Welcome to the North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club Thursday July 10, 2014
Home Forums WikiNASIOC Products Store Modifications Upgrade Garage
NASIOC
Here you can view your subscribed threads, work with private messages and edit your profile and preferences Home Registration is free! Visit the NASIOC Store NASIOC Rules Search Find other members Frequently Asked Questions Calendar Archive NASIOC Upgrade Garage Logout
Go Back   NASIOC > NASIOC Technical > Factory 2.0L Turbo Powertrain

Welcome to NASIOC - The world's largest online community for Subaru enthusiasts!
Welcome to the NASIOC.com Subaru forum.

You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community, free of charge, you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is free, fast and simple, so please join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-03-2002, 11:58 PM   #1
malelee21
Guest
 
Member#:
Question Turbo & High-Tech Performance Magazine Jan 2002 issue READ

Page 43
"XS Engineering Power Intake installed power figures rose by 13.9 horse power and 10.9 lbs-ft. More interesting is the fact that peak power was made earlier in the power band with 182.7 horse power at 5,684 rpm-more than 300 rpm sooner than the stock run....."

vs.
Page 36
"M2 package generaged 189.9 hp and 189.8 lb-ft of torque.... M2 Performance added its upgraded stock-mount intercooler, a 3 inch downpipe and a 3-inch exhaust..." also comes w/ AEM CAI.

After reading this article you might be wondering why M2 package resulted in only 7+ hp advantage over just XS Engineering Power Intake... considering M2 package comes with AEM CAI intake, turboback, and bigger intercooler.

13.9HP gain w/ only CAI is very questionable..... when CAI, turboback, bigger intercooler resulted in 21.1HP gain....
* Registered users of the site do not see these ads.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2002, 12:15 AM   #2
jmott
Scooby Guru
 
Member#: 6713
Join Date: May 2001
Chapter/Region: TXIC
Location: Houston TX USA
Vehicle:
2007 Prius
brown

Default Re: Turbo & High-Tech Performance Magazine Jan 2002 issue READ

many intakes get big power gains by screwing up the mass air sensor calibration to lean the car out.


Quote:
Originally posted by malelee21
Page 43

13.9HP gain w/ only CAI is very questionable..... when CAI, turboback, bigger intercooler resulted in 21.1HP gain....
jmott is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2002, 12:15 AM   #3
malelee21
Guest
 
Member#:
Default

On pg. 50, they dynoed IS300 w/ Weapon R Intake which only resulted in 3.7hp peak gain.
  Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2002, 12:27 AM   #4
Red Rocket
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 10507
Join Date: Sep 2001
Vehicle:
'04 Ex STi Owner
'97 4Runner

Default

TURBO = B.S.

Its simple math!

Kevin

(though I do think intakes are genraly worthwhile)
Red Rocket is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2002, 02:07 AM   #5
mitch808
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 10228
Join Date: Sep 2001
Vehicle:
2002 Subaru WRX

Default

Quote:
Originally posted by malelee21
On pg. 50, they dynoed IS300 w/ Weapon R Intake which only resulted in 3.7hp peak gain.

Although another mag with a IS300 did a Stillen intake and got close to 10HP... I think in the ballpark of 7 or so.

Too many variables to consider
mitch808 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2002, 07:55 AM   #6
2.5RSt'd
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 1294
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: CT
Vehicle:
2002 WRX
12.80 @ 106.99

Default

You are just talking peak horsepower what about torque acrooss the rpm band or horsepower increase across the rpm band...

Peak power is just a start for comparision.. which happens to be the one that everyone looks at but but often should be over looked until weighted against the other variables.
2.5RSt'd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2002, 10:14 PM   #7
Conduit
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 6162
Join Date: Apr 2001
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Orlando, FL. USA
Vehicle:
2002 WRX
MBP, 1st WRX Ever in FL.

Default

Blegh. Show me something comparing wideband o2 measurements and then we'll talk about your dyno results. Leaning out the car can produce that kind of power without an intake.

On another note, I'd like to see ONE person explain how they measured the "correct" air flow vs. what the meter is reporting. We asked shiv and he had no answer. Then, suddenly, the CAI-damning thread died. Does anyone have thoughts on how the naysayers are doing this? No conjecture, please, I wish to test it for myself, not wait around for someone's own "non-maf-confusing" CAI.
Conduit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2002, 10:25 PM   #8
Imprezer
Dynamic Uno
 
Member#: 1
Join Date: Jun 1999
Chapter/Region: BAIC
Location: Alameda, CA
Vehicle:
2011 Impreza WRX STi
Black

Default

Its no BS.

It just proves how important engine management is. With intake, you might get away with few ponies, but when you start changing turbo's and intercoolers, you will do more harm than good if you do not have a properly tuned ECU.

-Alex
Imprezer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2002, 11:36 PM   #9
Conduit
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 6162
Join Date: Apr 2001
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Orlando, FL. USA
Vehicle:
2002 WRX
MBP, 1st WRX Ever in FL.

Default

No kidding. That's gospel, frankly.
Conduit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-04-2002, 11:58 PM   #10
mid9s
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 7777
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: alexandria, VA
Vehicle:
2002 impreza WRX
Blaze Yellow

Default

is that why Mark and shiv both say that a CAi in not worth anything? Could you make more power with there systems if they tuned them for it? Or not a CAI how about just a cone filter like the Blitz set up?
mid9s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2002, 12:57 AM   #11
Conduit
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 6162
Join Date: Apr 2001
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Orlando, FL. USA
Vehicle:
2002 WRX
MBP, 1st WRX Ever in FL.

Default

That's not entirely true. Mark said Al gained 20hp by adding the Injen intake when he had the car down there for mapping long ago (before he went Motec).

The only measurement I've seen other than dyno results for some CAIs (which are hard to trust, given the potential maf confusion that has been suggested) are the measurements I posted for the pressure drop across the stock airbox/maf/post-maf-neck vs. my AEM. There was a significant difference. I really do want to test this maf confusion issue (that aftermarket intakes cause "wrong" measurements), but again, noone can tell us how THEY tested it, let alone how to do it. I know experience can go a long way, but these blanket statements are a little suspicious.
Conduit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2002, 01:06 AM   #12
mid9s
Scooby Newbie
 
Member#: 7777
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: alexandria, VA
Vehicle:
2002 impreza WRX
Blaze Yellow

Default

I would think that the size and depth of the tube that the MAF is in is how they change the reading.
mid9s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2002, 01:36 AM   #13
Conduit
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 6162
Join Date: Apr 2001
Chapter/Region: South East
Location: Orlando, FL. USA
Vehicle:
2002 WRX
MBP, 1st WRX Ever in FL.

Default

I thought the same, but if you think about it, the larger tube, while flowing more air overall, will have a lower velocity, so less gets measured within X-time (as I was told here).

You are starting to see the problem
Conduit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2002, 02:07 AM   #14
nmyeti
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 4980
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Albuquerque, NM USA
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Conduit
That's not entirely true. Mark said Al gained 20hp by adding the Injen intake when he had the car down there for mapping long ago (before he went Motec).
You sure about that? Because i remember a conversation with mark where he was talking about Al's power meter numbers, and saying something to the effect of "its not showing up on the dyno"

-Nathan
nmyeti is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2002, 09:47 AM   #15
WRBLUEWAGON
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 10745
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Palm Coast FL via NJ
Vehicle:
2006 VW SUV

Default

The power meter is a toy. So those numbers are high. I could think his is getting good numbers with a big turbo but 20hp from the intake is just off
WRBLUEWAGON is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2002, 10:44 AM   #16
TurboRex
Scooby Specialist
 
Member#: 8635
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Texas
Vehicle:
04 STI, 07 FXT

Default

I feel that changing the size of the tube is how they trick the ecu. If the CAI has a slightly larger tube, then the maf thinks there is less air (lower velocity) even though the same amount is flowing at a certain rpm and thus lowers the amount of fuel. This is why it would lean things out.

If the tube size is the same, then maybe the turbulance and change in air flow caused by the stock air box is the problem. I would like to see results with the stock air box with the filter taken out. An elbow with a cone filter is then used instead.

I have another question on the CAI. Is there a way you can modify the filter so that it is not so loud? Seems like there would be a way to have free flowing air that is more quiet.

Greg
TurboRex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2002, 12:18 PM   #17
nhluhr
John Wayne Toilet Paper
Moderator
 
Member#: 7327
Join Date: Jun 2001
Chapter/Region: NWIC
Location: Seattle, WA
Vehicle:
2008 Mazdaspeed3
2006 Wrangler Sport

Default

Quote:
Originally posted by WRBLUEWAGON
The power meter is a toy. So those numbers are high. I could think his is getting good numbers with a big turbo but 20hp from the intake is just off
I totally believe that Al got 20hp by adding the intake. However, his car was already so modified that the intake was becoming a restriction.

Quote:
Originally posted by WRBLUEWAGON
I thought the same, but if you think about it, the larger tube, while flowing more air overall, will have a lower velocity, so less gets measured within X-time (as I was told here).

You are starting to see the problem
Well, the WRX maf uses a heated wire MAF. This means that with a bigger tube, the maf will see a lower air velocity and thus lower cooling for the same amount of air. Since the MAF is reading less air, the ECU injects enough fuel for the reading... BUT there is actually MORE air than the maf is reading so the engine is lean. I don't see the problem here...

Leaner means more heat/detonation, better fuel economy, slightly more power. CEL's too if you're lucky.
nhluhr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2002, 12:25 PM   #18
nhluhr
John Wayne Toilet Paper
Moderator
 
Member#: 7327
Join Date: Jun 2001
Chapter/Region: NWIC
Location: Seattle, WA
Vehicle:
2008 Mazdaspeed3
2006 Wrangler Sport

Default more

also, since the wire is a heated element, I'm assuming the MAF works by monitoring the voltage require to keep the wire heated to a certain temp. More voltage required = more air cooling the wire.

Alternatively, it might measure the resistance through wire, which will increase with temperature. So if the air is not flowing fast, the temp of the wire is high and resistance is high. Thus, you'd get lower resistance at higher cfm through the intake.

The actual method the factory maf uses is unknown to me. Jon [in CT] please chime in if you know!
nhluhr is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Lot's of magazines: Sport Compact, Turbo High Tech Performance.... blackturbo Tri-State Area Private Classifieds 1 05-25-2009 10:26 PM
TURBO& HIGH TECH PERFORMANCE MAGAZINE is done tekfoc General Community 22 12-07-2008 06:06 AM
January Issue of Turbo & High Tech ERaab212 Tri-State Area Forum 23 11-07-2004 04:23 AM
Super Street, Import Tuner, Turbo and High Performance and Sport Compact Car Magazine VolkWRX Private 'For Sale' Classifieds 0 09-25-2003 11:16 PM
Jan '02 issue - "Automobile" magazine ScoobieRu Tri-State Area Forum 8 12-22-2001 12:17 PM


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


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Powered by Searchlight © 2014 Axivo Inc.
Copyright ©1999 - 2014, North American Subaru Impreza Owners Club, Inc.