Just wondering how many of you had made any kind of "cold air intake" for your turbo's and what kind of gain you saw out of them? I made one today and it didn't turn out too bad, I would have like to used a flare and used bigger pipe but the engine bay is already getting cramped. Let me know what you think of mine and what kind of gains/dissadvantages you have noticed with yours! And sorry about the cell phone pics, maybe one day I will get a nice camera...

I've alway wanted to do that but never got around to it. I was told that it's better to leave the pipe close to the turbo but not attached to it to allow air to come in from the sides also.

Why? So you can suck debris into the compressor wheel and fuck your turbo up?

Slo - Mine looks about like yours. I have never logged the temps with it on/off before. I keep meaning to just haven't got around to it. I may try and get it done this week.

I don't think that it really makes any difference.. after going through the turbo the air is "hot as balls". Using a good intercooler will do you just fine. I would be suprized to see temps be more than a degree or two different from any standard intake.

I made one out of my old AEM cai when I went turbo. I did notice with the short pipe/filter, the compressor housing would get hot really fast. After adding the cai, you could actually still touch the compressor housing after running. Sucking cool air from under the car beats sucking up hot engine air anyday in my book :thumbsup

I beg to differ on it not mattering, if it didn't matter then companies wouldn't offer aftermarket intakes for turbo cars. The cooler the air the more dense the air is so the more you can suck or cram into the intercooler. It may make only a couple of whp on a na car having a cold air intake vs a ram air intake, but I was wondering how big of a difference it would make on a boosted car. When I get MSnS up and running I will put the filter on the turbo inlet and make a pull and log intake temps and then do it with the "cold air" on and log intake temps and see what the difference is.

Company's offer a lot of "crap" you don't need. When driving down the road, air is constantly circulating around in your engine bay. Sure it will be hotter than the outside air, but with an intercooler it shouldn't make much difference in the end. The intercooler should take care of most if not all of your "air intake temperature" needs if it is sized properly.
Just because some company builds it doesn't mean it is worth something. Just look at all the crap on e-bay. If you are stupid enough to buy it, then so be it.

I am just saying, in MY opinion, take it for what it is, the effort to do this and risk sucking up water is not worth it for the miniscule temp difference you may see. And on that note, I would be interested in seeing anyones intake temps before and after this install. Using legitimate methods of course. Not just, " I felt my turbo"..

I agree there is crap on ebay but reputable companies make intakes and are dyno proven to make power on factory boosted cars, I will do some logs with msns and see what the difference is.

Its a great idea.

In SC you dont have to worry about sucking up water that much. I ran my Neon CAI filter 3" from the ground. Never had an issue.

Not to mention the minute amount of water it MAY suck up will get vaporized as soon as it hits the compressor wheel.

CAI's give dyno proven gains on factory turbo cars like Slo said.

Great idea, I dont think it cost that much, and it probably helps. Certainly cant hurt.

Should help out. I'd like to do it, but my cold pipe runs about where I'd need to run a large enough intake pipe. In theory, the cooler you can get the air pre-turbo, the less energy the compressor needs to compress it. I know underhood temps can probably vary 20 degrees vs. ambient, so there's that. FWIW, I've logged about 270*F post-turbo at 18psi on a 75* night, and about 90-95* post-charge cooler on a long highway pull.
On the other hand, there's the thought of restricting the compressor intake flow. The closer you have a filter element, the more able the compressor is to take air from wherever at any rate. If you have a long intake tube, you need to make sure it's adequately sized that you don't get pressure drops when under boost, or for quick-spooling turbos before the air can get a stable flow. Most engine bays can't take that size of tubing for descent power. If you're sub-250hp, then yeah, 3" would be okay, but I've got a restriction gauge off a GM on my turbo intake, and at 3" with a 10" tube at 15psi it's pulling a vacuum of about 3"Hg. Higher hp may need 'feeder' tubes 4"+ to get good volume flow, also kinda depends on DD vs. drag, etc.

Thats a VERY good point and also why I want to make another pipe like the FP version intake that flares out to 4". I will see how this works for now and possible get some vibrant reducers and make another one, this one litteraly took 10 min. to make. We'll see how it does.

A cold air intake for a turbo is nice, but it's much more cost effective when you factor in your labor to just get a better intercooler. Been there, done that.

What is a better intercooler than the Hahn FMIC? I thought it was susposed to be a pretty efficient one.

So I finally got around to doing some logs with the CAI on the turbo and I took it off and ran no filter. I didn't feel like trying to fit the filter back on the car just for 1 pull. Anyways I got some pretty good results I think. I tried to keep the coolant temps about the same and sprayed off the intercooler before each run to eliminate a heat soaked intercooler. Im running a cheap ebay core and it sucks as you can see. This was on a td05 20g at 20-21psi.

Results:
The turbo spool a consistently 100-150rpms sooner. Also peaked another .5-1psi of boost and held about .5psi more boost with the CAI on. This resulted in the car accelerating quicker, however the intake temps did not really change much. It seems like the temps were not increasing quite as fast but it was not that much different.

Here is a screen shot of both logs put together. The brighter lines are with the CAI on.

http://i189.photobucket.com/albums/z173/SilvrEclipse/MSlog-1.jpg?t=1247535196

Mine has been there for close to a year. I saw a big difference. Its not a linear difference so I cant say its 20* lower across the board but when its 80* outside my intake temps are around 70*. Same conditions without the pipe the intake temps were 90*-110*.

I guess you made my point for me. As for creating more boost, well I don't know how to explain that. Being that boost is for the most part entirely controlled by the wastegate, I am not sure why a CAI would cause you to boost more. Never the less, I think this proves with valid enough evidence that the time spent on building a CAI for a turbo with intercooler is not worth it. In my opinion of course. The worst hazard would be to suck in water. Which outways any mild gains you may see as a result.
You can never predict when you may be caught driving home in a downpour, or in flooded streets. You could just have someone drive by and hit a huge puddle next to you for that matter. I would rather play it safe and keep my intake as far from puddle sucking as possible.

Well i dont agree with you on there not being a value to it. Ait temps are very crucial to the power you make.

As far picking up water, with a turbo that generally isnt an issues because the turbo will atomize the water with the air. In fact many high hp cars do this intentionally to lower intake temps. Now if your submerging the filter underwater as you drive.....you have driving issues. I have been caught in many downpours as have many of my friends and if you search the internet, its not an issue liek you think it is.

Originally posted by bzoss
I guess you made my point for me. As for creating more boost, well I don't know how to explain that. Being that boost is for the most part entirely controlled by the wastegate, I am not sure why a CAI would cause you to boost more.

You must differentiate between PRESSURE and TEMPERATURE.

The wastegate is pressure dependent. Now if you hold pressure constant, decreasing temperature necessitates increasing density (more oxygen in the intake charge.) Therefore, a reduced temp equates to increased power, in addition to the obvious benefit of making the combustion environment less susceptible to detonation.

I dont know how anyone can say that a CAI is worthless. I thought my log pretty much proved that it did help out quite a bit as you can see how much faster the rpms rise compared to the run without it.

I typically dont like to use the HP calculator on MS but according to that I gained 10hp with it on. And I have never not driven the car because of rain. I just drive it easy and avoid going threw any puddles and I have never had a problem.

The temperatures didn't change though..

Why does that matter? The turbo is going to heat the air up a lot anyways but with the CAI the turbo is getting cooler air which allows it to push more air at the same boost level. The test was does it lower intake air temps. Well in my test no, it did not. But maybe in other situations it might. Maybe if the car was ran for a long period of time and the engine bay was super hot a CAI would lower temps.

But we still have proof that a CAI did gain some HP. Im sure a better intercooler would help out a lot to.

I was responding to the other guy talking about the more dense air charge...

In your case, that wasn't really applicable.
Look, I am not arguing the fact there may be gains. And, Sure some people like a little water in their intake to help cool things, just not gobs of it.
What I am saying that for someone that drives around daily, not looking to pull every ounce of power that they can muster from their car it will not ever really matter.
If you have the time and energy to put into it, go for it. I will never waste the time.
One of the guys above brought up a good point though. If you are going to run that long of an intake to your turbo, it needs to be massive to keep up with the turbo. By massive I mean >3" minimum. It just doesn't make sense to me to do it.
If you do want to pull every ounce out of your car, and do it that way. Go for it. My opinion remains. You can't post a question about this and then rebuttal anyone who gives a difference in your initial opinion. Just take it for what it is, if you like it use it, if not move on.

Originally posted by bzoss
I was responding to the other guy talking about the more dense air charge...

Originally posted by bzoss
The temperatures didn't change though..

No, the temperatures DO change. You are getting hung up on the fact that the turbo is increasing temperatures, and drawing the incorrect conclusion that the CAI didn't contribute to reduced temps going into the engine. That's false. Remember, the increase in temperature resulting from the compressor is additive to the intake temp.

The output of the compressor will be even hotter if the input into the compressor is hot.

Originally posted by SilvrEclips
... however the intake temps did not really change much. It seems like the temps were not increasing quite as fast but it was not that much different. Here is a screen shot of both logs put together. The brighter lines are with the CAI on. http://i189.photobucket.com/albums/z173/SilvrEclipse/MSlog-1.jpg?t=1247535196

Read the whole post. This guy logged temps on MS and found there to be "no real change".

Therefore, all this denser charge crap and lower temps are not valid. Which brings me back to my first statement of "I don't see it making much difference with a good intercooler". And, well it didn't make much difference.
Again, spend the time if you want. I don't advise it because I see minimal gain for the effort.

Originally posted by bzoss
Therefore, all this denser charge crap and lower temps are not valid.

True in an economic sense it may not be worth the time investment. However it is important for you to note that compressor efficiency is proportional to the inlet temperature and density as well as the pressure ratio, if we are talking about a isentropic efficiency. You would know this if you were a Mechanical Engineer and have studied fluid dynamics and thermodynamics of turbomachinery.

As a matter of fact I am a Mechanical Engineer.

We can talk specifics if you want, but there are many factors to take into account. You can not immediately consider this isentropic either.
This is not a turbine driving a pump or something. This turbine really makes no "power" in the sense that you are trying to say. It is a net zero work machine. All the work that goes in (exhaust) comes out in the intake (compressor).
Therefore, if you really want to talk increasing efficiency of this thing, you are going to need to effect something that actually drives the turbo. I guarantee you that it isn't the intake.
Things like longer runners to smooth and straighten flow. Ideal combustion, etc.
Perhaps you should retake your thermo and fluids classes and learn how to apply them to the real world scenario before you bark intellectual ignorance at me.
I don't come on here throwing my education around, and terms most people have never heard of because it confuses most people. Maybe next time you try and speak like you know something you should check and see if you are actually talking to someone else who will tell you to cram your nonsense up your ....

You have to consider that pressurized elements do not heat or cool the same, Like how a higher pressure radiator cap raises boiling point. Water boils at 70* in a vacuum. So there is more here to consider than just temps. Not to mention that any decent filter is gonna act like a velocity stack and inadvertently give the turbo a much wider area to pull air from than just a pipe end or normal turbo inlet. The detonation control alone is very important not only to engine longevity but also if you want to make more power without increasing risk of booom. lol The pipe would also have to stay cool. Remember its attached to the hottest dang thing in the engine, the exhaust, so it is gonna heat up during the pull. The air will have to fight the engine temps anyway. A normal cold air intake is attached to the IM and isn't subjected to the same heat soak.

So... alot of things still to consider here. If all the factors can be accounted for we can get some info.

Some aftermarket parts are bogus, but that's were experience and research come in.

For thos eof us who have been doing this a long time, there can be a big different depending on your setup. A 20* difference is large. Another member who will go nameless since he hasnt posted not only had a noticable difference in air intake temp but it also affected his EGT temps. Now since we dont have thermocouples in our cylinders I cant tell you the cylinder temp is lower but if 1+1=2 even a Mechanical Engineer as wise as yourself can make the assumption the cylinder temps were lower.

Now this is very setup dependant. With a Log manifold the Cold air intke may or may not cause the same effect but for those of us with custom equal lenght manifolds, there is a sizeable value to having the filter in the bumper.

Let me put it simply:

Man logs intake temps before cold air intake
Man logs intake temps after cold air intake
Temps on intake do not change between the two

Man has intercooler, therefore, it stands to reason that the intercooler is efficient enough to get the intake temps down to a certain level (ambient) whether they come in 20* higher or not.

If, no intercooler, then sure the intake temps would change. That is not part of this argument though. Perhaps you should read the entire thread.

Lastly, if intake temp with one thing is the same as another, then everything after that would be the same. Air is not denser. Provided the same AFR, combustion temps would be the same. As well as EGT's.

My point was, why do cold air if you have an intercooler. I doubted that the temps would be very different at all if you have a decent intercooler. (By the way, for those of you who may have missed it, the intercooler cools the incoming air charge.) So if your intercooler is efficient enough to get intake temps down to a certain value regardless of the temperature coming into it, then who cares? Besides that, the extra run of undersized piping can not cause any good to come of the turbo efficiency.
One of the guys logged his intake temps, and they were the same before and after. Enough said. That to me, renders the gain from a cold air intake useless. If intake temps are the same without it, then who needs it.

It is the temperature at the manifold that will determine the density of the charge going into your cylinders, not what comes into the turbo.

You guys should quit hanging out with these rediculous honda owners so that you can stop convencing yourselves that some fairy sprinkles magic dust in your car that makes it go faster when you have a cold air intake on an intercooled application.

You obviously never read my details on the cold air i have. My intake temps did change. Go back and read it.

and Terry steps in for the win!

Originally posted by SilvrEclips
So I finally got around to doing some logs with the CAI on the turbo and I took it off and ran no filter. I didn't feel like trying to fit the filter back on the car just for 1 pull. Anyways I got some pretty good results I think. I tried to keep the coolant temps about the same and sprayed off the intercooler before each run to eliminate a heat soaked intercooler. Im running a cheap ebay core and it sucks as you can see. This was on a td05 20g at 20-21psi. Results: The turbo spool a consistently 100-150rpms sooner. Also peaked another .5-1psi of boost and held about .5psi more boost with the CAI on. This resulted in the car accelerating quicker, ...
however the intake temps did not really change much....
It seems like the temps were not increasing quite as fast but it was not that much different. Here is a screen shot of both logs put together. The brighter lines are with the CAI on. http://i189.photobucket.com/albums/z173/SilvrEclipse/MSlog-1.jpg?t=1247535196

This is whom I refer to when I say he logged with no difference.
I would be curious still to see you post your results. These results clearly show no significant difference in intake temperatures.
To be clear, we are not talking about temp at the filter...

I did read your post, but seat of the pants results are not as definitive as these logged and posted ones. Perhaps you missed this post as well.

This is common sense...A colder/cooler intake air temp is better. In most cases, you may not see a hp increase, however you will probably notice that your engine Performs better. Maybe you notice slightly better throttle response. Maybe your engine runs smoother. Maybe the "Pants" tell you it made an improvement. Anyone with common knowledge of engine performance knows that this is a beneficial modification, regardless of induction, whether forced or n/a. If you do not agree with/beleive this, then that's ok. YOU(those who disagree) are the one(s) losing out. I beleive that every little bit makes a difference, especially when you have more modifications. I am running a hahn FMIC, and I still use a CAI on my turbo. COLDER IS BETTER! For those of you who matter,(TERRY) please correct me if im wrong. For the rest, have a nice day.

Let me just spell it out again...

There was NO change in his logged temps.

Therefor, it is NOT colder, and there is NO gain from it.

That is pretty simple. I do not disaggree that if it were colder it would be better. But, in this case it isn't. It stands to reason that this case it widely applicable to many people out there with similar intercooled applications. Therefore, it is widely applicable that they would yield similar pointless results.

I have posted the details of my logs above. I can post the logs however you do not have the software to veiw them. Your full of shit saying they have no value now shut the fuck up.

Originally posted by Star Turbo Talon
I have posted the details of my logs above. I can post the logs however you do not have the software to veiw them. Your full of shit saying they have no value now shut the fuck up.

Your details are what is bullshit. 20* is a lot to ask for period. I will be sure to discount any post you put out in the future as you obviously don't have a clue what you are talking about. Your choice to start throwing explitives proves your ignorance in my opinion.

Originally posted by bzoss

Originally posted by Star Turbo Talon I have posted the details of my logs above. I can post the logs however you do not have the software to veiw them. Your full of shit saying they have no value now shut the fuck up.

Your details are what is bullshit. 20* is a lot to ask for period. I will be sure to discount any post you put out in the future as you obviously don't have a clue what you are talking about. Your choice to start throwing explitives proves your ignorance in my opinion.

:scratch

Terry ignorant? WTF dude, quit getting all butthurt because people are calling you out on your shit.

It's not even my "shit"... I am not butthurt, seems your friend Terry is the butthurt one.

I simply said that I didn't see it making much difference, and was curious to see logged results if it were possible to get them. Someone chimed in with logged results. Thanks for those by the way, forgot who you were...
anyhow...

The results clearly show that there was no significant difference in the intake temperatures. Point made.

Then people chime in one after another saying that they see it different even though the logged results are what they are. If someone can log results that disprove these, I would love to see them. Until then, I think that you guys should stop convencing yourselves of something that isn't there.

This thread needs a CAI, it's getting pretty heated in here LOL!



*Edit* Oh wait, nevermind, they don't work :(