Mike's modified airbox experiment - cold airtastic!
- Thread starter Mike Roberts
- Start date
Ive got an innovate ot2 which is handy for OE parameter logging http://www.innovatemotorsports.com/products/ot2.php
I went for this one as Ive got alot of their other products, and they are all modular, with universal software. The OT2 has an input and output, so for eg can use it with knock detection hardware and log and include a knock trace or with wideband lamdba etc .
Cheap at £120 or whatever it was.
I went for this one as Ive got alot of their other products, and they are all modular, with universal software. The OT2 has an input and output, so for eg can use it with knock detection hardware and log and include a knock trace or with wideband lamdba etc .
Cheap at £120 or whatever it was.
Cheers, Craig.
What parameters would you be looking at to see if and how this has made a difference?
What parameters would you be looking at to see if and how this has made a difference?
i love it when craig comes on . . . . he will answer any engine question 100% correct every time 
im gunna change ure "site trader" bit to Genius
im gunna change ure "site trader" bit to Genius Superb Craig.
Well, I'll crack on and see what I end up with - which will probably be nowt, but we can only try!
Well, I'll crack on and see what I end up with - which will probably be nowt, but we can only try!
mike
im goin to use me rs tuner and monitor different stuff over the coming week
ill report back here
im goin to use me rs tuner and monitor different stuff over the coming week
ill report back here
The innovate OT2 has an Iphone app to suplement it, it is laptop based really using USB or WiFi.
I have the devToaster app and the wifi dongle... Its really quite good!
I used it on the other half's mini and it ran quite slow but on the 197 its bang on!
I used it on the other half's mini and it ran quite slow but on the 197 its bang on!
Hi Mike, Looks like ive gone down the same road as you with the 2 x CAF on the 200, i posted this yesterday (mainly for Dotty to read)
I will be watching for your results!
Here was my post > > >
Over the last week ive done lots of testing with this theory of taking the lid off the airbox. A total of 516 miles of testing!
Now some of you are going to read it and think ‘well i knew that’ but i just wanted to test it for myself.
Doing runs at motorway speed with the speed limiter set at XXmph (keeping my foot to the floor in 6th gear) i would wait until i went over a fixed ‘bump’ in the tarmac and knock the limiter off, the car would then start accelerating hard until i hit another bump some ¼ mile down the road which is when i check the speed (on the GPS)
This test was done countless times with the lid on and with the lid off, also several times a day over the last week.
Result =
With the lid on it accelerated better/quicker, upto 12mph was the best difference.
I then had another look at the airbox set up on the 200 and decided i would do away with the 2nd air feed that ends next to the battery pulling in the warm air from the engine bay. I put my own pipe on this and ran it down to the lower grill near to the fog light. As ive only done a few runs with it like this i can only give the results so far which is same test as above with the lid on (OEM setup) then putting my CAF on gives another 3mph. Based on the results im going to be running mine with the lid on and with the 2nd CAF.
Plus side to having the airbox lid off, it sounds loads better, and thats it really as far as my tests found
I will be watching for your results!
Here was my post > > >
Over the last week ive done lots of testing with this theory of taking the lid off the airbox. A total of 516 miles of testing!
Now some of you are going to read it and think ‘well i knew that’ but i just wanted to test it for myself.
Doing runs at motorway speed with the speed limiter set at XXmph (keeping my foot to the floor in 6th gear) i would wait until i went over a fixed ‘bump’ in the tarmac and knock the limiter off, the car would then start accelerating hard until i hit another bump some ¼ mile down the road which is when i check the speed (on the GPS)
This test was done countless times with the lid on and with the lid off, also several times a day over the last week.
Result =
With the lid on it accelerated better/quicker, upto 12mph was the best difference.
I then had another look at the airbox set up on the 200 and decided i would do away with the 2nd air feed that ends next to the battery pulling in the warm air from the engine bay. I put my own pipe on this and ran it down to the lower grill near to the fog light. As ive only done a few runs with it like this i can only give the results so far which is same test as above with the lid on (OEM setup) then putting my CAF on gives another 3mph. Based on the results im going to be running mine with the lid on and with the 2nd CAF.
Plus side to having the airbox lid off, it sounds loads better, and thats it really as far as my tests found
Cool, thanks.
I know it is unscientific, but it does go some way to support a theory that as much cold air as you can get is the best for the engine.. The lid-off was always a bad idea in my eyes, as it can only get access to hot engine bay air.
Hopefully I can expand on your 2nd CAF test with some data logging soon and see if it matches your findings.
I know it is unscientific, but it does go some way to support a theory that as much cold air as you can get is the best for the engine.. The lid-off was always a bad idea in my eyes, as it can only get access to hot engine bay air.
Hopefully I can expand on your 2nd CAF test with some data logging soon and see if it matches your findings.
I did something similar with a set of maha rollers and different air filters.
What we found from this is a large(r) or second cold air feed to a panel filter has the most volumetric efficiency and gave most gain in terms of torque and hp which was all dyno proven.
I can't express how crucial cold dense air is to complete combustion and the prevention of knock.
What we found from this is a large(r) or second cold air feed to a panel filter has the most volumetric efficiency and gave most gain in terms of torque and hp which was all dyno proven.
I can't express how crucial cold dense air is to complete combustion and the prevention of knock.
We ran logs on intake temps while doing a dyno run here in Johannesburg. Altitude about 1600m above sealevel, time was between 12:11 and 12:50. Temperature was around 32 - 34 degrees C.
Intake temps reached a high of 74 degrees C during run resulting in a reading of around 10kW (13.3hp) less than a previous run when the car was cooler earlier in the morning. Allowed the engine to cool down and sprayed some cool water over the intake and plenum and got the intake temps down to 54 degrees C with resultant gain in 11kW (14.67hp).
It is a fact that this engine suffers from heatsoak and up here at altitude in the thin air and heat it is much more pronounced.
Eh?
Please stop picking holes in everything I post. The secondary cold air feed made the engine more efficient, the colder and denser the air (good volumetric efficiency ) the better for engine performance.
Was the point I was trying to make.
