Notices
Evo Engine / Turbo / Drivetrain Everything from engine management to the best clutch and flywheel.

oem intake tube/Airbox/MAF is $HIT

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jan 29, 2007 | 01:18 PM
  #16  
Drifto's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 809
Likes: 2
From: Alabaster, AL
Originally Posted by Warrtalon
Smogrunner put down 582whp on the fully stock intake, so it's not that bad, not to mention all the work required to switch to speed density is not worth it for 99% of Evo owners.
You are misreading Smog's mod list I believe. Stck intake manifold.

Originally Posted by Bonestock!
Smogrunner made 582whp with the stock box.. wonder what it would have made with an intake like Buschurs on the next pull? My point is it may support XXX hp but how much gain could be had by using an intake?
All the pics I've seen of Smog's setup showed neither stock inlet tube or box. When he posted about his MAF screen failing, the pics showed a MAF adapter that replaced the stock box and allowed an open element filter
Reply
Old Jan 29, 2007 | 01:41 PM
  #17  
DanInPA's Avatar
Evolving Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
From: Chester Springs, PA
My buddy brought over used ARC intake for his EVO 8. We were dying to find out how it works. So, we installed it and try to tune it using UTEC. While boost was building a little faster, we could not reduce the knock around mid-range.. When, it was hitting max boost around 3.5K, we were seeing as many as 40 knock counts... We loved added responsiveness and cool noise it added but decided to take it off and consult prof. tuners...

So, I know there is definately a room for improvement. I also know that MAF system with aftermarket intake can be tricky to tune for average people....

He finally had turbotrix tune his car with ARC intake and other turbo upgrade... (reflashed ECU and got rid of UTEC)... Car runs absolutely perfect while responsiveness is improved.... Best of all, I love the stock BOV/DV sounds.. Pshhshshshs who needs after market BOV anyway!!!
Reply
Old Jan 30, 2007 | 05:46 AM
  #18  
mrfred's Avatar
EvoM Guru
iTrader: (50)
 
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 9,675
Likes: 132
From: Tri-Cities, WA // Portland, OR
Originally Posted by l2r99gst
The stock intake setup (airbox and all) is very restrictive and has been proven by many logs. I myself have posted many logs in the ECUFlash forum that shows the pressure drop and resulting decrease in air density.

JCSBanks has also done a lot of testing and he has shown excellent results on the stock airbox by simply cutting a small portion away on the opposite side of the engine.

...
I've measured about 1.4 psi pressure drop at the MAF at 7000 rpm with a completely stock airbox and Works drop-in airfilter. I'm looking forward to cutting my airbox lid like jscbanks did to see what happens with the pressure drop. I figure if it drops 1 psi, that means the turbo will not be working quite as hard and should net a slight increase in efficiency.
Reply
Old Jan 30, 2007 | 06:17 AM
  #19  
High_PSI's Avatar
Evolved Member
15 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (50)
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 4,152
Likes: 17
1.4 PSI gain in removing a restriction could easilly be over 10WHP gain.
Reply
Old Jan 30, 2007 | 09:24 AM
  #20  
TURBODAWG's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (54)
 
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 1,181
Likes: 0
From: NC
I switched from my stock airbox with K&N drop in to an HKS SMF (filter and adapter only). I gained 1 psi of boost pressure on wastegate actuator pressure alone. When I switched on the EBC using the same settings, the taper was reduced up to also. Both setups used my HKS MAF Hardpipe. My results concor with the results that mrfred found. The airbox is definitely a restriciton over a conical filter system. I dont believe the MAF itself is much of a restriction at all.
Reply
Old Mar 7, 2007 | 07:14 AM
  #21  
High_PSI's Avatar
Evolved Member
15 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (50)
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 4,152
Likes: 17
make sure you choose an intake filter desigend to be run with a MAF.

I know of only two

Apexi and Buschur's.
Reply
Old Mar 10, 2007 | 09:41 AM
  #22  
Erik@MIL.SPEC's Avatar
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (94)
 
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 5,695
Likes: 24
From: Los Angeles
I am pretty sure the ARC box is for the MAF too. Check dis out:


https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...d.php?t=252487
Reply
Old Mar 10, 2007 | 02:40 PM
  #23  
High_PSI's Avatar
Evolved Member
15 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
iTrader: (50)
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 4,152
Likes: 17
Yeah that ARC box sure is nice and I am sure it flows more then the OEM box. I just bought a APEXi intake filter and am now currently looking for an APEXi Induction Box.
Reply
Old Mar 10, 2007 | 03:57 PM
  #24  
tony gibson's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 744
Likes: 0
From: NW FLORIDA
Originally Posted by TURBevO8
I would think there would be more of a benefit in not running the restrictive MAF anymore more than the intake tube itself.
Yep that is common sense...for anyone that keeps the fundamentals for how a car works in mind.
Reply
Old Mar 10, 2007 | 08:41 PM
  #25  
Smogrunner's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,558
Likes: 1
From: Inland Empire, CA
Just to clarify, on my 585whp/527wtq dynojet pull, I had the stock maf, but used the AMS intake:



Dang, my engine bay was sexy! AMS uses this pic on their website to sell their sparkplug covers.

Last edited by Smogrunner; Mar 11, 2007 at 10:09 AM.
Reply
Old Mar 10, 2007 | 09:40 PM
  #26  
Smogrunner's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,558
Likes: 1
From: Inland Empire, CA
Runs 10 and 11 are from my old days during an MS109 tune: Shiv was doing the tuning. The two pulls were taken only 3 minutes apart on the dyno and no tuning adjustments were made. I was running the stock airbox, stock filter, and stock maf. On run 11 we took the airbox cover off AND took the filter out and did a pull just for fun. With no filter at all and the top off the airbox off we only made 2 more horsepower and the same torque.

I would say however, that run 11 (no filter run) looks a little better over 7200rpms. I'm not trying to argue any specific point, but these particular pulls indicate that the stock filter isn't a significant restriction at 370whp.


Last edited by Smogrunner; Mar 11, 2007 at 04:07 PM.
Reply
Old Mar 11, 2007 | 08:36 AM
  #27  
nothere's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (23)
 
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,680
Likes: 1
From: Bellevue. WA
having run speed density with hard pipe and an ITG filter and then having gone back to stock intake I would say the biggest difference was the quality of engine sound.
The hard pipe acts like a horn transmitting the turbo noise. Not particularly indicative of power imho.

Of course I can't comment on power gains or losses, for a number of reasons, the least of which is how do you justify the tuning necessary to run for each system being equal. iow pretty hard to develop a tune for a system in a matter of a few minutes.
let me just add, as an indication of my position, my aftermarket ems with restriction less intake did not offer any perceptible power gain over my switch back to stock intake without ems. In fact the loss of the turbo horn sound makes me feel 23.113% better.
Reply
Old Mar 11, 2007 | 02:57 PM
  #28  
Aby@MIL.SPEC's Avatar
Thread Starter
Former Sponsor
iTrader: (161)
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,043
Likes: 13
From: San Elijo Hills, Ca.
Originally Posted by Warrtalon
The differences in load and engine speed are due directly to the random increase in boost.
This compare was conducted ~2 hours from each other, on the same day,same fuel, similar ambient conditions, same stretch of road, same mbc settings.

These are results that i experienced. Your results may vary.

However, there isnt too many post's illustrating their results with logged data.

It's either "yeah, it felt better", "yeah it's louder" WHICH IT IS or "nah, i didnt feel any difference"

All what i can say is, the dyno numbers posted below speak for themselves.....The dyno numbers were achieved on california's finest 91 octane

smoggies numbers look to be run on MS109? is that vp 109?

This post just illustrates the potential for maximizing what you have....a oem based turbo & readily available bolt-on goodies

The dyno plots are illustrated within the 65mm tb dyno compare below.

Last edited by Aby@MIL.SPEC; Mar 11, 2007 at 02:59 PM.
Reply
Old Mar 11, 2007 | 04:09 PM
  #29  
Smogrunner's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (5)
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,558
Likes: 1
From: Inland Empire, CA
of course vp ms109
Reply
Old Mar 11, 2007 | 04:13 PM
  #30  
tony gibson's Avatar
Evolved Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 744
Likes: 0
From: NW FLORIDA
I don't have dyno numbers to prove that getting rid of the MAF is a significant HP gain but I will have track times come the first of april....only changes were switching from stock edu to the AEM, converting to speed density, and going from 660cc to 1000cc injectors.
Reply



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:51 AM.