Prototyping 8MR UICP: Looking for input
On the final product did you guys make the UICP straight or does it have a 45 degree bend? It should be straight to maximize compatibility with a variety of FMIC. If the IC points at a 45 degree angle like the OEM IC, then a 45 degree silicone coupler could be used to mate the UICP (this is the factory setup except Mitsu uses a crappy 45 degree rubber coupler). If the IC outlet comes straight out the bottom of the end tank, then a stright coupler could be used.
1) minimize the angle of attack of the radius bend into the TB
2) have a straight section prior to the throttle inlet to increase charge velocity and stabilize the turbulence from the compression at the bend right before the TB
3) Eliminate the bend in the stock battery version pipe
I don't know what everyone else's goals are but these were mine. If you look at the pic below with the stock battery, you'll notice that there is absolutely no room for a straight section before the TB. That's what the small battery pipe seeks to address. And they are interchangeable without having to change the pipe from the intercooler.
My battery is currently relocated to the back. I just ordered a box off of jeg's and used some 0 gauge welding wire for my power lead. Ill have to get a pic of my under hood to show you all the room under there.
The kits will be available in only 2 finishes, polished Aluminum and matte black powder coating. It will also come with an intake pipe designed to work with the BOV location, fittment and performance.
The main goal of the intake pipe is really to keep the MAF happy. And our testing has been yielding very smooth and stable results. Less jerkiness over stock from the car, etc.
The main goal of the intake pipe is really to keep the MAF happy. And our testing has been yielding very smooth and stable results. Less jerkiness over stock from the car, etc.
If you look at the difference between going under the MAF and going over the MAF, you are merely talking about a 4" difference in pipe length before the bend up. And, only an additional 7 degrees of bend. But what happens when you go under the MAF is that you have to add a bend half way down the length to clear the armature and counter weight for the transmission. It is far more detrimental to charge air velocity to add that bend than it is to add the 4" of piping, especially when it comes to a change in velocity right before coming into the TB. If you know that you're going to get a drop in velocity at the 90 into the TB anyways, you want to make sure that you maximize the velocity of the charge that is going there in order to minimize the negative effect of the turn into the TB. If you take a look at the picture, the pipe is straight going into the TB. I don't know what everyone else is doing, but I've seen some stuff out there with tons of bends in order to accomodate the transmission.
The greatest priority in any MAF system has to be what the MAF is seeing. This has the greatest detrimental impact on any system when not done right. In fact the calculations were made to locate and position the MAF first. Then the piping was made to fit in with that plan. I believe that the factory S-shape is a mistake and so is going big diameter on that pipe with the S-Shape. I don't think that many people take into account the time constant for a given volume of air between the turbo and the MAF when making up an intake for the Evo.
The other thing that I don't see a whole lot of priority in either is the performance of the DV, whether it be OEM or aftermarket. The EVO is pretty sensitive to flutter and backflow through the MAF. You don't get CELs like, say the GM cars, but the cars tend to buck and hesitate. Just drive around with your DV disconnected and you'll notice this. I'm seeing piping where the DV is just plumbed anywhere convenient with a long inlet tract and no provision for the time to actuate constant. I don't think that the LICP is that important, compared to the interplay between the UICP, intake, DV-return and DV. But our kit is setup as a system and only works with the Synchronic BOV/DV. So, as a system, it is all designed to work together.
I currently run the Nisei UICP, but have been slightly disappointment with the fitment. I've also recently been experiencing more and more bucking as of late, as well as what I think to be flutter.
I look forward to more and more details regarding this kit in the form of pricing and availability. Depending on the details, I'd love to be one of the guys from around the country that tests this setup out. I live in Northern NJ, right outside of NYC, and DD my car and put a good amount of miles on it. I'd love to test this setup out and see the differences. CBRD is my preferred shop, and my plan is to make my current setup a lot more efficient, so I'd love to see what they think and how they feel about this product combo.
Let me know if you'd consider me!
Thanks.
-Jalal
What this does, is that it unloads the compressor in the transition from vacuum to boost, so that the engine ingest air that bypasses the intercooler, and helps response. Also, at cruising speeds on the freeway, the BOV allows the engine to bypass the restriction of the intercooler and piping. Our IC piping design is meant to maximize these effects and have as smooth of a transition as possible for the intake to the engine through the BOV.
We've got just enough full mini battery setups for 5 guys total in SoCal to beta test. You're on the list sspaladin28. We just need to figure out when we will be doing the test fitting and documentation day.
I have to look at the R&D calendar tomorrow and see when we've got the schedule freed up.
I have to look at the R&D calendar tomorrow and see when we've got the schedule freed up.
On the final product did you guys make the UICP straight or does it have a 45 degree bend? It should be straight to maximize compatibility with a variety of FMIC. If the IC points at a 45 degree angle like the OEM IC, then a 45 degree silicone coupler could be used to mate the UICP (this is the factory setup except Mitsu uses a crappy 45 degree rubber coupler). If the IC outlet comes straight out the bottom of the end tank, then a stright coupler could be used.
We actually set it up to mate up straight to the stock intercooler. This should also mate up to the AMS FMIC for the guys that have that already. But in the future we'll be offering up a bolt-on core that will replace the stock one. We are just working on some R&D on a new intercooler core design.
We actually set it up to mate up straight to the stock intercooler. This should also mate up to the AMS FMIC for the guys that have that already. But in the future we'll be offering up a bolt-on core that will replace the stock one. We are just working on some R&D on a new intercooler core design.
We've got just enough full mini battery setups for 5 guys total in SoCal to beta test. You're on the list sspaladin28. We just need to figure out when we will be doing the test fitting and documentation day.
I have to look at the R&D calendar tomorrow and see when we've got the schedule freed up.
I have to look at the R&D calendar tomorrow and see when we've got the schedule freed up.