GOLFMK7
GOLFMK6
GOLFMKV
VW GTI MKVI Forum / VW Golf R Forum / VW Golf MKVI Forum / VW GTI Forum - Golfmk6.com



Go Back   VW GTI MKVI Forum / VW Golf R Forum / VW Golf MKVI Forum / VW GTI Forum - Golfmk6.com > Technical Topics > GTI 2.0T Engine / Drivetrain / Exhaust / Tunes


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 08-21-2012, 07:46 PM   #57
MKV727
FIA GT Champion
 
Drives: 2013 Drivers Edition GTI
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Posts: 963
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apexeater View Post
Thanks again, I think there is some great info in there. We need more people willing to do this kind of testing. How about a IC comparison next

I would like to continue the conversation Bender started though. To me there is a potential flaw in the testing methodology (for anyone who is not K04). The problem I see is the difference in air demands between the stock IHI turbo and your KO4. You have shown very nicely the aftermarket intakes flow better with the increased demands but with a stock turbo the flow is going to be less and the difference will be less pronounced. Isn't a K04 moving more air thus making the lack of movement the stock box can provide a bigger problem?

The reason I ask is I want to know (and I think a large number of people) the advantages between one brand and another may not be a big a deal until we jump into the big boy pool with a K04.

I think the difference in tunes to be a small matter when compared to the above issue.

Please feel free to poke holes in my theory.
So you want to be a brand that isn't the best because it's not that far behind unless you're running a K04? Why not just buy the best from the beginning?
MKV727 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2012, 07:54 PM   #58
Bender
Banned
 
Bender's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Focus ST
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Doylestown, PA
Posts: 20,440
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apexeater View Post
Thanks again, I think there is some great info in there. We need more people willing to do this kind of testing. How about a IC comparison next

I would like to continue the conversation Bender started though. To me there is a potential flaw in the testing methodology (for anyone who is not K04). The problem I see is the difference in air demands between the stock IHI turbo and your KO4. You have shown very nicely the aftermarket intakes flow better with the increased demands but with a stock turbo the flow is going to be less and the difference will be less pronounced. Isn't a K04 moving more air thus making the lack of movement the stock box can provide a bigger problem?

The reason I ask is I want to know (and I think a large number of people) the advantages between one brand and another may not be a big a deal until we jump into the big boy pool with a K04.

I think the difference in tunes to be a small matter when compared to the above issue.

Please feel free to poke holes in my theory.
Missing my point. My point is more that many tuners may tune to their products (as they should). As a result, using one tune with other products is not necessarily indicative of anything to do with said product, but rather with said tune.
Bender is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2012, 08:05 PM   #59
Apexeater
Oval Champion
 
Apexeater's Avatar
 
Drives: GTI and Jeep Rubicon
Join Date: May 2012
Location: AZ
Posts: 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by MKV727 View Post
So you want to be a brand that isn't the best because it's not that far behind unless you're running a K04? Why not just buy the best from the beginning?
I guess I am trying to say that what is best for a K04 may not be the best for a stock turbo and the differences shown here may not out weigh other value judgments such as sound or appearance.

Don't get me wrong, I think this is a valuable tool that Grambles has done for us. I am just trying to understand where the value lies for us who are not K04.
Apexeater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2012, 08:11 PM   #60
Apexeater
Oval Champion
 
Apexeater's Avatar
 
Drives: GTI and Jeep Rubicon
Join Date: May 2012
Location: AZ
Posts: 159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bender View Post
Missing my point. My point is more that many tuners may tune to their products (as they should). As a result, using one tune with other products is not necessarily indicative of anything to do with said product, but rather with said tune.
I see your point but you think that is a bigger factor than volume of air moved between a K04 and a IHI?
Apexeater is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2012, 08:16 PM   #61
Bender
Banned
 
Bender's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Focus ST
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Doylestown, PA
Posts: 20,440
assuming identical tuning - k04 would amplify flow characteristics of intakes so would be the best way to test.
Bender is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2012, 08:44 PM   #62
RABBIT FUR
Touring Car Champion
 
RABBIT FUR's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 4dr GTI CW 6sp MT
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 253
I must agree with Benders comments. This test only shows us what worked best for this combo of tune and KO4. It is not the best intake for every TSI ever. There are just to many varriables that could sway the out come to make that assumption. Great tread if you are KO4 with 366 hp. Keep that in mind all you STG 1 and STG 2 guys.
__________________
{ DON'T BUY IT IF YOU CAN'T SELL IT }
CW 12 GTI 4D MANUAL
Serron Wheel Pac-Eibach Pro Kit-Unitonics Intake-VAGcom Tweeks-Tint-S3SS-Smoke Markers-Neutered Soundakator-R8 Caps-Michelin PSS-P3cars Gauge-SPM Custom Exhaust-Euro switch-VW Lip black-Euro Textured Mirror Caps-R8 Red Top coils-Neuspeed charge pipe-ECS bleeder-GFB DV+
RABBIT FUR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2012, 08:52 PM   #63
McQueen77
Banned
 
Drives: "We only make one thing..."
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Not Kentucky
Posts: 8,628
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apexeater View Post
To me there is a potential flaw in the testing methodology (for anyone who is not K04). The problem I see is the difference in air demands between the stock IHI turbo and your KO4. You have shown very nicely the aftermarket intakes flow better with the increased demands but with a stock turbo the flow is going to be less and the difference will be less pronounced. Isn't a K04 moving more air thus making the lack of movement the stock box can provide a bigger problem?
^^sort of my initial comments, just put more eloquently.

air demands as you put it w/k04 are definitely greater than k03 turbo, so in theory, these gains become more negligible, or differences between intake and stock air on say, stage 1 w/stock turbo, become smaller due to lesser demands from stock turbo. so, bigger turbo = more gains and benefits from AM intake vs. smaller turbo..
McQueen77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2012, 09:07 PM   #64
MKV727
FIA GT Champion
 
Drives: 2013 Drivers Edition GTI
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Posts: 963
Quote:
Originally Posted by RABBIT FUR View Post
I must agree with Benders comments. This test only shows us what worked best for this combo of tune and KO4. It is not the best intake for every TSI ever. There are just to many varriables that could sway the out come to make that assumption. Great tread if you are KO4 with 366 hp. Keep that in mind all you STG 1 and STG 2 guys.
There isn't as many variables as you'd think, the largest variable is the one I mentioned about MAF placement.

The turbo is requiring Y amount of air at X RPM and that doesn't change. The recipe for power is Xair/boost + Yfuel + Ztiming and its a moving target dependent on ambient conditions. For the system to meet the load requirements of the tuner (ex: achieving requested boost) it will need a certain amount of volume of air and thats all there really is.

The ambient conditions may change and effect the density of the air and have a MAF reading less than what it would on a cooler day with less humidity but it won't change what the air intake can and can't physically do. This is exactly like a tuner using an air intake with a different MAF location, the tuner cannot change what the air intake can physically produce in delivering air volume. They can recognize its limits and characteristics to write a calibration that will optimize its capabilities but a tuner cannot change how it physically performs but rather make the best out of what is there.

A head to head comparison through MAF readings is 100% legit, we aren't measuring the power output of the vehicle but the airflow capacity of the air intake. The APR tune has not altered the MAF and will report how much airflow has exited the air intake and thus giving the best indication of how it performs. If the relocated MAF in another intake has it reading less airflow, that would mean the Bosch EMS will read less airflow and adjust the million different readings that accompany it accordingly.
MKV727 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2012, 09:54 PM   #65
RABBIT FUR
Touring Car Champion
 
RABBIT FUR's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 4dr GTI CW 6sp MT
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 253
MAF readings 100% true test i agree. Max flow of a certain CAI design also true. Mainly i just wanted other readers to understand that the APR intake should not be considered the best just because it can flow more air. If your motor , turbo , and tune do not require that much air than it is not better. It would just be the same. I think that some people may take the test findings the wrong way
__________________
{ DON'T BUY IT IF YOU CAN'T SELL IT }
CW 12 GTI 4D MANUAL
Serron Wheel Pac-Eibach Pro Kit-Unitonics Intake-VAGcom Tweeks-Tint-S3SS-Smoke Markers-Neutered Soundakator-R8 Caps-Michelin PSS-P3cars Gauge-SPM Custom Exhaust-Euro switch-VW Lip black-Euro Textured Mirror Caps-R8 Red Top coils-Neuspeed charge pipe-ECS bleeder-GFB DV+
RABBIT FUR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2012, 10:16 PM   #66
Bender
Banned
 
Bender's Avatar
 
Drives: 2014 Focus ST
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Doylestown, PA
Posts: 20,440
Absolutely agree MAF readings are the gauge that i think is most salient as it takes tune out of the equation.
Bender is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2012, 10:36 PM   #67
MKV727
FIA GT Champion
 
Drives: 2013 Drivers Edition GTI
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Palm Harbor, FL
Posts: 963
Quote:
Originally Posted by RABBIT FUR View Post
MAF readings 100% true test i agree. Max flow of a certain CAI design also true. Mainly i just wanted other readers to understand that the APR intake should not be considered the best just because it can flow more air. If your motor , turbo , and tune do not require that much air than it is not better. It would just be the same. I think that some people may take the test findings the wrong way
This is where you are losing me, an intake that produces the highest MAF readings will be the best performer. An intake that flows less with a K04 than a competitor cannot be considered a better performing set up. If this same intake flows comparable with the Carbonio with an IHI that doesn't make it a better intake with respect to performance.

I'm not making claims that the Carbonio is the best because it hasn't been put up against the competition. If it goes up against the competitors and then flows more then yes, it's a better performing intake. I don't see how that's disputable and I'm not trying to be mean or anything I'm trying to follow your thinking.
MKV727 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2012, 11:21 PM   #68
RABBIT FUR
Touring Car Champion
 
RABBIT FUR's Avatar
 
Drives: 2012 4dr GTI CW 6sp MT
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 253
OK to keep it simple. I think that the test results will differ on a STG 1 only. By the way what intake tested did have the highest MAF reading at the max RPM ?
__________________
{ DON'T BUY IT IF YOU CAN'T SELL IT }
CW 12 GTI 4D MANUAL
Serron Wheel Pac-Eibach Pro Kit-Unitonics Intake-VAGcom Tweeks-Tint-S3SS-Smoke Markers-Neutered Soundakator-R8 Caps-Michelin PSS-P3cars Gauge-SPM Custom Exhaust-Euro switch-VW Lip black-Euro Textured Mirror Caps-R8 Red Top coils-Neuspeed charge pipe-ECS bleeder-GFB DV+
RABBIT FUR is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2012, 11:25 PM   #69
Kal-GTI
FIA World Rally Car Champion
 
Kal-GTI's Avatar
 
Drives: 2002 Jetta TDI; 2008 GMC 2500HD SLT
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: KY
Posts: 630
Has filter area been figured into any of this? Seen a lot of this design vs. that design, but no one has mentioned filter area. The larger the area of the filter, the higher the potential for increased flow correct? I'm not sure about the modshack filter size, but I'm going to guess from the pics I've seen that it is a little smaller than the carbonio.
__________________
VAG-COM in Kentucky; PM me if you need assistance
Kal-GTI is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-21-2012, 11:30 PM   #70
A_Bowers
Moderator
 
A_Bowers's Avatar
 
Drives: MKVI GTI
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Alabama
Posts: 9,969
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal-GTI View Post
Has filter area been figured into any of this? Seen a lot of this design vs. that design, but no one has mentioned filter area. The larger the area of the filter, the higher the potential for increased flow correct? I'm not sure about the modshack filter size, but I'm going to guess from the pics I've seen that it is a little smaller than the carbonio.
At this point i don't think that has too much of an impact.

The main restriction in the intake was the OEM box.

You may see a small increase in MAF readings with a physically larger filter but nothing that is going to be a game changer
__________________
MKVI CSG GTI ///
K04 :: SPM TBE :: SPM IC :: Neuspeed :: SPM Motor Mounts :: W.ALK :: SouthBend Stg. 3 :: 42DD :: UniBrace UB :: UniBrace XB :: VWR :: Carbonio :: BBS CK

Build Thread::Southbend Stage 3 review::SPM Intercooler Review::SPM Full Engine Mount Review
A_Bowers is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply

Tags
mcqueenblowsmodshack

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:05 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.