john banks

I have MY00 Turbo with APS induction kit (inner wing) and the MAF sensor connected to the original inlet pipe.

The BPM inlet pipe seems a good choice (a bit expensive maybe) but,



Excuse the rough and ready image - I did a few "measurements" but the BPM is shorter... http://www.steve.ukmail.org/car/intakehose.html ... and it will definitely not meet my MAF sensor from the pics on Stephen's site.

Any suggestions? Could use a second MAF housing to join them up??

[Edited by john banks - 10/14/2002 10:32:56 PM]

nom

The BPMs seem to be longer than Steven's was now (err, I mean they are longer than they used to be). I have had BPM inlet > MAF housing > APS cold-air thing in, and it fits. Very just, but fits. Very rigid - might not do the MAF much good! The fit is tight enough that it actually looks as though it was designed that way - but I don't know if mine was a one off & they vary.
I can try to get a picture tomorrow evening if you'd like to see the length - but the APS kit isn't fitted at the moment.

Pavlo

Jap Innovations sell the MRT pipe which is £252 inc vat and looks longer.

Paul

john banks

Thanks Paul.

Sounds good Nom, thanks. Agree on the rigidity issue - MAF on a silicone hose might be OK though.. should damp the vibes from the engine quite well? Picture would be ace. Is the silicone pipe more rigid than the corrugated plastic section on which the MAF is currently supported do you reckon?

[Edited by john banks - 10/14/2002 11:34:53 PM]

nom

The rigidity is more from the fact of it being anchored so securely between the APS bit & the inlet. The actual inlet pipe is stiffer than the Samco-type hosing against collapse, but will bend. Lucky, really, as it has to do quite a bit of bending to get under the manifold
The pipe has to be heaved back a little (but there is no distortion to the shape - or rather the curve is marginally different to what it would like ) and is very much fixed under the inlet manifold. But then again I suppose the MAF is pretty rigidly fixed with the APS bit anyway!
I'll jiggle it together & take a pic. Definately a picture telling a thousand words (certainly of mine ).

john banks

The worry with the MAF would be vibrations from the engine side I reckon, so the protective corrugated bit in the original design is not bad. I emailed APS and they said they tried a few different designs of inlet pipe and found no gain, that is why they don't make one.

nom

Well, if you ask me, there is a gain - although probably not to power, just to spool-up. The change was quite noticeable when I initially set it up; considerably faster. No lower, just faster.

john banks

Others say there is a gain particularly when you increase the power. Is there a way to non-destructively remove the OEM inlet pipe without removing the inlet manifold?

nom

I doubt it. The hard knobbly bits that flex on the BPM part don't on the oem. Steve's description is pretty much bang-on - parts need to be cracked off destructively. If you're careful, it could probably be superglued back on again - the parts that need to be removed are certainly thick enough that glue would hold well if the initial cut were clean, but I'll check on that if you're interested...

harvey

iTrader: (48)

My inlet tract came from Scooby Mania and cost just under £200 including delivery and credit card charge. It replaced a Samco I was not happy with. I am not sure as to the make, ask S/M but it looks like the one above. It fits well with the MAF housing in place coupled to an APS cold air kit but I have thrown away the MAF sensor and would not run an APS CAK if the engine still had to rely on the MAF sensor.

FrankM

Hello John

I have fitted a SAMCO Intake Hose designed for the MY01 to my MY99.
It's long enough, the only thing you have to do is to block one hose which is not nessassary and you have to reverse one 90° aluminium connector of the SAMCO Hose for better fitting.

Very important: secure all connections with clamps!

Frank :-)
PS: I use the APS HFA as well...

[Edited by FrankM - 10/16/2002 7:27:48 AM]

nom

Finally got the camera, batteries & cable do grab the images together. So, photos of the BPM offering follow...


Tube dangling, to get an idea of the length & where it would 'like' to be. Note the longer bit at the 'entrance' end over the image at the top of the page. I presume this is a design change!


With the MAF housing, hanging loose - correct length, not quite the correct place...


...but with a bit of jiggling (not a lot) it fits snuggly. Perfectly might also be the word. But you can see how it's rather rigid in there & will probably get a lot of vibration.

Hope the images help, John!

[Edited by nom - 10/16/2002 9:54:06 AM]

john banks

Great pix thanx.

The silicon pipe should damp out a lot of the vibes though or is it really that rigid?

[Edited by john banks - 10/16/2002 11:20:54 AM]

nom

I don't think I'd worry too much about the vibrations. The silicon hose I imagine will transmit more of the low frequency but a lot less of the mid/high, which I suspect is what the MAF doesn't like (it should damp them out better than the harder oem inlet plastic). Anyway, if the MAF goes, just replace it with one of the new tougher ones (if you haven't already ).
I think that if any vibrations, etc. are going to get to the MAF, they'll largely be through the APS CAK not the inlet hose.

Floyd

iTrader: (9)

I'd put some rubber grommets under those CAK mounting bolts as the original air box does this.

It's strange that the improvement is in spool up with these pipes, the more air to the turbo means more air pressure/resistance on the blades and it should be the other way around?

The turbo would spool up crazy fast in a vacuum - is the theory. I'd like to see more air volume through-put giving better low down torque but slower spool, to make more sense.

F

ScoobyWhite

Thanks

I was thinking in fit one too but everybody says that it does not fit!!

But whit this photos I am now thinking in buy one!!
You do not have to cut anything from the MAF? right Nom.

Thanks.

john banks

Mine is damped with rubber already. I have the "new improved" MAF sensor as well just in case, but maybe I should carry it in the glovebox

I just presumed (probably wrongly) that the vibrations were coming from the engine (when you see a cone filter dancing around on the edge of a revving engine it makes you weep for the poor MAF sensor) - the bit I am anxious about losing is the corrugated bit that joins the MAF sensor as the design of that should really reduce vibrations. Hopefully silicon will be as good.

My idea is - the fewer restrictions in the pipe the lower the pressure drop, so the lower pressure ratio at the turbo (and hence lower backpressure and lower post turbo temperatures) for the same boost. Two happy effects should be better top end boost and more ignition timing midrange. We'll see. Not dissimilar idea to taking out any restriction to breathing.

Theoretically, I reckon if you had a turbo in a vacuum it would spin very quickly from the exhaust gas and probably overspeed, but the PR would be a big fat zero. So I would rather have the inlet at as high a pressure as possible (ie as near to atmospheric as possible which is what you would get with a no restriction intake).

I don't think the APS CAI is particularly going to break MAF sensors, just have to sort out the misread issues.

[Edited by john banks - 10/16/2002 1:26:42 PM]

nom

Nope, nothing from the MAF bit needs to be cut. The only hacking necessary is at the turbo inlet - a couple of cm needed to come off mine.
It makes sense the turbo can spool faster as John says - the inlet pipe has air sucked through it by the compressor blades, and any restriction in the pipe will slow that spin-up down. Hence lag!

ScoobyWhite

What new improoved MAF???? Tell me tell me.............please.

And to Nom you are telling me that the pipe does fit all (can not) in the turbo inlet?? It stays "almoust to slipp" or at Half of the inlet?

Thanks

madou

john

Jacko did not find any improvement with Samco vs OEM

"I did not notice any difference in performance when swapping back to the OEM inlet pipe apart from it was much quieter."
http://bbs.22b.com/ubb/Forum9/HTML/000125.html

nom

eh?
Don't know about 'fit all', but fitted mine OK.
From the 22B thread/ChristianR's problems, I don't believe the BPM inlet can reasonably be compared to the Samco one and Bob does now not use the oem part, btw!). The BPM & Samco are quite different designs. To start with, on the 'collapsing' problem, the BPM one has a metal spring'like structural reinforcement; wires around 2mm thick I'd estimate that make it keep its shape. If the tube is collapsing it it's because someone's sitting on it. The shape is different, it replaces more parts, all it's various tubes come & go at different points, etc. etc.