  It started out really positively.  As I said a while back, they had already designed the improvements on their CAD gear whilst I was there, so I can only assume the delay is with ITG.  But the onus is also on Racingline to chase them up regularly on our behalf, which I can also assume isn't happening.  The irony of all this is small companies hate bad publicity and get all defensive when criticised, but they bring it upon themselves.  How difficult is it to pick up the phone to ITG and ask what the progress is?  30 seconds work, ffs.

Maybe we should send a kit over to China and get them to copy it with my revisions.  Sell them from underneath Racingline's feet, because they clearly aren't interested in bringing this to a satisfactory resolve.  So let someone else do what they can't be arsed to do themselves?




Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on October 24, 2018, 08:18:18 PM
Still nothing new yet?
This is quite poor really.
The rubber strap on mine broke within two weeks of VRS fitting it.
For the asking price you’d expect a really high quality product. 😩

Nope, nada, diddly squat, square root of jack.   As I said, there will be zero f'cks given this side of christmas.

Yep, due to excessive movement, which one of the engineers at Racingline is in complete denial about.  A cheap rubber band is laughable at the price anyway.  How on earth are ITG a supplier to F1 if that's the crap they sign off?

Well given the fact I can't sell my kit, I think it's safe to say the word is spreading about the epic awfulness of it.   Look out for a Black Friday deal on them on Awesome's site  :grin:

Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: mjmallia on October 25, 2018, 08:16:48 AM
 :signLOL: :congrats:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Dave J on October 25, 2018, 11:03:22 PM
Sorry guys, I'm afraid we need to suffer Racingline/ITGs indifference for a bit longer.

I'm trying to remain optimistic, but I'm struggling now.  As Dan said, 6 months to make some small changes is way over the top.  The last update I got from Matt was yesterday, to tell me the delay is with ITG and he's going to chase them up.  I'm not holding my breath. The Christmas wind down will start soon, so nothing will happen this year.

I note Awesome are still punting the old kit out at £438 (KO4 engine), and I also note Racingline have added big piles of manure to their marketing spiel. 'Simply the best'  :grin:

It's sh*tty business ethics imo.  The kit should be pulled from the shelves until it's sorted, but as it hasn't been, it shows what kind of company they are.   Chasing race team contracts and profit first, customers second.  I know that is pretty standard practice in greedy capitalist nations, but wouldn't it be nice, just for once, to have a company on the side of the customer?  It certainly started that way with the initial meeting, but we got kicked into the long grass unfortunately.

If it is indeed either indifference, & a Christmas wind down at the start of October? Says it all really. Sounds like two companies making way too much margin on new platform / motorsport stuff to care about rectifying an item that's not fit for purpose on an older platform road car. Many of us might be in a position to  choose to upgrade to a MK7 & mods in future (or even right now), but this whole debacle just leaves a sour taste & disappointment.

From the faults found in running the product, and now to the poor speed in resolution to a forum of enthusiasts, this is absolutely a company I would never choose to buy from again through principle.

Can you prove me wrong with any resolution Racingline?
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: csrigo on October 26, 2018, 04:39:14 AM
Disappointing this...but not shocking. They know the mk5 market has dwindled and the amount of golf R's and new mk7 gti's on the road make this market negligible to them probably. Its more the fact they know its garbage, has an insanely high chance to cause catostrophic damage and wont rectify it...and yet ALSO they wont pull it from the shops. Dish out some rubbish about sorting it and hoping people will forget about it..yet another reason to not pay money to this company. As above I will not buy any of their products again and i will be actively putting everyone I know in the Vag scene off them.

Anyone on other forums should do the same.

Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: welikeaps on October 26, 2018, 04:25:48 PM
I don't wish to sound pessimistic but racingline will not resolve this at all. They have a very poor attitude when it come to after sales service. I've been asked to contact 3 different members of staff there and none of them have followed up my inquiry despite their initial polite responses of 'we'll look into it for you and contact you back'.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Shoduchi on October 28, 2018, 07:33:17 PM
Reality speaks for itself. I'm also disappointed and I'm not believing that the corrections are going ahead. :sad1:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: colesey on October 29, 2018, 06:03:22 AM
You guys should make your feelings known via their twitter account, that usually gets a response from businesses.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Dan_FR on October 29, 2018, 07:25:35 AM
Fighting a losing battle I fear
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: JamesED30 on October 29, 2018, 11:41:14 AM
Just seen this on the VRS Instagram.
Is the mk6 not the same kit??

https://www.instagram.com/p/Bpg8bN7j4xo/?utm_source=ig_share_sheet&igshid=fbnzf573vzl4
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Dan_FR on October 29, 2018, 01:44:47 PM
No it's a different kit on the TSi - primary difference is MAF placement
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on October 30, 2018, 03:43:35 PM
Just seen this on the VRS Instagram.
Is the mk6 not the same kit??

https://www.instagram.com/p/Bpg8bN7j4xo/?utm_source=ig_share_sheet&igshid=fbnzf573vzl4

I was working on retro fitting that setup to my Ed30.  I have the OEM pipework and MAF, but I never got around to moving the MAF harness over from the driver's side to test it out.

The benefits are:

The MAF is closer to the cold air source, and well away from the turbulence and oily reversion of the turbo.
The MAF scaling is correct.
There is plenty of flex for engine movement.
More choice of filters to pop onto the MAF.
No resonance noises from cheap thin walled aluminium tube as the pipe is thick plastic.
Cheaper.  A LOT cheaper.

The only snagging point for K04 owners is having to plumb in a return port for the DV into the pipe somewhere, but a fitting from Revotec can do that easily enough, which is indeed the exact same fitting Racingline use in their kit, because they can't design anything themselves can they, they are just a warehouse specialising in the repackaging of existing products.  They are merely charlatans.  Even their ECU tunes are acquired from over seas. 

I picked up the MK6 pipework, flexi and MAF for a tenner off ebay.   Stick a £20 cone on the end.  Job done.   




Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on October 30, 2018, 03:47:02 PM
As for this ongoing saga.  I don't care anymore, well, I do care about the people who've suffered from their shoddy product, but I don't care for Racingline anymore.   They had their chance to impress me, and they failed, miserably.  F'ck em'.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: csrigo on November 07, 2018, 10:37:36 PM
As for this ongoing saga.  I don't care anymore, well, I do care about the people who've suffered from their shoddy product, but I don't care for Racingline anymore.   They had their chance to impress me, and they failed, miserably.  F'ck em'.

Agreed
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: JamesED30 on December 13, 2018, 12:23:18 AM
Still not heard anything on this pudding??
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on December 14, 2018, 08:58:55 AM
No mate.  It must be what, 9 months now?  :grin:  Bloody useless company.
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: JamesED30 on December 28, 2018, 07:57:02 PM
No mate.  It must be what, 9 months now?  :grin:  Bloody useless company.

That’s pretty shocking mate, from such a well known company with so much to lose  from bad publicity. 😟
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Dan_FR on December 29, 2018, 11:09:28 PM
What bad publicity? a dozen or so disgruntled owners having a moan on a forum that's barely used?  :signLOL:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Shoduchi on December 30, 2018, 11:14:02 PM
We can always move our disgruntlement to Facebook.  :fighting2:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on January 11, 2019, 08:14:38 PM
Tried that already but.......nothing  :grin:

The mark of a good company is how they deal with complaints / after sales services, and Racingline have demonstrated how utterly useless they are at that.  As I said previously, f'ck 'em. All talk, no action.  We can do better than some little tin pot shed selling other companys' products as their own.

Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Lewo on January 30, 2019, 09:41:55 PM
Bit of a thread bump...
What a roller coaster read this one is!
Well done Pudding et al for trying to get things resolved.
I'm thinking about buying a second hand one of these but maybe I should leave it now. :rolleye:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on January 31, 2019, 12:03:05 PM
I do look on their website from time to time, just in case they've released a revised intake without telling us......but nope! 

I guess getting wheel stud conversion kits out to market is more important to them than appeasing existing customers.  As I've said before, in the UK, in this industry.....if you are a not a race team with a 6 figure budget, F off, basically.

I wouldn't buy ANYTHING from Racingline personally.  Seek alternatives before getting your wallet out!  They don't deserve our business.




Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Lewo on February 01, 2019, 11:09:16 PM
Decided not to get any induction kit now and stick with standard box and panel filter.  :signLOL:
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: campione on March 05, 2019, 02:50:35 PM
I emailed them today to ask about the revisions to the induction kit. I am not holding my breath for a response but let's see what they say...
If I had FB I would ask them on their FB page....
Title: Re: VWR Intake disappointing
Post by: Pudding on March 06, 2019, 09:37:59 AM
I wouldn't waste your time mate.  The best way to show contempt for a company is to simply not buy their products.

The whole thing needs a redesign.  It was never a vehicle specific 'kit' in the first place, but rather 3rd party bits cobbled together.  As consumers, we can do better than that!