well , if you want the sound then the intake set up is much more logical then buying a BOV itself.

 

What tuning method is quite relevant to this topic. There may indeed be differences in intake performance depending on what tuning method one utilizes. I can start a new thread if you prefer for me to stay out of one you started but that is a waste of storage capacity for the host and double posting.

Any intake system that may raise boost and lower MAF signals with a different boost hose assembly and/or an enlarged MAF sensor housing (many intakes will fall into this category) are not recommended by TTP. You have made this clear and I accept that.

We you have not proven in test results and are only speculating on is whether these intake systems that modified hoses/housings will show the same results or different results if tuned by a ECU flash program vs. a signal modifier like the Zchip. In addition, testing I don't think has been done with normal hoses/housing and an ECU flash program. It think you proved that the Zchip did not work properly with an intake with modified hoses/housings. And it would be benefical to understand why for those scientific minds that enjoy this type of discussion. An ECU flash works very differently than a MAP sensor modifier. We all know that and I hope can agree on this. It is quite possible that an ECU flash has greater control in adjusting table values over the other kind controller. Please correct me if I am wrong, but doesn't the Zchip basically attenuate the signal coming from the car's MAP sensor to make it think it is producing less boost than it actually is? Please believe me when I say that this is not a dig on any manufacturer. I really think the Zchip is a good product for some people. I am not off topic here and don't want to make this a specific manufactuer debate, but want to address all manufacturers of all ECU modifications and all intake systems to prove the theory stated in the original title of this thread. We really need more testing from a variety of sources.

What I as well as others want to know is if you had success with your other ECU tuning options with the same and other intakes. It would be great if you could share this information. I don't believe you ran this particular test. If you did'nt, that's ok. If you don't want to, that's ok. Some other vendors can do it when they feel like it. I know it takes time and energy to conduct these tests and we are all very appreciative of vendors time in improving a particular car's platform. I just don't like to see anyone make a blanket statement that something does not work or make power when all the variables have not be accounted for. Thank you all for your time. The EvoX is a great car with great potential for reliable power in many different ways.

 

Whenever you feel the need to take the thread off topic, please refer to this answer we have already provided.

It is irrelevant what tuning method is used and going off on your tangent brings the thread off topic which is against the rules. We did not mention whether the car was ZChipped or reflashed or uses a Hydra EMS.

The thread is about the intake results on a tuned evo and the results are not influenced by the tuning method used.

 

you have both taken this thread off topic, I would suggest you cut it out and take it to pm's if you want some data resolved. Of if you really feel the need, start a new thread.

 

Ok.

 

Just seen this thread and I would like to raise one interesting point from post #1.

Coming from a hot wire/hot film background, I used to see marked alterations in MAF calibration due to changes in the air filter that was attached to the unchaged MAF housing. The airflow pattern could cause dramatic offsets.

Moving to 4G63 Karmann Vortex, it was suggested to me that the offsets I used to see on hot wire/hot film would not be there. They were, just the same, no worse, no better.

It is therefore a surprise to see the claim that a 4B11T hot wire is immune to calibration offsets when different filters are bolted on.

Things often come full circle, it would be very surprising that if the airflow distribution changes so that a lower or higher proportion goes through the sampling area that you wouldn't see MAF calibration offsets and different to what happens to every other airflow meter.

The only airfilter test I would make would be measuring the air pressure between the filter and the compressor inlet, or swapping air filters on an engine running speed density. With the so far primitive logging on the X, I am suspicious that on a MAF based ECU that the variables are not fully controlled.

 

it's really helpful info.

 

the observation I have so far is the variation in offset is much less than that compared to the Karman on the 4G63..

I have tested 3 systems on 3 different cars .. of which only 1 agrees with your argument.. that of calibration offset due to the intakepiping change..

1 test car has a drop in filter which effectively has the same Load variable as when he had the paper filter.. yes I'm back to the crude timing vs load thing again .. but since his timing remained virtually the same, I'd assume the load remained the same

1 test car has an open pod with effectively the same result as a dropin

The one that has the most offset was the last test car with an intake piping change .. that had almost a 1 column change in load (which is logical, since the MAF now records lesser air for the bigger piping)

I argue on the fact that Karman measures eddy currents passing thru the mesh and changes in airflow pattern affects the measurements .. and hot wire elements measures electric current which is not sensitive at all to how the airflow changes (unless the sensor has a channel / duct that is sensitive to these changes) ..

There's another factor which I'm not sure how this affect the overall Load calculation .. the car runs SD based.. and it uses a table to convert SD to 2byte Load .. I also do not understand why the new car runs 2 systems side by side

I think you and tephra should defect

 

This is the most amusing EGO post I have ever seen.



Get an aftermarket intake if you want the woosh noise coming from under the hood.

The sound waves actually make your car faster (mentally anyway).

If you keep your factory box in your car can still be just as fast it just wont sound like it


Thats the simplified terms for all this crazyness

 

whats up with the dynos of cars gaining 50whp just from an intake then? Seems it alters the map enough to lean it out a good amount.

 

THAT is my point .. it does not alter the signal that much to affect the loadsites .. BUT it leaned out the car .. meaning the leanout is is not because of shifting in the maps due to variation in the airflow patterns .. but due to increased flow because of less restriction from the filter element..

John alluded to using a pressure sensor to measure the drop before and after filter .. which is the best way to tell if the filter is a restriction ..

The title of the post is misleading in that it says you don't need an air filter with a tune .. where most testings have shown it does make a difference ..

It would be better to say the claimed gains are not as high .. but there's still gains ..

 

this has been a very interesting thread to read... to add a little joke.. not directed at anyone by the way, but I kept getting that... " This is the thread that the _____________ < ( take your pick ) doesn't want you to read " lol

Back to seriousness though, when I was reading about intakes I recall one of the sticky's saying that if you aren't over 350-400 hp an intake isn't going to do much... so I just never thought about getting one... now reading this just confirms that I don't need to get one for my X either so thanks for helping me save the money and put it toward something else.

 

I have a general question. Can an intake like ETS, AMS,etc that change the intake pipe lean out an otherwise completely stock car too much to cause damage?

 

We have been testing with the new Motec M800 pnp ECU & Diff ecu . We ran the bone stock car then some basic mods . The drop in air filter made nothing .As DB etc etc has said @ power levels under 450hp there is going to be little benifit . Also to note the new range of Garrett X turbos all use stock intake pipe work .

 

It took several months, but knowledgable individuals are starting to get it now.