Induction Kits

[Ess_Three]

I know he was writing in uppercase, and targetting you a bit Ess_Three, but I think it was a bit harsh to ban the chap... I've definitely seen worse than that on the forum.

The rules are clear.
Language such as used will not be tolerated...neither will the attitude towards other users. Any thread, if reported, will be read and the user treated in the same manner.
Especially stupid taking that tone against a Moderator who IS reading the thread.

If you see worse, please report it so we can act.

 

[Ess_Three]

I know all about the stickies,i read them years ago and was impressed that Glen went through all that effort to show his findings.
I was impressed until he tells me something i know to work doesnt work because HE has tried it and it did nothing only to then be told how he actually did the test,the clue is in the name "straight intake" not just shoving a piece of pipe on the maf and bunging a filter on the end.

James...please let go of your hard-on you have for your 'straight intake'.
It's only you that rattles on about it...
I only mentioned I'd tried the best version of what was available.

If you actually understood what the intake you are describing did, maybe you'd post less crap.
A reducing diameter intake as you describe - whether it has a big cone on the end or not - does two things:
Speed up the airflow, thus giving a slight rise in pressure.

Gives laminar flow into the compressor vanes.

Am I correct?


So...speeding up the airflow can be achieved by going to a gradually smaller diameter tube, from a larger one.
4" to 3" to TIP...does the same thing.
The slight increase in pressure can be countered by picking the cold air up from the area in the front bumper that has the highest pressure - as measured using a manometer.

The results are the same...or, possibly even more 'ram air' from the set up I had. And it gave no measurable gains....

As for laminar flow, you only need a couple of times the diameter of the inlet to the turbo to get laminar flow...to get it exact you need to do the maths with Reynolds number etc...but experience shows beyond 1.5 x diameter the flow is all but perfectly laminar...which really adds no value to the long straight inlet.

Buy hey, you go on arguing a point that was never part of the original discussion all you like.

 

[james0808]

Well well,im impressed again.
You do know something about fluid velocities.
Unless you used Google to get that.

 

[1animal1]

we completely understand what a straight intake is, the car however would never run with this so why build it into any tests? the question was 'will the induction kit make a difference'..... Glen's tests were conducted with everything that goes before the filter.....id regard this as more accurate a test than running a straight hose to the turbo because your never gonna run with that because it wouldnt fit permanently....so whats the benefit?

james, really fella, you have been closed down on so many of your arguments and you do exactly what a child would do by picking something tiny and completely irrelevant to try and question that persons integrity.....

we know you know your stuff..... would we trust you? no because you seem hell bent in proving something (to illustrate your knowledge) and the only way you can do that is by slating somebody who has actually proven their worth..... standard psychology - kind of like the remappers who all slate each others maps because they have to be seen to know something and encapture their audience by revealing something that they didnt already know

 

[1animal1]

No im not trained to work on Audi's,is Glen?
I did own an Audi,so what?Does that mean im more qualified?

pure childish......

I owned a 1.8T before this, were i to modify it, it would have needed a completely different list of additions to get power out of it..... unless you have some direct experience with a car your never gonna extract the maximum amount from it by applying stereotypical methods - simple fact of life

 

[fran-s3]

Errr wow things have changed in here!

Decided against the induction kit route in the end, some good points raised by Glen and it wouldn't of fitted anyway. Not worth the extra wooshy noise to end up with poor running and heat soak. Although call me a chav I do like the loud blow-off valve effect. Although I can't stand loud deep rumbly exhausts so maybe im half chav LOL! Anyway each to there own eh!

So used the money against a J-Valve which I just fitted.. Boy what a difference! (im remapped allready) The midrange certainly seems more aggressive and lasts slighty longer and the turbo is louder which put a massive grin on my face (it's not in my head, I did back to back run with my standard F and J-valve 15mins within each other)

So very pleased, and u saved me wasting my money Glen! Cheers - fingers crossed I don't hit limp mode.

 

[1animal1]

lol Fran, glad you found something useful out of this post haha....this forum is sooo good for information and opinions, theres always something else to learn ive found

Tim

 

[<tuffty/>]

And there you have it, nearly 90 posts and BAM!!!! j-valve curve ball!!!

<tuffty/>

 

[HODD]

i know and most do that companys spend a fortune designing airboxes, but that never stopped me fitting a neuspeed induction kit for the sound, you see for me the whole driving experience is to do with feelings and my senses, so i'm happy to loss a few bhp on a hot day just for the experience.

It may seam chavey to some but I love it

 

[james0808]

we completely understand what a straight intake is, the car however would never run with this so why build it into any tests?

Exactly,a straight intake can not be fitted to an S3 to do an accurate test of spool up time.

Spool up earlier...not on an S3.
Tried it...didn't work.

we know you know your stuff..... would we trust you? no because you seem hell bent in proving something (to illustrate your knowledge) and the only way you can do that is by slating somebody who has actually proven their worth..... standard psychology

Thank you,i do know a little on how engines work and the S3 engine bay,thats why i had to question the point on Glen's proven test that a straight intake didnt work on an S3 when i knew it couldnt even be fitted.But how could i possibly know that when i havent even owned an S3.
I also know that a correctly installed cone filter (shielded,sealed,cold airbox whatever you want to call it)will perform aswell as a modified airbox and uprated panel filter and out perform one when the power gets higher.
I know that most S3's on here will never see 300bhp so will be pefectly fine with a modified airbox but to say

i still cant get over how many induction posts still come up on here.... its been said time and time again about what cones and some other aftermarket do to the MAF....and how they reduce the power.... we should ban the word 'induction' being associated with 'S3'... its a pointless conversation....

really shows how little you know.

pure childish......

I owned a 1.8T before this, were i to modify it, it would have needed a completely different list of additions to get power out of it..... unless you have some direct experience with a car your never gonna extract the maximum amount from it by applying stereotypical methods - simple fact of life

No it wouldnt.Let me guess where you would start,modified airbox,panel filter and cold air feed or cold airbox,cone filter and cold air feed.Then possibly a decent exhaust and possibly a J or H valve,uprated diverter moved to the cold side valve and maybe a good remap.
I would do this on both.
What would you do completely different seeing as you own an S3?

 

[1animal1]

Exactly,a straight intake can not be fitted to an S3 to do an accurate test of spool up time.





Thank you,i do know a little on how engines work and the S3 engine bay,thats why i had to question the point on Glen's proven test that a straight intake didnt work on an S3 when i knew it couldnt even be fitted.But how could i possibly know that when i havent even owned S3.
I also know that a correctly installed cone filter (shielded,sealed,cold airbox whatever you want to call it)will perform aswell as a modified airbox and uprated panel filter and out perform one when the power gets higher.
I know that most S3's on here will never see 300bhp so will be pefectly fine with a modified airbox but to say

really shows how little you know.



No it wouldnt.Let me guess where you would start,modified airbox,panel filter and cold air feed or cold airbox,cone filter and cold air feed.Then possibly a decent exhaust and possibly a J or H valve,uprated diverter moved to the cold side valve and maybe a good remap.
I would do this on both.
What would you do completely different seeing as you own an S3?

ok in order..... yes a straight intake cannot be fitted to an S3 so why would you build it into the test when it wouldnt be able to be fixed permanently? this shows that Glens test were as accurate as they could be given the conditions....rather than lab conditions which you seem to propose

like Glen said, for a cone to work on an S3 it would have to be SEALED purely because as you know, in the higher ev range the engine will pull more air.... stands to reason that if it isnt sealed then it will pull air from inside the bay..... what you saying is particiallly correct however you are overlooking that the standard airbox is well designed...and you have continued to forget this fact throughout this thread even when you have no factual proof (as Glen does) to back up your argument - even the bloke who posted has gone against you ,whats that tell ya?

ok with my 1.8T, i would have gone map, air filter and maybe J valve exhaust etc..... if you knew anything about the S3 you'd know the exhaust would be a complete waste of time for sub 300bhp and also the air box as we have said...the airbox in a golf /A3 is different to that of an S3.....we all know the S3 was not built to the spec of an A3/Golf which
is the reason the car is unique in its own right - yes it uses the same base parts but thats where the similarity ends - so to answer your statement, it shows i know more than you in this case if you still maintain your completely unplausable assumptions

 

[james0808]

owhat you saying is particiallly correct however you are overlooking that the standard airbox is well designed...and you have continued to forget this fact throughout this thread even when you have no factual proof (as Glen does) to back up your argument

The standard airbox is quite well designed but not as well designed as a modified airbox for the purposes of tuning and the ridiculous pipe that feeds the airbox,which you keep forgetting.

There you go again Glens factual proof?

ok with my 1.8T, i would have gone map, air filter and maybe J valve exhaust etc..... if you knew anything about the S3 you'd know the exhaust would be a complete waste of time for sub 300bhp and also the air box as we have said...the airbox in a golf /A3 is different to that of an S3.....we all know the S3 was not built to the spec of an A3/Golf which
is the reason the car is unique in its own right - yes it uses the same base parts but thats where the similarity ends - so to answer your statement, it shows i know more than you in this case if you still maintain your completely unplausable assumptions

So the only thing you would do different is not to change the exhaust on the S3?

I owned a 1.8T before this, were i to modify it, it would have needed a completely different list of additions to get power out of it..

Now correct me if im wrong but that is not a completely different list of additions to get power out of it,is it?

 

[1animal1]

no i agree half the list but NOT the air cone filter or exhaust...stop twisting what i am saying, sooo annoying especially when you are trying to get some sort of recognition for this post (failing BTW)

I know what your issue is.... you have no faith in the standard equipment assuming that they MUST be total ***** like most standard boxes out there..... if i were to test id do it from where the cone would be mounted (which is where Glen did), because its pointless adding something that isnt going to be used in the end product (ie straight ducting pipe)..... you choose to ignore parts of posts that prove you are in this instance wrong and pick up the slightest thing....james really fella stop being a child and put this to bed, we are never going to agree as you are a 'sold' victim of the aftermarket brands...clearly

i have no doubt a cone would work well on lots of cars....but on this one it doesnt, you really need to grasp that fact and take it for what it is.....in laymens terms, you are applying generics to an cleansed situation to a car that you have no direct factual experience.... your tact could be seen as 'following sheep' as you have shown yourself to argue about something you havent tested yourself, that doesnt make a good mechanic as it shows you go for what options are available to you rather than exploring/acknowledging new options

 

[mat20vt]

jbs's big turbo R32 uses standard airbox from look of it.
when i went there to get my golf mapped, they recomended taking induction kit off, and modifying standard air box.
R32 and mine are/were 400+bhp cars

 

[james0808]

no i agree half the list but NOT the air cone filter or exhaust...stop twisting what i am saying, sooo annoying especially when you are trying to get some sort of recognition for this post (failing BTW)

I know what your issue is.... you have no faith in the standard equipment assuming that they MUST be total ***** like most standard boxes out there..... if i were to test id do it from where the cone would be mounted (which is where Glen did), because its pointless adding something that isnt going to be used in the end product (ie straight ducting pipe)..... you choose to ignore parts of posts that prove you are in this instance wrong and pick up the slightest thing....james really fella stop being a child and put this to bed, we are never going to agree as you are a 'sold' victim of the aftermarket brands...clearly

i have no doubt a cone would work well on lots of cars....but on this one it doesnt, you really need to grasp that fact and take it for what it is.....in laymens terms, you are applying generics to an cleansed situation to a car that you have no direct factual experience.... your tact could be seen as 'following sheep' as you have shown yourself to argue about something you havent tested yourself, that doesnt make a good mechanic as it shows you go for what options are available to you rather than exploring/acknowledging new options

Standard equipment is good for the standard car,and for Audi who like to save money on mass produced cheaper products.

Forget the straight intake it is obvisous you will rely on Glens effort of a test for the result,was that result compared to a standard airbox or his modified one?cant remember.

we are never going to agree as you are a 'sold' victim of the aftermarket brands...clearly
Like it,but some aftermarket stuff is actually quite good for making more power/torque,one day you may realise this and stop praying to the oem shrine.
I like the large assumption by you and others that i have never worked on/modified an S3 or something with an S3 engine in it?
and i love the way you only gain knowledge about a car by owning the particular car,if you believe that you will believe anything,oh wait a minute,you do.
You are right that we will never agree on this so might as well agree to disagree.

 

[james0808]

jbs's big turbo R32 uses standard airbox from look of it.
when i went there to get my golf mapped, they recomended taking induction kit off, and modifying standard air box.
R32 and mine are/were 400+bhp cars

Big turbo an a 3.2 V6 is totally different to a 1.8 4 pot and K04?

What boost pressure are they running?

 

[mat20vt]

my golf 1.8bar, maybe 2bar if it ever got properly mapped.
forget the R32. point i was trying to make, was if modified airbox works for big turbo cars, thens it got to be suitable for a ko4 setup?

 

[james0808]

Different cfm flow through the airbox.Glen will know what i mean,others might struggle.
Sounds like fun though 2 bar boost.

 

[omegadirective]

James, now that you've lost the argument, you don't need to try and prove that you know a few things. Putting other people down is just showing how petty you are.

Not everyone has a background in engineering, not everyone has experience with modiying, but it doesn't mean they aren't willing to learn, or know enough to understand whats going on, even if they couldn't do it themselves.

If you have nothing decent to contribute, just be quiet and stop this petty "mines bigger than yours" attitude.

 

[james0808]

I dont need to prove anything,i know enough.Not as much as some people think they know,but enough.
Dont remember loosing any arguements as it was just a discussion on an internet forum not an arguement,so wind your neck in.
Im all for learning,knowledge is a wonderful thing.Maybe one day you might get some.

 

[james0808]

Not everyone has a background in engineering, not everyone has experience with modiying,

It doesnt matter if you do,what matters is if you have owned an S3?

 

[glen_jai]

So what was the bottom line on this?

Standard airbox is good for <280bhp, but an induction kit is better for >280?

Just for the record, I'm still using the standard airbox in my S3.
Also, I seem to remember that Mark (backdraft) was still using the standard airbox (modified though) on his TT race car.

 

[james0808]

I will probably get flamed for this but here goes.
The airbox is only good for how much air you can actually flow through it at a given time and how cold (dense)the air is will determine how much power that equates to on the given engine.
The final bhp figure capabilities of the airbox will depend on other supporting mods,intercoolers,turbos etc.

What would be a good question is how much cfm can the S3 air box flow standard v modified?

 

[1animal1]

Standard equipment is good for the standard car,and for Audi who like to save money on mass produced cheaper products.

Forget the straight intake it is obvisous you will rely on Glens effort of a test for the result,was that result compared to a standard airbox or his modified one?cant remember.

we are never going to agree as you are a 'sold' victim of the aftermarket brands...clearly
Like it,but some aftermarket stuff is actually quite good for making more power/torque,one day you may realise this and stop praying to the oem shrine.
I like the large assumption by you and others that i have never worked on/modified an S3 or something with an S3 engine in it?
and i love the way you only gain knowledge about a car by owning the particular car,if you believe that you will believe anything,oh wait a minute,you do.
You are right that we will never agree on this so might as well agree to disagree.

I have never said im sold entirely on OEM...infact in my last post you chose not to point out that i mentioned about cones being well suited to most other cars....... but then this would have stopped you replying which it was meant to do

I understand the principles of mass produced items.... (worth mentioning i do have qualifications in engineering as well as full professional qualifications in financial services - im not daft)..... what i do know is that the S3 does not share many common components with the A3...there is a reason for this, one of those components just so happens to be better than any aftermarket item so far produced.... you cannot grasp this fact.... it doesnt matter if you have owned one or worked on one, my guess is you havent gone anywhere near the lengths as Glen has in terms of testing..... and like i said before, what would be the point in removing the TIP for testing airflow IF all you were going to do was to replace the TIP for driving??? pointless because the tests would be based on parameters that wouldnt be emulated in the final product..... this has been further proven by the fact that backdraft use the standard airbox in their race cars...are they wrong too? James we know you know your stuff but on this occasion you need to put your dummy back in unless you can come up with some cast iron RELEVANT figures yourself.

i agree to disagree with you and follow the masses that are actually doing what you think is wrong..... if you had half an argument in favour of your stance I would listen because im that type of person.... im quite prepared to openly apologise if you prove what we know as correct to be wrong.... HOWEVER, if you insist on coming on here and arguing the toss on generics then you will be shot to **** like you have been

people arent queuing to back you on this....this isnt because they havent got the in depth knowledge of testing...its because some things in life make sense through common sense..... this is why uni grads now have to work on placements - because class room knowledge and real life application are two seperate ball games that work very well when put together

i hate to come here to give you a lesson on life but i think its been well deserved by you - and just for the record...you sound like a sub 20 year old whos just gotten his hands on some information that you know the general population wouldnt have - just my perception, lets see how many agree

 

[<tuffty/>]

cup of tea anyone?

 

[1animal1]

 

[omegadirective]

I unfortunately agree with Tim.

Exactly what I was thinking. :icon_thumright:

 

[james0808]

and like i said before, what would be the point in removing the TIP for testing airflow IF all you were going to do was to replace the TIP for driving???

If you go back and re-read this thread you will see quite clearly when i referred to the straight intake i was talking about a modification i have done to my own car,stating the earlier spool up time of the turbo.

When Glen tried to say

Spool up earlier...not on an S3.
Tried it...didn't work.

Which i know was complete crap as it wouldnt fit.

So i asked how he managed to do this on an S3.

Shove length of MAF sized tubing onto the MAF and have it hanging over the wing whilst you dyno, to see if you get any gains - with a big cone filter on the eng, in the airflow of the cooling fans.

Once it was pointed out that is not a straight intake

You can't do a proper straight inlet to an S3 K04...but I still don't believe that with the size of turbo fitted.

So why say

Tried it...didn't work.???When he obviously didnt.

i agree to disagree with you and follow the masses that are actually doing what you think is wrong..... if you had half an argument in favour of your stance I would listen because im that type of person....

Did i say it was wrong to do a modified airbox?

i hate to come here to give you a lesson on life but i think its been well deserved by you - and just for the record...you sound like a sub 20 year old whos just gotten his hands on some information that you know the general population wouldnt have - just my perception, lets see how many agree

I unfortunately agree with Tim.

Exactly what I was thinking. :icon_thumright:

Oh no,now im shocked that you omegadirective would agree.

 

[james0808]

Such a shame I'd not come accross you...it would have given you a shock!

For outright power on long roads, the S3 will always struggle to match the Jap stuff with their higher revving engines with bigger turbos...but off roundabouts and on back roads...different story!

Only just seen this,i have seen your torque curve and while it is peaky and would be good coming off roundabouts it still wouldnt have enough.
On back roads absolutely no chance.

 

[Ess_Three]

Well well,im impressed again.
You do know something about fluid velocities.
Unless you used Google to get that.

Yes James...
I used a background in Industrial Measurement and Control and 20 years as an Instrument Tech including Compressor control systems to base my knowledge on what should work - then try it to see if it DOES work.


You?

 

[Ess_Three]

Only just seen this,i have seen your torque curve and while it is peaky and would be good coming off roundabouts it still wouldnt have enough.
On back roads absolutely no chance.

Boring...
Maybe gearing, a better chassis and balls come into play.

 

[MintyS3]

Only just seen this,i have seen your torque curve and while it is peaky and would be good coming off roundabouts it still wouldnt have enough.
On back roads absolutely no chance.

Is it a GT4 you own? If I can be a match for one on a "spirited drive" then Ive no doubt Ess_Three could have.

 

[Ess_Three]

This is tedious.

I'm not going to get involved with petty todger fancing any longer.

So far we have established that James will argue anything he can with anyone (including his shadow)...even when the point has beem totally missed pages ago...he will still try to take his crusade to anyone who will listen.

You can't fit a straight inlet to an S3, if you have the enging in the car.
However, you can simulate the results of what hallowed 'straight inlet' could give in other ways. This however, seems to count for little.
...and you still ingest hot air...a point James choosed to ignore.

James doesn't actually have any hard facts about tuning the S3...as he hasn't actually tuned one.

James doubt all the 'tests' that have been carried out...and likes to make his opinions known to all...but is hesitant in offering opinions of tests that actually can be done - rather than rattling on about something that can't...

So, I'm not lettin any more bandwidth be wasted...
The original topic was around Induction kits - the opinions are there for all to read.
They work on a GT4. They don't in the same way on an S3.

That's it...locked.