gt3 induction filter
Discussion
might be worth a look gang if it goes cheap enough, im running one of these and it seems to be good (as supplied by parr)
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/BMC-GT3-CUP-con
as ever, its nothing to do with me, blah blah blather blather...
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/BMC-GT3-CUP-con
as ever, its nothing to do with me, blah blah blather blather...
Nervy
Thanks a lot for alerting the world and his wife to this.
I have been stalking this for the last 2 days, now the price is bound to go through the roof.
Apart from the filter have any other mods been done to make the filter fit/operate properly?? I have been told that without a proper shroud deflecting air straight into it, the filter sucks in air from above the engine that is far hotter than ideal for thecombustion process.
Regards
Thanks a lot for alerting the world and his wife to this.
I have been stalking this for the last 2 days, now the price is bound to go through the roof. Apart from the filter have any other mods been done to make the filter fit/operate properly?? I have been told that without a proper shroud deflecting air straight into it, the filter sucks in air from above the engine that is far hotter than ideal for thecombustion process.
Regards
Edited by paulburrell on Tuesday 8th August 16:59
Crikey thats cheap. bought mine from tech 9 & think it was XX times more.
Ive retained std air mass meter and consequently had to have a bracket made to help support the filter, as opposed to bolting direct onto intake. When I say bracket< i think we used a spare bit of mecchano, its that simple. Perhaps Parr supply bracket as well?
makes the car sound fantastic if u have a std exhaust like mine> brilliant bit of kit< although ano told me that it eventually causes the airflow mass meter to fail _ who cares its sounds great.
Ive retained std air mass meter and consequently had to have a bracket made to help support the filter, as opposed to bolting direct onto intake. When I say bracket< i think we used a spare bit of mecchano, its that simple. Perhaps Parr supply bracket as well?
makes the car sound fantastic if u have a std exhaust like mine> brilliant bit of kit< although ano told me that it eventually causes the airflow mass meter to fail _ who cares its sounds great.
ricardo60 said:
Crikey thats cheap. bought mine from tech 9 & think it was XX times more.
Ive retained std air mass meter and consequently had to have a bracket made to help support the filter, as opposed to bolting direct onto intake. When I say bracket< i think we used a spare bit of mecchano, its that simple. Perhaps Parr supply bracket as well?
makes the car sound fantastic if u have a std exhaust like mine> brilliant bit of kit< although ano told me that it eventually causes the airflow mass meter to fail _ who cares its sounds great.
Ive retained std air mass meter and consequently had to have a bracket made to help support the filter, as opposed to bolting direct onto intake. When I say bracket< i think we used a spare bit of mecchano, its that simple. Perhaps Parr supply bracket as well?
makes the car sound fantastic if u have a std exhaust like mine> brilliant bit of kit< although ano told me that it eventually causes the airflow mass meter to fail _ who cares its sounds great.
I've also got one of these on my car ( already fitted when i bought it ), they are fantastic for the induction noise alone.
A couple of questions, do they need to be re-oiled and what happens when the airflow mass meter fails ??
I don't think they are worth having in isolation. Just had my car dynoed, and compared to a GT3 with stock air filter, htough I had a higher peak BHP figure at redline, there was quite a big loss at around 4500 rpm - however, with a cargraphic header system, the exhaust play a part too. My car already had it on, but I believe a few people have found that the cone filters don't enhance performance - it doesn't help that they are taking in warmer air from the engine bay. The stock set up takes air from the duct in the engine lid and is a few degrees cooler.
Sorry to piss on your parade, but I think they look 'cool'~ish, but wont add one iota of performance.
Sorry to piss on your parade, but I think they look 'cool'~ish, but wont add one iota of performance.
lsb said:
ricardo60 said:
Crikey thats cheap. bought mine from tech 9 & think it was XX times more.
Ive retained std air mass meter and consequently had to have a bracket made to help support the filter, as opposed to bolting direct onto intake. When I say bracket< i think we used a spare bit of mecchano, its that simple. Perhaps Parr supply bracket as well?
makes the car sound fantastic if u have a std exhaust like mine> brilliant bit of kit< although ano told me that it eventually causes the airflow mass meter to fail _ who cares its sounds great.
Ive retained std air mass meter and consequently had to have a bracket made to help support the filter, as opposed to bolting direct onto intake. When I say bracket< i think we used a spare bit of mecchano, its that simple. Perhaps Parr supply bracket as well?
makes the car sound fantastic if u have a std exhaust like mine> brilliant bit of kit< although ano told me that it eventually causes the airflow mass meter to fail _ who cares its sounds great.
I've also got one of these on my car ( already fitted when i bought it ), they are fantastic for the induction noise alone.
A couple of questions, do they need to be re-oiled and what happens when the airflow mass meter fails ??
cause - is meant to be particles from the cone filter getting thru and blocking up meter (err
I know a man who can tell u why it causes failure!) symptoms - and here im stronger having had two fail on me
, hesitation, flat spot, general lethargy repair - new mass meter, circa £450 fitted opc. Or, u can trace the original part from Bosch circa £70 and get a mate whose handy to fit it. My mate only told me after id gone down the opc route
Not sure about oiling _ i'll ask me mate!!
johnfm said:
I don't think they are worth having in isolation. Just had my car dynoed, and compared to a GT3 with stock air filter, htough I had a higher peak BHP figure at redline, there was quite a big loss at around 4500 rpm - however, with a cargraphic header system, the exhaust play a part too. My car already had it on, but I believe a few people have found that the cone filters don't enhance performance - it doesn't help that they are taking in warmer air from the engine bay. The stock set up takes air from the duct in the engine lid and is a few degrees cooler.
Sorry to piss on your parade, but I think they look 'cool'~ish, but wont add one iota of performance.
Sorry to piss on your parade, but I think they look 'cool'~ish, but wont add one iota of performance.
agree johnfm _ without the exhaust not expecting more power> be dissapointed if lost power when pressing on though. I really wanted the sound and at the price i paid im happy (for now).
ricardo60 said:
cause - is meant to be particles from the cone filter getting thru and blocking up meter (err
I know a man who can tell u why it causes failure!) symptoms - and here im stronger having had two fail on me
, hesitation, flat spot, general lethargy repair - new mass meter, circa £450 fitted opc. Or, u can trace the original part from Bosch circa £70 and get a mate whose handy to fit it. My mate only told me after id gone down the opc route
Not sure about oiling _ i'll ask me mate!!
Thanks for the reply, please let me know about the oiling !!
johnfm _ I've also got a techart 100 cell cat exhaust system fitted with the bmc filter, i would hope these two together would add a little more power but haven't tested it so could not say - sounds fantastic though !!
paulburrell said:
Nervy
Thanks a lot for alerting the world and his wife to this. I have been stalking this for the last 2 days, now the price is bound to go through the roof.
Apart from the filter have any other mods been done to make the filter fit/operate properly?? I have been told that without a proper shroud deflecting air straight into it, the filter sucks in air from above the engine that is far hotter than ideal for thecombustion process.
Regards
Thanks a lot for alerting the world and his wife to this.
I have been stalking this for the last 2 days, now the price is bound to go through the roof. Apart from the filter have any other mods been done to make the filter fit/operate properly?? I have been told that without a proper shroud deflecting air straight into it, the filter sucks in air from above the engine that is far hotter than ideal for thecombustion process.
Regards
Edited by paulburrell on Tuesday 8th August 16:59
oh brother, I'm sorry. *cough* use an e-sniper and you'll win it, never fails *cough*
my filter has been fitted in conjunction with another exhaust and an uprated ecu thingy so I'm guessing it makes slightly more difference than the one fitted to John boys car.
as for the induction of hot air, Ive fabricated a shroud that attempts to stop heat soak, though if I'm honest I'm not sure its any way necessary. vital in wasting a happy Sunday afternoon though. mine is also distanced from the engine as much as possible by putting a length of samco hose in between the MAF and the filter. again, i betcha the difference is negligible. BUT, and i feel this is vital to note, blue hose looks good.
I had an interesting day at 9M yesterday. While waiting for my car to be serviced, me and Colin did a few pulls on the dyno.
It wsa interesting to do runs without the 'big blue elbow pipe thing' that nervous refers too. Colin suspects the 90 degree turn isn't great for inlet flow stability. This would only have the effect of giving slight MAF errors, as I believe the MAFs accuracy is better in laminar air flow. I was able to compare my corrected runs with a couple of other GT3s. Notably, Adrien's MK1 had much stronger mid range TQ, at about 5K revs. I was running 95 octane fuel though (don't ask why!!), so that may have had an influence.
I would love the time to dyno my car with stock inlet/cargraphic and also try stock inlet/stock exhaust.
Either way, I am very annoyed that I filled up at a station with no 98 octane, so the dyno run was done with 95 octane fuel. I will be returning with 98 to see if the difference felt in the midrange with 98 fule is reflected o nthe dyno plot.
Most pertinent point of the day wsa that peak HP figure is great for marketing. Its really interesting to compare total area under the TQ curve for different motors.
PS Colin's new 4.0 litre engine looked very, very interesting!!
It wsa interesting to do runs without the 'big blue elbow pipe thing' that nervous refers too. Colin suspects the 90 degree turn isn't great for inlet flow stability. This would only have the effect of giving slight MAF errors, as I believe the MAFs accuracy is better in laminar air flow. I was able to compare my corrected runs with a couple of other GT3s. Notably, Adrien's MK1 had much stronger mid range TQ, at about 5K revs. I was running 95 octane fuel though (don't ask why!!), so that may have had an influence.
I would love the time to dyno my car with stock inlet/cargraphic and also try stock inlet/stock exhaust.
Either way, I am very annoyed that I filled up at a station with no 98 octane, so the dyno run was done with 95 octane fuel. I will be returning with 98 to see if the difference felt in the midrange with 98 fule is reflected o nthe dyno plot.
Most pertinent point of the day wsa that peak HP figure is great for marketing. Its really interesting to compare total area under the TQ curve for different motors.
PS Colin's new 4.0 litre engine looked very, very interesting!!
nervous said:
paulburrell said:
Nervy
Thanks a lot for alerting the world and his wife to this. I have been stalking this for the last 2 days, now the price is bound to go through the roof.
Apart from the filter have any other mods been done to make the filter fit/operate properly?? I have been told that without a proper shroud deflecting air straight into it, the filter sucks in air from above the engine that is far hotter than ideal for thecombustion process.
Regards
Thanks a lot for alerting the world and his wife to this.
I have been stalking this for the last 2 days, now the price is bound to go through the roof. Apart from the filter have any other mods been done to make the filter fit/operate properly?? I have been told that without a proper shroud deflecting air straight into it, the filter sucks in air from above the engine that is far hotter than ideal for thecombustion process.
Regards
Edited by paulburrell on Tuesday 8th August 16:59
oh brother, I'm sorry. *cough* use an e-sniper and you'll win it, never fails *cough*
my filter has been fitted in conjunction with another exhaust and an uprated ecu thingy so I'm guessing it makes slightly more difference than the one fitted to John boys car.
as for the induction of hot air, Ive fabricated a shroud that attempts to stop heat soak, though if I'm honest I'm not sure its any way necessary. vital in wasting a happy Sunday afternoon though. mine is also distanced from the engine as much as possible by putting a length of samco hose in between the MAF and the filter. again, i betcha the difference is negligible. BUT, and i feel this is vital to note, blue hose looks good.
mines carbonfibre (look
) - does that trump blue?johnfm _ do u mind me asking about the bhp & torque readings only an exhaust is my next move> what do u meam by laminair (as opposed to the elbow< which I think Ive got as well)
also, and I fear this has been covered loads of times but im tired and have a sales meeting to run 2morrow, but do u have to get it remapped to get the best out of exhaust or will it deliver out of the box
also, and I fear this has been covered loads of times but im tired and have a sales meeting to run 2morrow, but do u have to get it remapped to get the best out of exhaust or will it deliver out of the box
ricardo
focus on you rsales meeting, its only a car!!
Re: exhaust, I'd say they are always a compromise. Depending on design, they may improve TQ either mid range, or top end - but rarely both. I am no expert, and will happily be corrected, but I believe you can gain meaningful and noticable improvements with exhaust and mapping, but a bolt on solution is unlikely.
At the end of the day, most people's real aim is just to get a fruitier exhaust sound. If you can afford it, get it to one of the clever people (ie Parr, JZ or 9M or others)to optimise the fuelling to match the harmonics of your particular inlet/cam/exhaust combination..
..but what do I know!!
focus on you rsales meeting, its only a car!!
Re: exhaust, I'd say they are always a compromise. Depending on design, they may improve TQ either mid range, or top end - but rarely both. I am no expert, and will happily be corrected, but I believe you can gain meaningful and noticable improvements with exhaust and mapping, but a bolt on solution is unlikely.
At the end of the day, most people's real aim is just to get a fruitier exhaust sound. If you can afford it, get it to one of the clever people (ie Parr, JZ or 9M or others)to optimise the fuelling to match the harmonics of your particular inlet/cam/exhaust combination..
..but what do I know!!
nervous said:
paulburrell said:
Nervy
Thanks a lot for alerting the world and his wife to this. I have been stalking this for the last 2 days, now the price is bound to go through the roof.
Apart from the filter have any other mods been done to make the filter fit/operate properly?? I have been told that without a proper shroud deflecting air straight into it, the filter sucks in air from above the engine that is far hotter than ideal for thecombustion process.
Regards
Thanks a lot for alerting the world and his wife to this.
I have been stalking this for the last 2 days, now the price is bound to go through the roof. Apart from the filter have any other mods been done to make the filter fit/operate properly?? I have been told that without a proper shroud deflecting air straight into it, the filter sucks in air from above the engine that is far hotter than ideal for thecombustion process.
Regards
Edited by paulburrell on Tuesday 8th August 16:59
oh brother, I'm sorry. *cough* use an e-sniper and you'll win it, never fails *cough*
my filter has been fitted in conjunction with another exhaust and an uprated ecu thingy so I'm guessing it makes slightly more difference than the one fitted to John boys car.
as for the induction of hot air, Ive fabricated a shroud that attempts to stop heat soak, though if I'm honest I'm not sure its any way necessary. vital in wasting a happy Sunday afternoon though. mine is also distanced from the engine as much as possible by putting a length of samco hose in between the MAF and the filter. again, i betcha the difference is negligible. BUT, and i feel this is vital to note, blue hose looks good.
so if you have no talent, what do you need all that crap for???
Steve....it was nervy who advised me on Parr.
t that i am.johnfm said:
It wsa interesting to do runs without the 'big blue elbow pipe thing' that nervous refers too. Colin suspects the 90 degree turn isn't great for inlet flow stability. This would only have the effect of giving slight MAF errors, as I believe the MAFs accuracy is better in laminar air flow. I was able to compare my corrected runs with a couple of other GT3s. Notably, Adrien's MK1 had much stronger mid range TQ, at about 5K revs. I was running 95 octane fuel though (don't ask why!!), so that may have had an influence.
so, how do i go about ascertaining whether i should change the shape of the pipe or not? or are you running again to work it out? i agree with you in principal about the air flow, would be interesting to see what a difference it makes.
Nervous
sorry 'bout email! Re-send it to phil@ , as he deals with editorial!
Ricardo
I have neither run a sales meeting nor aspire too. But, if it finances your 911 habit, more strength to your elbow & good luck for tomorrow. THe only advice I can offer for a sales meeting is:
1. Buy low and sell high!! or
2. Go out there, guys, and sell alot!!!!
Hope that helps!
sorry 'bout email! Re-send it to phil@ , as he deals with editorial!
Ricardo
I have neither run a sales meeting nor aspire too. But, if it finances your 911 habit, more strength to your elbow & good luck for tomorrow. THe only advice I can offer for a sales meeting is:
1. Buy low and sell high!! or
2. Go out there, guys, and sell alot!!!!
Hope that helps!
johnfm said:
I had an interesting day at 9M yesterday. While waiting for my car to be serviced, me and Colin did a few pulls on the dyno.
It wsa interesting to do runs without the 'big blue elbow pipe thing' that nervous refers too. Colin suspects the 90 degree turn isn't great for inlet flow stability. This would only have the effect of giving slight MAF errors, as I believe the MAFs accuracy is better in laminar air flow. I was able to compare my corrected runs with a couple of other GT3s. Notably, Adrien's MK1 had much stronger mid range TQ, at about 5K revs. I was running 95 octane fuel though (don't ask why!!), so that may have had an influence.
I would love the time to dyno my car with stock inlet/cargraphic and also try stock inlet/stock exhaust.
Either way, I am very annoyed that I filled up at a station with no 98 octane, so the dyno run was done with 95 octane fuel. I will be returning with 98 to see if the difference felt in the midrange with 98 fule is reflected o nthe dyno plot.
Most pertinent point of the day wsa that peak HP figure is great for marketing. Its really interesting to compare total area under the TQ curve for different motors.
PS Colin's new 4.0 litre engine looked very, very interesting!!
It wsa interesting to do runs without the 'big blue elbow pipe thing' that nervous refers too. Colin suspects the 90 degree turn isn't great for inlet flow stability. This would only have the effect of giving slight MAF errors, as I believe the MAFs accuracy is better in laminar air flow. I was able to compare my corrected runs with a couple of other GT3s. Notably, Adrien's MK1 had much stronger mid range TQ, at about 5K revs. I was running 95 octane fuel though (don't ask why!!), so that may have had an influence.
I would love the time to dyno my car with stock inlet/cargraphic and also try stock inlet/stock exhaust.
Either way, I am very annoyed that I filled up at a station with no 98 octane, so the dyno run was done with 95 octane fuel. I will be returning with 98 to see if the difference felt in the midrange with 98 fule is reflected o nthe dyno plot.
Most pertinent point of the day wsa that peak HP figure is great for marketing. Its really interesting to compare total area under the TQ curve for different motors.
PS Colin's new 4.0 litre engine looked very, very interesting!!
Hi John,
Interesting post. For reference, my Mk1 is completely standard in terms of the engine/intake/headers etc. We did several runs with both 10% wheel load and no load. Each time the dyno read almost identically - in fact the max figures were within 0.9hp of each other with identical torque readings. Given the consistency between both readings, I'm quite happy that the results were acceptably accurate (and within 5% margin for manufacturer claims, thankfully the +5% in this instance!). I can't remember what fuel I was running on the day, but it would have been either Optimax or Ultimate.
Cheers,
Adrien
Here's the plot...
Gassing Station | Porsche General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff