andy00v7

Hi Shaun
If you are fitting the classic kit does that mean the right hand intercooler pipe ( as you look at the engine from the front of the car )will be above the engine as classic is or below the engine as a newage kit is ?

Andy

APIDavid

iTrader: (4)

Above:- unless our Pandoras box can throw up a correct one from a job, that was a leftover.

We do do many bespoke FMIC fits where we rotate the inlet manifold or we rotate the compressor housing on the turbo and shorten the left hand [ in your description ] piping to run down the chassis rail and under the headlamp.

We have many odds and ends. NO you can't buy 'em we use it all up eventually.

David

Shaun

Or at least you can't buy them, until mines been sorted!

harvey

iTrader: (48)

GT2 kit and flange adaptor at API Tuesday.
We fit GT2 kits to New Age cars but we do not have a kit for that as every installation is individual so this work is only done in our workshop much as David indicated above.

Shaun : As I understand it you now propose to change to inner wing induction (CAK)and the FMIC at the same time. This means you will not be able to attribute any loss or gain to a specific modification.
Personally I am against cold air kits on engines producing 380 bhp upwards, even with fairly big filters and this is because I have found it is very difficult to get a large enough air filter within the confines of the inner wing and because of the much extended inlet tract length.
When I first started tuning the STi 6 Wagon I went to a rolling road day at G-Force and produced 417 bhp, the most powerful Subaru at the time (but we have moved on a long way since then.) As the car came off the rollers, I was tipped off by Chris Davies that I should change away from my APS CAK. Chris being an Australian might know a thing or two about APS products.
Duly, the next week I fitted a very large cylindrical filter capable of 700 bhp apparently (from K+N). I returned to G-Force the following week with no other changes and we have 434 bhp. I then went on to Bob Rawle's for a mapping session and came back to Darlington over the weekend. In the interests of exactness I then took the long journey back to G-Force for a figure now the car was mapped. 451 or 452 bhp from memory.
Now assuming the rolling road was accurate and I had no reason to believe it was not, I had picked up 17 bhp without mapping from a change of filter and shortening the inlet tract and a further 17 bhp or more from the mapping. Probably the cheapest 34 bhp I have achieved in my history of Subarus.
Subsequently I built a carbon fibre divider so the filter was breathing air coming in through the inner wing and segregated from the hot engine air.

The improved power was of great interest to me because in the past I have found that changing air filters often led to less power than more power and a change of air filter most certainly needs a remap to determine accurately what losses or gains have been made.
Now during my investigation I received a lot of help from K+N and I think there are a lot of cars out there running inadequate air induction systems and not jut too small a filter in many cases.
I use Magnahelix guages to determine differential air pressure but you can do a little experiment for yourself for not a lot of money which will prove whether a filter change was beneficial or just a change of inlet tract on its own. Simply obtain a length of clear plastic pipe. Attach one end to the inlet tract before the compressor housing and the other is left open to atmosphere at the filter end. It can be taped at a suitable height to the driver wing. This water manometer will now show what depression exists in your inlet tract and therefore you will know whether the filter change or inlet tract you make is positive or negative. Obviously the least depression is what you are seeking. Obviously the turbo has to overcome the resistance (vacuum) in the inlet tract so reducing the depression gives the turbo an easier time as there is less to overcome. From my testing I think the New Age airbox is good to around 440 bhp and certainly better than an APS CAK and on Classics, depending on model year, the airbox is good to around 350 bhp (ver 5 and 6 cars).
Interestingly in discussion with K+N they told me that the standard filter in the inner wing of the APS kit would start to become a retriction beyond 320 bhp. The more the flow the greater the restriction. HTH

Shaun

Harvey,
You are of course correct, that changing the intercooler and inlet at the same time I will be unable to associate any differences specifically to a single item. This is a shame in some ways, but I just want the car "performing" with regards to this turbo.... it's a time (and logistics) thing and I just want it "singing" now. Looking at the way the last dyno graph is, some form of restriction is happening so both modifications are not unwarranted at this stage..... certainly in the long run.

We have had conversations in the past about inner wing kits and going by my own experiences I can state I have had differing results to yourself (but I have never used the APS kit).

When I had the Hyperflow Monster kit fitted to my Spec C (2.5ltr Cosworth Build, GT30 core turbo etc), that kit came with the Hyperflow Inner Wing kit. This filter is not particulary big (in fact I don't think the surface area is any bigger than a panel filter in reality). This kit had no problems provided air for 500bhp.

However when we did some testing, once I went to high compression, we found that the inner wing kit was indeed holding it back at the top end. This was resolved by using a bigger K&N filter (the biggest we could get in the wing) and also replicating a "ram air" effect by opening up the Fog Lamp cover. This immediately caused massive overboost. After remapping it allowed the engine and turbo (this engine breathed for England with the Big Cossie Heads) to be much more efficient. This resulted in 540bhp (achieved on ScoobyClinic's RR) on VPower and over 600bhp on Q16 (achieved on Tracktives RR).

Something that API will be doing as part of the inlet mods, will be to ensure the "ram air" effect will be in place.

Another LM450 customer (non Billet though in this case) did the same (minus the ram air effect) and he acheived 460bhp on the Hybrid Inner Wing pipework with K&N (obviously with a GT2 Hybrid in place as well).

I look forward to having the Hybrid GT2 fitted.

Thanks again for your input and off-line help and support.

johnfelstead

Now get outside and do some acceleration tests before you change it.

Shaun

Toffee

iTrader: (3)

^^ for reference > I have an RCM induction kit which is VERY close (if not toughing the side of the engine bay) to the inner wing, I have a cold air feed going in to a pipe that runs up in to the engine bay touching the RCM cone. I believe the Gobstopper was an engine bay cone with a pipe feeding cold air in to the engine bay as well

Lee.

Shaun

Lee,
What's the "Gobstopper" got to do with this project?

Hammer man

iTrader: (25)

Cheers chaps,,,,thats me now worried about my CAIK

joz8968

iTrader: (13)

Looks like, then, that you CAN'T have your CAIK and eat it.

Toffee

iTrader: (3)

I was just reffering to getting cool air to your engine without causing a restriction, Harvey expressed a concern about running an inner wing induction kit because of "possible" restrictions.

Lee.

Shaun

Lee,
Did you not read what I already put about this? plus the guy who I was referring to with the LM450, is actually using the inner wing kit that comes with the Newage Hybrid GT2 kit. Lol

It achieves 460bhp WITHOUT any ducting from the front fog cover!

Cliff,
Don't worry!!

Shaun

Just to back-up what I was referring to (Mel hope you don't mind me quoting your car / dyno run):



Vehicle spec. associated to above dyno graph:
MY06 Spec C
Standard Engine Internals
Litchfields LM450-S60 (76mm version) Turbo
Litchfields 800cc Injectors
Perrin 3 port Boost Solenoid
Sard FPR
Miltek 3" Sport Cat'd Full Exhaust System
SFS 3" Intake
Simtek ECU
Hybrid FMIC
K+N CAI Kit

Pretty impressive for a sports cat'd car and without the "Ram Air" effect on the Inner Wing Kit.

Here's hoping the latest Billet LM450 will produce BHP figures getting on for the original "Non Billet" LM450 spec.

harvey

iTrader: (48)

I would not dispute any of the above figures but that does not mean that the cold air kit is not a restriction and increasingly so above a certain power level. It does not suddenly get to a figure and stop working. It is a gradual process where the depression in the manifold increases as power increases and the turbo has to overcome this.
You don't need a rolling road power run to prove this just a bit of clear plastic pipe as I explained previously and recording the manometer column differences between two different induction systems. If you are doing this on the road you can tape the manometer column to the windscreen or if you have enough clear plastic pipe you can mount the manometer in front of the passenger seat. Obviously the least manometer column difference means the more efficient induction system.
The mesh size of the filter is also important. Metal type Blitz filters show smaller readings than say a K+N filter of the same size and in comparison on panel filters the biggest manometer difference is the STi aftermarket panel. What this means is that the steel Blitz is filtering less well and letting through bigger particles than the K+N and the filter medium in the STi aftermarket panel filter takes out smaller particles than the K+N panel. Just in the interests of exactness the difference between all the panel filters I tried was only 2 bhp, the STi being the lowest power producer but the best filter medium

Shaun

Harvey,
If I'm reading this right....

If any specific inlet kit was less than "best practical case" efficiency (compared to an induction filter straight off the turbo inlet pipe, based on what you have said), the turbo would have to work harder to attain target flow?

I can understand that in a "physics" way.

The question is though, by how much at any specific volume of air you are looking to consume.

One thing I have never liked from a personal perspective, is having an airfilter in the engine bay.... especially on a MAF based system. Since the MAF temps are driving ECU parameters, you can have an unwanted temp compensation effect due to any over inflation on temp figures. I do however appreciate that this can be circumvented by isolating the cone filter.

On my car we are now starting to enter the realms of the ceiling with the MAF voltage (without any rescale). I am already hitting 4.8v (just under 350g/s now) on the MAF sensor with the EcuTEK MegaROM 400gs ROM and the new LM450 (previous was circa 333g/s with the LM400). I have been informed that some headroom still exists on the current scaling, but that "safe" ceiling is getting closer.

The next mapping session should provide some useful information in that area.

New_scooby_04

iTrader: (4)

Beeen down this road before.

I have a Simota CAIK on my forged 2.5 SC46 from APi and it produced a figure of 473/482 when the engine was mapped at 1400 miles (measured via Ecutek's road dyno). Bang on the money in terms of expectations for this set up.

However, as Harvey says, this doesn't mean that the CAIK won't be a restriction at higher bhp aspirations, especially with the Hawk, as getting a CAIK to fit in the inner wing is a ROYAL pain in the ***! David will tell you all about the issues he had with mine (granted I do have an oil cooler too).

What I have noticed from a subjective point of view though is that 2.5s get VERY hot under the bonnet (even with the headers/dp etc... wrapped) so I wonder if there is a cone size/air temp trade off that occurrs when using an induction kit located in the engine bay?

Ns04

Shaun

Ns04,
The Simota CAIK is what API are fitting to mine....... albeit with a few "tweaks".

johnfelstead

Hot air to the inlet is a real issue with the MAF based cars.

When i bought my car it had a small missfire every so often, which helped me knock the purchase price down. I called Richard Bulmer about this and he suggested i check the airbox top was fitted properly as drawing hot air in from the under bonnet area causes ocasional missfires, he had seen it numerous times before.

Sure enough, the lid wasnt clipped into the inside locators, so it was drawing some hot air into the inlet via there, rather than through the front entry pipe work. I fitted the lid properly and it never misfired again.

It's a no brainer to not use a filter that draws hot air into the inlet, especially so on a MAF based car.

johnfelstead

What fudge factor did you use, as road dyno only shows power @ wheels.

Shaun

That would be circa 21%... Bob mapped it.

New_scooby_04

iTrader: (4)

Love the "fudge" factor description! I didn't use anything - I was driving....and concentrating pretty hard!

As Shawn says, Bob mapped it, so whatever he uses!

Ns04

johnfelstead

21% then.

Shaun, post up your latest Road Dyno performance report data in full, as you havn't done that yet.

New_scooby_04

iTrader: (4)

Tweaks?!?! Do tell! In the end, David had to stick a cone filter in the engine to get the running in map put on mine whilst they figured out a way to get teh CAIK to fit!

I well remember taking my car out to put the running in map on it sans front bumper ..... got some looks from passers by....and the local constabulary!

Andy.F

Harvey, I consider your test method flawed.
How do you compensate for air speed in the flowing pipe when measuring the vacuum from the sidewall? Higher flow (airspeed) will result in a lower measured pressure at the wall of the flowing pipe.
Its the most basic principle of aerodynamics, the one that keeps planes in the sky!!

Shaun - get that accel test done, we want faster cars on here not big dyno figures!

New_scooby_04

iTrader: (4)

That's what does it?!?!? I thought it was the combined will power of 300 passengers all thinking: "Come on, get up there you big barsteward"

New_scooby_04

iTrader: (4)

Exactly right! But so few peple want to hear this..... Everyone wants big gains for as little expenditure as possible and then blames the car when it goes **** up and then can't afford to replace the parts they've bent!

BTW that performance test sounds interesting, I'd like to see the figures for my car - that SC46 billet really does spool almost unbelieveable well on a 2.5 and should translate to some impressive timed increments. I'll ask Bob to do some testing when I see him to go Mafless on racerom.

Shaun

John,
These are comparable temperature runs. The lastest LM400 Billet figures I put up, were in cooler temps, so I have used the previous test benchmark for a better match (just incase someone says they don't match the latest LM400 Billet figures - just look at the previous "warmer" run a few posts before).

LM450 Billet - so far
40 - 60mph = 2.5s
50 - 70mph = 2.1s
60 - 80mph = 2.1s
70 - 90mph = 2.3s

LM400 Billet
40 - 60mph = 2.4s
50 - 70mph = 2.1s
60 - 80mph = 2.2s
70 - 90mph = 2.4s

LM400 Non-Billet
40 - 60mph = 2.6s
50 - 70mph = 2.2s
60 - 80mph = 2.2s
70 - 90mph = 2.4s

VF
40 - 60mph = 2.6s
50 - 70mph = 2.5s
60 - 80mph = 2.6s
70 - 90mph = 2.9s

40-60mph is to 4851 rpm (on the Billet LM450) at which point it has gone way past peak torque. I am certainly down on boost currently (peak, midrange and top end) to where I want to be when all the next round of shizz is fitted. 1.7bar peak dropping to 1.6bar midrange at the moment in 4th (relevant for the 40-60mph timings). I hope we can peak at 1.8bar and hold this through the midrange to 1.6bar at max revs.

I would hope that acceleration figures will improve throughout the range in 4th.

Ns04,
The "Ram Air" effect of pressurising the inner wing void from an aperture cut out from the fog lamp cover.

Hammer man

iTrader: (25)

I thought your oil cooler was located in front of the radiator. Nowhere near the inner wing and surely the piping for the oil cooler takes the shortest route, again avoiding the inner wing.?
(flame suit on again and ready)

MelTypeR

iTrader: (4)

No probs in using the graph Shaun. It was put up for all to see. Really believe you will achieve almost the same if not better results that I also did.

Pm me if you have any other questions mate.

Would be great to get them both out on the track once yours is finished.

Mel