cij911, what bung are you talking about adding?

killa1206, our battery kit works with the stock air box.

 

Breather nipple ....I use a DC3 catch can and would like to route the the line back into the intake...On a side note, I am shocked how much oil is captured in the DC3 (I run 2 cans one on intake side and one on the manifold side).

Thanks Dave!!

 

Do you have any pictures of this? I am curious to see what you got going on under your hood.

 

Well, for the record, my silicon content is within acceptable parameters per Blackstone. It went from 11PPM (Works drop-in/OEM) before the filter to 12PPM after the filter. Seems OK by me. And Blackstone.

 

I think I understand what you mean -- you tested a Works Drop in and a BR cone filter. The Works drop in (wet filter) filtered better than the BR (dry filter), but the variance 1PPM is acceptable to you. Your data is inline with my statements (see above) and would vary based upon driving conditions.

To truly compare the filters, one would need to test in the same conditions for the same duration (and to run a statistically valid sample size). Ideally you would have the OEM paper filter data to compare to compare to 11 or 12 PPM. I am very impressed that you actually are testing your oil .

 

I am all for scientific method, but for most of us it's impractical. In fact, I don't think most of any performance shop data who specializes in the Evo would live up to scientific method's requirements (or yours).

The 11PPM was for both the OEM filter and the Works drop-in (I took out the Works at some point). I just double-checked the silicon content for my vehicle, and it had dropped to 10PPM with the Buschur/Ebay filter wit my most recent analysis. Blackstone, for its universal averages with the 4G63, lists 9 PPM as the norm for silicon.

 

sij911, we are not putting the nipple in the inlet pipes, too much oil contamination and it will RUIN an intercoolers efficiency in no time, forget about what it does to fuel quality and the detonation it can cause. If you want to run one it is simple enough to drill and tap it for a hose barb.

 

David -- Thanks for the feedback...Again your bends, beads, and welds are quite nice! I look forward to meeting you at the track .

Atlvalet -- Interesting data...Thanks for the clarification.

 

Ok so how would it pull more un metered air running a breather?

There is a check valve that closes during boost and is open during vacuum operation.

I'm pretty familiar with how the pcv systems work, as well as how the EVO pcv runs as well. Basically during normal driving (vacuum) regardless of breather or not, the Intake manifold still draws in air from the other end that runs to the intake pipe (creating ventilation under the valve cover to remove as much blow-by gas as possible). Putting a breather just changes the fact that air is drawn into the valve cover from a breather filter rather than the intake system. But either way there is ventilation under the valve cover and air is drawn in.

Only way I can think of more unmetered air being drawn in is if the stock system some how restricts or the breather flows that much better.... ?

I'm not arguing just trying to understand.

 

With the breather hose connected to the turbo intake pipe, the path of the airflow is as follows:

through the air filter---through the maf---through the intake pipe---through the breather nipple---through the breather hose---into the valve cover breather nipple---this fresh air mixes with blowby gases, moisture,etc---exits out through the PCV valve and into the intake manifold---then on into the cylinders where it can be burned or exited through the exhaust

I think the big point that you are missing is that with the breather hose connected to the turbo intake pipe, this air has to go through the MAF and it is accounted for.

With just a breather filter, the first 5 steps I listed above are omitted and the air is allowed to enter under the valve cover, unaccounted for. This is what can cause problems with the fuel trims.

I hope that was a good enough explanation to help you understand.


Eric

 

I thought you were done in this thread, like 3 pages ago

Your info is useless bro, go fly a kite.

 

What's your problem, dude? I am answering a question that someone asked me to help him understand this?

The info may be useless to you, but not to people that want to learn things.

FYI, I did say I was done with the arguing in the thread and I haven't argued since. I have simply replied to people that have personally asked me a question about something that I have explained.


Eric

 

I dont normally get involved in these threads, however I'm going to jump in here because I have some valid observations concerning this intake and Dynoflash. In the past I have said good things about this intake and I've personally witnessed rock solid fuel trims in the summer months. A friend of mine has the full BR intake and uses it with the MAF/OEM ECU and I tuned the car without having to rescale the MAF/Injectors in the summer time.

However, this winter (denser cold air) the car started experiencing issues and was brought in to be re-tuned, I found it's throwing P0300's at idle (It's a IX), along with lean codes. I checked the car for vacuum leaks and found 2 small leaks and fixed them but the car is still hunting in closed loop (Idle AFR varying 10.0-18.0). Lean at Idle (beyond trim capability), and rich under WOT which could be tuned out except that this issue is caused by a physical problem that should be fixed, not tuned out. The only other thing that has changed on this car since the summer months was a aftermarket FMIC was added to the car. It's a race type intercooler (non Buschur). I'm not certain yet that the intake is the problem but it's the first place I'm going to look. The reason why it would work properly in the summer and not in the winter is due to air temperature / density so more unmetered air is allowed in/out of the system in the winter months.

Here is the thing, l2r99gst is absolutely correct. If your running a MAF based car all potential air leaks should be eliminated. The BR intake does not have a nipple to route air back into the intake as it should IMO. A properly designed catch can solution could also fix this problem. As a side note - In honda world only ebay intakes don't have nipples, all the other aftermarket intakes have nipples. The fan boyz can try to bash l2r99gst but they have no real argument because they are wrong.

Now if anyone wants to start spouting off about "tooners", I've got something to say about that. When I first got my Evo I had it custom tuned by Dynoflash for $450.00. The car made right around 300whp 290tq DLL with a CBE, MBC, and a Works drop-in and I was pretty happy at the time - until the problems started. This was in Febuary of 06. Then a month or so later the car started throwing P0300 codes. I contacted Al and he didnt offer anything helpful as far as fixing my car and eventually I removed my mods and sent my ECU back to Al to be returned to stock. I then took the car to the dealer to have my P0300 issue resolved as Al acted like it was not the tune and was not helpful in diagnosing the issue. The dealer had a hell of a time getting the car to replicate the issue on the stock map but they started swapping parts and eventually replaced the injectors and cleaned the combustion chambers. They mentioned that the car was carboned up and that I should get on it a little more. I bought a Tactrix cable and found out Al's tune was knocking counts of 8 right at the onset of boost (caused by excessive timing and excessive fueling). I also bought a wideband and found that the fueling was way off (super rich). It should be noted I never heard any audible knock but either way the knock was making the car make less power because it was pulling so much timing. I guess his strategy at the time was to allow the knock control to sort out the timing. I dont know if he still uses this methodology but I can tell you that there are better ways to made power with the stock ecu on a Evo. The idea of riding the knock sensor is the poorest tooning methodology I've ever heard of. I'm not saying it doesnt work - Just saying that I dont agree with the methodology. I've been tuning Evo's since the summer of 2006 and have read many great books on EFI performance tuning. I've also taken a EFI University course on speed density tuning. Nothing I have learned has validated his methodologies.

In Al's defense, I think he was using an limited system to tune Evo's in Febuary 06 (TechTom or whatever it was). Also, I personally dont believe you can get a perfect tune (drivability and WOT) on any car in a few hours - especially when street tuning.

I've since went with a minimalist mod setup - TBE, LICP, and an aftermarket boost solenoid with the stock airbox and a clean OEM paper element filter. My car looks completey stock when you lift the hood yet its making 360/340 DLL with < 3 counts of knock.

 

All the smart kids hang out in the ECUflash forum

 

I'm still lost to where this nipple is located or how this system works.... Is there a picture I can look at?