PDA

View Full Version : Cone filters and IATs Data



pbcrazy
12-15-2014, 01:41 PM
For those of you not aware, there has been an argument about cone filters and the effect on the performance on our cars for quite a while. Many people think that the heat shields do not do a good job at keeping out heat from the turbo/exhaust next to the air filters, causing the cone filters to just pull in hot air and raising IATs (and lowering performance because of it). I did a simple test to see if we can either put this myth to rest or prove the theory. (Please note I do have a FMIC which may skew the results a bit). Ambient temperature stayed constant at about 53*F

I drove 15 minutes from my house to an open stretch of highway with an empty parking lot next to it, I drove completely normally. Once I got to the parking lot I stopped and set up my laptop and took the first reading (took about a minute to set up laptop). You are looking at the last number (second temp, 25.5*):
http://i1194.photobucket.com/albums/aa376/pbcrazy96/Capture22_zpse836c3b5.jpg

Then I idling the car for 5 additional minutes to simulate a couple of stop lights or traffic (as one of the major arguments is the IATs will skyrocket in traffic):
http://i1194.photobucket.com/albums/aa376/pbcrazy96/Traffic_zps42290ec9.jpg

Then I drove a bit until the IATs dropped down to the starting 25.5*C, then did a 20-60 mph pull and took readings about 1 minute after: http://i1194.photobucket.com/albums/aa376/pbcrazy96/pull11min_zps1db89b31.jpg

I continued to let the car idle for 3 more minutes after the pull:
http://i1194.photobucket.com/albums/aa376/pbcrazy96/run16min_zps85431c39.jpg

And 2 more minutes (A total of 6 minutes since the run):
http://i1194.photobucket.com/albums/aa376/pbcrazy96/run14min_zpsb9b78a7c.jpg

And after a 10-15 minute drive back home:
http://i1194.photobucket.com/albums/aa376/pbcrazy96/Home_zpsf94cdf58.jpg

I did a second pull again about 20-60 but I did not snip the VCDS data as it was nearly identical to the first pull (only difference was 1 minute after pull was 25.5*C, the rest of the measures ended up being the same at 31.5*).

In normal conditions even with 6 minutes of idling consecutively I only saw a temperature increase of 3*C. The highest increase in temperature happened sitting for 6 minutes after a 20-60mph pull, and was about 6*C. I don't have a stock airbox to compare this too, but I am not seeing the any significant increase in temp, and definitely not an increase worth noting in terms of performance.

GrapeBandit
12-15-2014, 01:54 PM
[up]too bad you didnt have a stock airbox to compare the results to. like you said, theres really no significant increase in temps that would seem to hurt performance.

now lets see your filter/heat shield setup

Mad Cow
12-15-2014, 02:03 PM
What's the ambient temperature? That's a really important thing to consider. Underhood temps can get pretty serious on a hot sunny day.

pbcrazy
12-15-2014, 02:07 PM
[up]too bad you didnt have a stock airbox to compare the results to. like you said, theres really no significant increase in temps that would seem to hurt performance.

now lets see your filter/heat shield setup

Only decent picture I have, though the heatshield is not particularly visible.
http://i1194.photobucket.com/albums/aa376/pbcrazy96/IMG_1349_zps13dad9b7.jpg
And I crappy one I just took (it's dark outside):
http://i1194.photobucket.com/albums/aa376/pbcrazy96/Mobile%20Uploads/image_zps72a426ba.jpg


What's the ambient temperature? That's a really important thing to consider. Underhood temps can get pretty serious on a hot sunny day.
You are completely correct, forgot to write that. It was 53*F (edited original post to add)

pbcrazy
12-15-2014, 02:10 PM
If anybody has the stock airbox and can do a similar test, It would be nice to compare data to get a more accurate conclusion.

GrapeBandit
12-15-2014, 02:12 PM
yours is about the same size as mine. what did you use for the heat resistance? the DEI silver stuff? I used heatshieldproducts.com lava shield. its made from crushed lava rocks. its pretty good stuff. i wish I had vagcom, id love to do comparisons like you did.

pbcrazy
12-15-2014, 02:16 PM
yours is about the same size as mine. what did you use for the heat resistance? the DEI silver stuff? I used heatshieldproducts.com lava shield. its made from crushed lava rocks. its pretty good stuff. i wish I had vagcom, id love to do comparisons like you did.

Heatshield products regular reflective mat. Nearly the same specs as the volcanic mat you have, but costs 1/3 of the price (but doesn't look as nifty)

GrapeBandit
12-15-2014, 02:43 PM
Heatshield products regular reflective mat. Nearly the same specs as the volcanic mat you have, but costs 1/3 of the price (but doesn't look as nifty)

haha, I paid like half price for mine. I found a seller on amazon that had it for sale. I always shop around for the best deals if I can

Seerlah
12-15-2014, 03:31 PM
54*F isn't credible. You need a blazing hot 90*+ summer day for a real test. 85*F minimum.

Where those tests taken with the heat shield?

pbcrazy
12-15-2014, 04:23 PM
54*F isn't credible. You need a blazing hot 90*+ summer day for a real test. 85*F minimum.

Where those tests taken with the heat shield?

I disagree. The IATs for any system, open filter or closed, will rise in the summer. So obviously the temps will be higher, but it could be assumed the change would be proportional to the outside temp (not tested, but it would make since).And besides, Virginia rarely gets to 85*+, 54 is a much more likely daily temp.

Mad Cow
12-15-2014, 07:32 PM
I disagree. The IATs for any system, open filter or closed, will rise in the summer. So obviously the temps will be higher, but it could be assumed the change would be proportional to the outside temp (not tested, but it would make since).

Colder ambient air is able to absorb a whole lot more heat than already hot air, same goes for everything else metal under the hood. Right now I could do 20 back to back WOT pulls and the IM would still probably be slightly warm to the touch, but get stuck in traffic for 10 minutes on a 30c day and I wouldn't be able to hold my hand on it for more than a few seconds. When you do a test like this you need a worst case scenario because that's what the stock airbox is designed to do.

aysix
12-15-2014, 07:42 PM
Can you log 3rd from 3k to redline?

aysix
12-15-2014, 07:48 PM
Here's a log with the same turbo but on a passat with stock intercooler/airbox if you want to compare. This was taken jan 31 in vegas last year...probably mid low 50's outside.

http://i.imgur.com/nZibf0R.png

pbcrazy
12-15-2014, 08:10 PM
Colder ambient air is able to absorb a whole lot more heat than already hot air, same goes for everything else metal under the hood. Right now I could do 20 back to back WOT pulls and the IM would still probably be slightly warm to the touch, but get stuck in traffic for 10 minutes on a 30c day and I wouldn't be able to hold my hand on it for more than a few seconds. When you do a test like this you need a worst case scenario because that's what the stock airbox is designed to do.

Not everyday is a worst case scenario. It would be stupid to do a test on performance where temperatures are at an all time high for the year to begin with, cars run and perform the best in colder temperatures so the largest performance change would be in colder temps for IATs. The entire point of this experiment and the point behind the argument that you lose power with a cone filter is that IATs will rise enough to change the performance of the car, you are not going to get the best performance out of a car on a 30*C day after sitting in traffic for 10 minutes regardless of the intake system.

And yes, on hot days the metal in the engine will heat up faster than on colder days, causing the intake air to rise in temp due to being pulled/pushed through already hot intercooler/piping/intake manifold. But that is the same for a stock airbox, which is why I believe these results are accurate of an even higher degree day.

Poopie
12-15-2014, 10:38 PM
IATs are influenced the heat exchange occurring at the intercooler more than the positive or negative effects of a cone filter. Every little bit helps, but the real hero is the intercooler. You will see the benefits more of the fmic in the summer when you are relying on the surface area rather than the temperature delta you are seeing in the winter.

If you had an undersized fmic where it is heat soaking because it is absorbing heat rather than dissipating, you may see the difference a cone filter has.

Stock airboxes are well designed. Not sure whey everyone is in a rush to get rid of them in turbo cars. The baffles reduce turbulence which is better for maf readings. The high surface area due to the pleat density of conventional panel filters also flow very well. Maybe you can gain some performance by pulling air from a cooler spot, but you still need a good filter to help flow for peak power.

viceprp
12-16-2014, 03:59 AM
IATs are influenced the heat exchange occurring at the intercooler more than the positive or negative effects of a cone filter. Every little bit helps, but the real hero is the intercooler. You will see the benefits more of the fmic in the summer when you are relying on the surface area rather than the temperature delta you are seeing in the winter.

If you had an undersized fmic where it is heat soaking because it is absorbing heat rather than dissipating, you may see the difference a cone filter has.

Stock airboxes are well designed. Not sure whey everyone is in a rush to get rid of them in turbo cars. The baffles reduce turbulence which is better for maf readings. The high surface area due to the pleat density of conventional panel filters also flow very well. Maybe you can gain some performance by pulling air from a cooler spot, but you still need a good filter to help flow for peak power.

Yes, the cone filter mod on a maf setup is simply for show. IAT will be skewed due to the FMIC and the only true way to test this is with preturbo readings.

pbcrazy
12-16-2014, 09:35 AM
Yes, the cone filter mod on a maf setup is simply for show. IAT will be skewed due to the FMIC and the only true way to test this is with preturbo readings.

My set up does not allow me to run the stock airbox without modification, so I opted for a cone filter. The FMIC could have potentially skewed results as mention, which is why I think we need someone with ideally a stock airbox and fmic to do a similar test (though SMIC would still work).

MetalMan
12-16-2014, 10:20 AM
The FMIC could have potentially skewed results as mention, which is why I think we need someone with ideally a stock airbox and fmic to do a similar test (though SMIC would still work).

Does that mean me? lol
Just like for my AEB car with FrankenTurbo, I'm working on a modified airbox lid for my AWM with FT to use 3" MAF housing. I Also have an applicable cone filter, high-flow filter for stock airbox, FMIC, BlinkTek heatshield, and Motoza logging suite for high-speed logging.

Too bad I don't have time these days...

alexvanlewen
12-16-2014, 12:16 PM
Does that mean me? lol
Just like for my AEB car with FrankenTurbo, I'm working on a modified airbox lid for my AWM with FT to use 3" MAF housing. I Also have an applicable cone filter, high-flow filter for stock airbox, FMIC, BlinkTek heatshield, and Motoza logging suite for high-speed logging.

Too bad I don't have time these days...

Sick, i wanna see your airbox when you're done, maybe even a tasty writeup. Do you like BlinkTek's shield? I'm on the fence.

S4NIK8
12-16-2014, 12:46 PM
Yes, the cone filter mod on a maf setup is simply for show. IAT will be skewed due to the FMIC and the only true way to test this is with preturbo readings.

Why are we concerned with pre turbo temps? If the post intercooler temps are an acceptable number does it matter what the pre turbo temps are?

Mad Cow
12-16-2014, 01:00 PM
Why are we concerned with pre turbo temps? If the post intercooler temps are an acceptable number does it matter what the pre turbo temps are?

The way I see it is pre-turbo temps account for any intercooler differences between setups, it's just better scientific method, ideally you'd measure both pre and post temps so you can also determine the intercooler efficiency. When the intercooler's operating more efficiently (cold ambient temps) pre-IC temps don't matter much, but when the IC's already heatsoaked pre-IC temps are pretty important.

pbcrazy
12-16-2014, 02:20 PM
Sure pre-turbo temps would be the most accurate way to compare, but without any means to do so easily tests like these should suffice.
FMICs will lower IATs, across all setups. Correct me if I'm wrong, but when you are looking at a change in temperature, you should compare the beginning temp (control) with the temp after testing is done. With an FMIC, the control temp will be lower than a SMIC. Therefore, the actual temperature readings will be lower but the change in temperature will remain relatively the same (factoring out heat soak, where with the stock airbox and a cone filter the temperatures will rise exponentially due to the intercooler constantly being hot).

If you really wanted to get technical, you could account for the added heat from the additional exhaust gases produced by my setup as I'm running higher boost with more fuel. But I really don't feel like calculating that [o_o]

viceprp
12-16-2014, 05:03 PM
Pre-turbo temp is the only way to test it properly.

It's isn't hard to figure out that a cone filter will have hotter IAT. The stock air box's only air is channeled in through the snorkel and into the turbo. While the cone filter uses the snorkel for SOME cool air and lots of stagnant heat from the motor. No matter the heat shield design, it will still find hot air being mixed pre-turbo.

Is it worth testing, not really. It's common sense that a stock position TIP cone filter won't perform better than a stock box.

pbcrazy
12-16-2014, 05:08 PM
It's isn't hard to figure out that a cone filter will have hotter IAT. The stock air box's only air is channeled in through the snorkel and into the turbo. While the cone filter uses the snorkel for SOME cool air and lots of stagnant heat from the motor. No matter the heat shield design, it will still find hot air being mixed pre-turbo.

Is it worth testing, not really. It's common sense that a stock position TIP cone filter won't perform better than a stock box.
Nobody is making an argument saying that IATs won't be higher with a cone filter, it's pretty obvious that the intake temps will be higher with a cone filter. The point is that
1. The change in IAT over a stock airbox will not be enough to make a measurable performance decrease (need somebody with a stock airbox to test this)
2. Cone filters will become heat soaked faster and kill IATs in traffic. I tested this and found no data to confirm this worth mentioning as shown by the data.

viceprp
12-16-2014, 05:54 PM
Nobody is making an argument saying that IATs won't be higher with a cone filter, it's pretty obvious that the intake temps will be higher with a cone filter. The point is that
1. The change in IAT over a stock airbox will not be enough to make a measurable performance decrease (need somebody with a stock airbox to test this)
2. Cone filters will become heat soaked faster and kill IATs in traffic. I tested this and found no data to confirm this worth mentioning as shown by the data.

1. It's a measurable difference. Not worth measuring, imo.
2. You tested in 50* and saw temps reaching 88*. It only tested how inefficient your fmic is.

It's not an arguement.

Poopie
12-16-2014, 07:58 PM
When you don't have any real options for inlets, you just live with the cone filter and make the rest of your set up more efficient to make up for it.

adam044
12-16-2014, 08:39 PM
Just go watch mighty car mods videos about pod filters and come filters on YouTube.

Davdraco1
12-16-2014, 09:21 PM
Just go watch mighty car mods videos about pod filters and come filters on YouTube.

This!

alexvanlewen
12-17-2014, 02:09 PM
Nobody is making an argument saying that IATs won't be higher with a cone filter, it's pretty obvious that the intake temps will be higher with a cone filter. The point is that
1. The change in IAT over a stock airbox will not be enough to make a measurable performance decrease (need somebody with a stock airbox to test this)
2. Cone filters will become heat soaked faster and kill IATs in traffic. I tested this and found no data to confirm this worth mentioning as shown by the data.
For this to be relative, you would have to reinstall the stock box into your car and test under the same conditions ie. Ambient air temp, and runs, etc.