[leftcoastman]

Last weekend I tested out the DIY dual cone intake (2 K&N filters bolted onto the intake tubes with a 2.25inch ID metal pipe, all sitting in the engine bay).

I have always believed that the stock intake scoops, aimed at the cones, would result in pretty low IATs. Some people have claimed that this "hot air" intake will produce substantially higher IATs during track use. Armed with an OBD-II datalogger and recording IATs, I observed that this is claim is patently false.

During freeway use, I recorded IATs that were 5-10 degrees higher than ambient. Once I slowed down to surface street speeds (+ traffic), I saw IATs go up about 20 degrees, resulting in intake temps that were 30 degrees above ambient. Once I got moving, the IATs dropped quickly back to their former levels.

The true torture test, HARD track use, is the real deal. With 60-65 degree ambients, I ran a few 30-40 minute sessions on track with speeds ranging from 37mph in the tightest corner to 135mph on the straights.

The recorded intake air temps, during heavy track use, were from the 130-165 degree range. The peaks were hit at the end of the long straight and TWENTY SECONDS of lower turbo load later, I was cooled back down to 130 degrees. This temperature spiking is consistent with AA's logging of IAT's during dyno pulls using the stock intake.

People have claimed that the hot air coming from the radiator would cause these IATs. This claim is not true for a few reasons:

1) During this entire session, coolant temps were rock steady in the 205-210 degree range. Therefore, it is very unlikely that the 30deg swings in IAT were due to coolant temp changes. They are likely due to the turbos heating up the air.

2) I put the stock intake back on and...............the IAT results were exactly the same.

My belief is that the 130-160 IATs I see on track are NOT due to the dual cone intake sucking in hot air, but rather due to heating of the air due to the turbos. This is highly likely as the dual cones and the stock intake produced the same IATs on track. We're back to that age old PV=nRT.

I can't really say if the commercial cold air intakes out there will produce lower IATs than either stock intake or the dual cone "hot air" system, but if any of you manufacturers want me to test it out - I'm scheduled for a dozen track days this year.

[ontopofm]

great info, i'm looking into this set up

[Mattscott]

Any pics of how "Raw" it looks in the engine bay. What increase in Hp/MPG are you seeing with this set up.

I want to weigh the pros and cons before going with this set up. Cons would really only be looks. Pros, HP, MPG, and sound. But how much? Thanks in advance.

[M3to335]

Wait, did I read this right? Your saying the dyno-glory filter setup does not give you higher IAT's on the track?

I was told just the opposite when my car crapped out after 4 laps with my tune.http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=113239

[leftcoastman]

Originally Posted by M3to335

Wait, did I read this right? Your saying the dyno-glory filter setup does not give you higher IAT's on the track?

I was told just the opposite when my car crapped out after 4 laps with my tune.http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=113239

You got it - same IATs as stock airbox. Not postulation, but data logging. What were your ambients at VIR?

I noticed that I got limp when I first installed the dyno glory setup. I think the vehicle had to adjust. I ran it for 2-3 weeks before trying it out on the track.

ZERO limp issues on track with V2.02 and the dyno glory. In a related note, I'm running about 0.3-0.5psi higher above 5000rpm with this dyno glory intake. Yes, I'm a bad boy and had my laptop in the car on track. I secured it though, I promise!

[M3to335]

Ambient on the first day was 55deg F. The intake was installed for about 100 miles prior to the runs. I was also informed that I may have needed to run 100+ octane for the track event with the PROcede. I had 93oct as usual with 92% across the board. What were you running?

We need to chat!

[SteelTorque]

Originally Posted by leftcoastman

You got it - same IATs as stock airbox. Not postulation, but data logging. What were your ambients at VIR?

I noticed that I got limp when I first installed the dyno glory setup. I think the vehicle had to adjust. I ran it for 2-3 weeks before trying it out on the track.

ZERO limp issues on track with V2.02 and the dyno glory. In a related note, I'm running about 0.3-0.5psi higher above 5000rpm with this dyno glory intake. Yes, I'm a bad boy and had my laptop in the car on track. I secured it though, I promise!

Do you think running this setup with the addition of catless DP's will affect IAT negatively?

[leftcoastman]

Originally Posted by M3to335

Ambient on the first day was 55deg F. The intake was installed for about 100 miles prior to the runs. I was also informed that I may have needed to run 100+ octane for the track event with the PROcede. I had 93oct as usual with 92% across the board. What were you running?

We need to chat!

This is going to make you cry...

91 octane.

And I'm running V2.02

[leftcoastman]

Originally Posted by SteelTorque

Do you think running this setup with the addition of catless DP's will affect IAT negatively?

Don't know. But I have been running catted UR pipes for the past 5 months.

[jcarlucci1]

Is there any benefit if IAT is same as stock? Increased airflow? Can you feel any extra power?

[leftcoastman]

Originally Posted by jcarlucci1

Is there any benefit if IAT is same as stock? Increased airflow? Can you feel any extra power?

More power as proven by dyno testing. The rub was that many claimed that dyno results wouldn't correlate to street/track results because of heat soak issues.

The slightly increased boost above 5k rpm combined with my track testing showing that there isn't extra heat implies to me that this is a good upgrade that produces additional power in real world conditions.

$55 total cost makes it even better.

[SteelTorque]

Originally Posted by leftcoastman

More power as proven by dyno testing. The rub was that many claimed that dyno results wouldn't correlate to street/track results because of heat soak issues.

The slightly increased boost above 5k rpm combined with my track testing showing that there isn't extra heat implies to me that this is a good upgrade that produces additional power in real world conditions.

$55 total cost makes it even better.

Damn! Was it wasy to install/make?

[jerrygarcia]

is this pretty much the same as the "dyno glory" intake that terry created? If so DIY is over on N54tech.com, 15 whp gain...

[leftcoastman]

Originally Posted by jerrygarcia

is this pretty much the same as the "dyno glory" intake that terry created? If so DIY is over on N54tech.com, 15 whp gain...

Yes. But to be entirely accurate, it was Shiv's prototype that Terry bought off of someone else.

[CaptChaos]

I haven't taken my car on the track but thanks for running the tests and posting your results.

[O-cha]

Originally Posted by leftcoastman

People have claimed that the hot air coming from the radiator would cause these IATs. This claim is not true for a few reasons:

1) During this entire session, coolant temps were rock steady in the 205-210 degree range. Therefore, it is very unlikely that the 30deg swings in IAT were due to coolant temp changes. They are likely due to the turbos heating up the air.

I assume this is aimed at me. I never said it had anything to do with coolant temperature, I said it had to do with the pump duty cycle. The car aims to keep the coolant at nearly the same temp all the time, the difference is when your driving hard the car ramps the pump WAY up.

Because of this a LOT more coolant is flowing through the radiator, sure the temps stay the same, but a LOT more heat is being removed from the coolant through the radiator which then goes into those filters. This should be pretty clear to anyone, if you floor the car obviously a lot more heat is being produced. I can guarantee you the intake temps at the filter are higher as I have personally recorded them raising 50 degrees from just a quick pull.

I've said several times that looking at post intercooler charge air temps are only half the picture, especially if you're running a tune. If the turbos have to spool more (when they are already running into the diminishing returns area of effeciency) to get the same pressure performance will suffer, the question is will it be offset by less restriction. I make no assumption on this.

If you want to test it go to a dyno and make sure the car is only intaking 160 degree air (maybe use a carpet dryer or something IDK) and see how it goes. I personally don't care enough to do this since I have the best of both worlds now.

[O-cha]

Also part of the reason peak temperatures remain the same is because as the difference between ambient and the air flowing through the IC increases the more efficient the IC becomes at removing the heat, this is exponential. This is why post IC temperatures do not indicate that the intake is intaking the same temperature of air. In tuned cars spooling the turbos more is going to impact the performance greatly, that's why I indicated in the past that it may be more important to look at temps before the turbos.

[M3to335]

Originally Posted by leftcoastman

This is going to make you cry...

91 octane.

And I'm running V2.02

Ok, now Im a little pissed and very confused at the same time.

You said something in the other post about working with Dustin. Do you mean on a track map? Or is the standard map we all have.

I really would like to run my car with the PROcede this time

[leftcoastman]

Originally Posted by O-cha

I assume this is aimed at me. I never said it had anything to do with coolant temperature, I said it had to do with the pump duty cycle. The car aims to keep the coolant at nearly the same temp all the time, the difference is when your driving hard the car ramps the pump WAY up.

Because of this a LOT more coolant is flowing through the radiator, sure the temps stay the same, but a LOT more heat is being removed from the coolant through the radiator which then goes into those filters. This should be pretty clear to anyone, if you floor the car obviously a lot more heat is being produced. I can guarantee you the intake temps at the filter are higher as I have personally recorded them raising 50 degrees from just a quick pull.

I've said several times that looking at post intercooler charge air temps are only half the picture, especially if you're running a tune. If the turbos have to spool more (when they are already running into the diminishing returns area of effeciency) to get the same pressure performance will suffer, the question is will it be offset by less restriction. I make no assumption on this.

If you want to test it go to a dyno and make sure the car is only intaking 160 degree air (maybe use a carpet dryer or something IDK) and see how it goes. I personally don't care enough to do this since I have the best of both worlds now.

Like clockwork. Your emotions are clouding your logic and ability to read the whole post. You are too predictable, my man!

How might you explain the fact that the stock intake resulted in the exact same IATs as the hot air intake?

Surely, if all that evacuated heat was being fed to the dual cones, putting the stock intake in would have resulted in lower IATs. Unless of course your theory is that the IC is so damn efficient that even a drastic bump in "at cone" temps would be negated by the super duper IC that we have, lol.

[leftcoastman]

Originally Posted by M3to335

Ok, now Im a little pissed and very confused at the same time.

You said something in the other post about working with Dustin. Do you mean on a track map? Or is the standard map we all have.

I really would like to run my car with the PROcede this time

Standard map. I did this track work with Dustin a few months back so the changes we came up with were incorporated into the standard V202 map, AFAIK.

[O-cha]

Originally Posted by leftcoastman

Like clockwork. Your emotions are clouding your logic and ability to read the whole post. You are too predictable, my man!

How might you explain the fact that the stock intake resulted in the exact same IATs as the hot air intake?

Surely, if all that evacuated heat was being fed to the dual cones, putting the stock intake in would have resulted in lower IATs. Unless of course your theory is that the IC is so damn efficient that even a drastic bump in "at cone" temps would be negated by the super duper IC that we have, lol.

Quit being a jackass, I'm not really sure what was "emotional" about my previous post. Get a temperature probe, stick it in the intake before the turbo and come back. After you do that we can discuss in depth why the difference between temps post IC shrink to almost nothing even as the temperature of the intake air varies a considerable amount. It's very basic thermal conductivity knowledge. I think even someone like you who thinks that the same amount of heat is being given off from his engine cruising on the highway and tracking the car will be able to understand it.

[O-cha]

And as an aside, I'm not debating whether or not the intake makes power or not, as I've said I make no conclusion on this. I'm just correcting your assumption that intake temps remain the same because your post intercooler temps stayed the same which is 100% flawed and wrong.

It is a fact that as you start loading the car cone filters will intake CONSIDERABLY hotter air over their already hotter then stock airbox air.


For reference for everyone else these are direct probed measurements from the intakes.

All 80 degree ambients (about 27 Celsius)

Stock airbox:
30-35 driving (no change during long hard acceleration)
40-50 after stopping

Dual cones:
40-45 cruising
60+ (I've seen driving temps higher then 70) during a small pull (No heatsoak just the pump ramping up from the load, actual heatsoak where the coolant is above the target temp it will go up even more)
70+ standing, got as high as 90 CELSIUS when I got stuck by a train before I shut the car off.

UR CAI:
Ambient cruising, I mean literally I drove through a shaded area and watched the temp go from 28 to 22 no joke. It's is actually colder then the stock airbox. Temps stay the same or lower on pulls, which is a big woohoo.

50+ sitting, Unfortunately it is in the engine bay so it's still susceptible to the same temp climb as the stock box and dual cones. However it immediately drop after starting off.