That is a good point and I'm sure it does make difference, but from experience it is not something you can really feel from the good ole butt dyno. I did some logs long ago before and after I did a cold air ram setup for my Eclipse. The logger definately showed lower temps with the cold air setup. At highway speeds the temps would pretty much go to ambient. I would definately want to fab some kind of a cold air setup for my Evo, but after years of driving my GST without one and not really feeling the difference, I wouldn't be too hesitant to go with an intake and come up with a cold air setup later.

 

That's amazing. The cooling system on the EVO must be massively over-designed.

 

0.39 psi occurs at 400cfm. I'd be concerned with temps at idle and low speeds, where the increase in air pressure is lower. 400cfm (if the MAF even pulls that much) is more than likely at higher speeds at which point, temperature shouldn't be an issue.

Rob,
Did you ever log the temps with the new filter yet?

 

Why don't you think temperature matters at high flow rates?

 

That's not what he said. What he said was that high flow rates don't matter at idle. Do you idle at 7000rpm?

Once the vehicle is moving at all, the difference in temps between stock vs. a cone type are trivial. I'll post the temperature data I collected soon (it's been a busy week at work).

 

I understand exactly what he said. So far, no one has posted any data showing that there is a trivial difference in IAT for a cone filter and the stock airbox under any conditions. Without any proof, I think the issue of IAT is a worthwhile question whether the car is standing still in traffic or moving at 60 mph. Looking forward to your data.

 

Hmm.. my first time ever being called an *** on an online forum.

I suppose at least you edited it.

 

Here is some information for you guys and you can argue it until you get tired if you like.

It just hit me though and thought I would post it.

I don't think I have ever logged air temps on a stock airbox car, the reason for that would be I have never installed an AEM EMS with an air temp sensor on a stock airboxed car.

Here is what I have noticed. When you first turn a car on after it hasn't run for a long period of time you will note that the air temps are ambient. So you can get an idea of what the temps are outside. I can't say that I have ever seen them, driving down the road, go over ambient by enough to notice. In other words if it is 50 degrees outside or 90 degrees, when you are moving the air temps will be about the same. At idle of course I have seen them increase with the low air flow.

My thoughts on this is the engine bay isn't nearly as hot as you would expect it to me, so the worries of this open element filter aren't needed.

I am going to make it a point to log my secondary sensor on the AEM for air temp. I have that lays under the hood of the car for turbo testing.

 

I am not an engineer and I don't play one on tv BUT....I bet temperature will be a big deal especially on such a hot motor...Mits didn't put the vent in there for looks.......a engine builder friend for a local race team says that for every ten degrees you can lower the engine bay air temp that enters the intake you can gain 1 hp....it is no secret that every race car in the world tries to isolate cool air all the way to the motor. Now, I don't know how this fits because the Evo has the turbo inlet pipe and the air has to heat up again right after the intake correct? Covers, shields, snorkels all come into play. I have been surprised that there has been very little discussion about this on Evo forums....maybe because they are turbos...but on BMW and other naturally aspirated forums it seems like it's a big deal....anyway I differ back to people like Buscher etc...that have actual hands on experience...good thread however..

 

These aren't race cars, they're street cars. And there is so much air entering the engine bay when the car is moving that it really doesn't make a difference. Try doing some datalogging and you'll see the IAT numbers don't really vary between a stock airbox car and a car with an open cone filter except at idle.

 

Because some of us aren't so lazy as to wait for the rest of the world to spoon feed us knowledge.

 

Id like to see what Shiv Vishnu would say about all this hehe

 

Sorry are discussion is boring you.....many engineers and many companies have spent plenty of time and money isolating the air going into the airbox intake from the engine bay temps. Alfa knows a bit about naturally aspirated engines and their systems are sealed right from the front of the car to the motor.....so you disagree that cooler denser air improves hp? I have seen the effects directly on a dyno for both a car and a motorcycle..

 

Has anyone tried adapting a conical filter to the factory airbox, or some sort of modification of the factory airbox?

 

Regardless of what anyone has to say, I've found that the OE intake tube has considerably more impact on drivability than the OE airbox. I've posted back to back drivability results in the past. Of course I have no "dyno" results, but if several Evos won't make it up ramps with an aftermarket pipe, and then idles and runs like stock with the same filter but OE intake tube, what else can one deduct? I've theorized in the past that it is an issue of reversion through the MAF (exacerbated by those with higher duration cams). In which it is obvious that the OE corrugated tube would be less reversion prone than a smooth 3" pipe.