Welcome to the SR20 Community Forum - The Dash.
Register
SR20 forum logo

Thread: Cone filter vs Air box

+ Reply To Thread
Posts: 11-18 of 18
2014-11-20 23:57:06
#11
I dont see the benefit of using an air box unless you were running ITB's and needed cold air for them
2014-12-11 07:48:39
#12
F air boxes. Louder = less restrictive
2014-12-11 11:58:17
#13
Re: Cone filter vs Air box


This is the airbox and vent i have made for my gtir and will be selling them soon.
I measured the air temps at idle standing still and found 10 deg drop inside the airbox.
Still more testing to be done as my temp sensors failed so I'll need to get more.
The car made 274hp@fly on 0.7 bar boost with extensive porting and a 3" exhaust from the turbo back.
2014-12-11 15:23:39
#14
Thats exactly what i was thinking of. I assume you are using the GTIR hood scoop the feed the box through the top. You are still using a cone filter correct? My thought would be to put a filter on the inlet of the box and use no filter on the intake tube.

I never did testing after I made my divider but i am sure it reduced intake temps. I will do some more testing next year.
2014-12-11 15:27:04
#15
Yes the bonnet vent feeds it but even just the box is worth having...i ran it without the vent and still saw 6c drop in temps.
The box isn't sealed so there isn't any issues for the maf.
The idea is the excess air goes out the bottom of the box and into the inner wing etc
2014-12-16 12:55:54
#16
Had a similar idea but never finalized it. The plan was to construct a large airbox to take advantage of the space you mention, and then use the filtered section of two stock airboxes to make up 2 of the walls of the airbox. One facing the front of the car and one facing the hole in the side of the fender with a cold air feed pipe.

The velocity stack then sits inside the cold air box simply drawing in the cold filtered air. The only problem I had with this idea was it leaves you with a very short intake tube when it's all said and done.
Last edited by Doctor G on 2014-12-16 at 12-57-22.
2014-12-16 14:43:49
#17
Originally Posted by Doctor
Had a similar idea but never finalized it. The plan was to construct a large airbox to take advantage of the space you mention, and then use the filtered section of two stock airboxes to make up 2 of the walls of the airbox. One facing the front of the car and one facing the hole in the side of the fender with a cold air feed pipe.

The velocity stack then sits inside the cold air box simply drawing in the cold filtered air. The only problem I had with this idea was it leaves you with a very short intake tube when it's all said and done.


One of the first things i will test is the length of the intake tubing to see what effect it has.

The more I think about this the more I feel a divider is best. Simple and effective. Unless the filter on the velocity stack is a big restriction there may be no need to test anything further.
2014-12-16 16:40:45
#18
Does the area in the airbox necessarily HAVE to be in front of the velocity stack? My thinking is not, since air simply IS everywhere. This would allow for another alternative:

Build a large, SEALED airbox covering the area between the shock tower and radiator support, with a filtered entry in the bumper vent for instance. Cold filtered air then fill up this large sealed area at all times. A long intake tube with an open velocity stack placed right behind the headlight will then still allow maximum length and give the motor access to the cold air, even though it will be drawn from "behind" the stack and then into it....

If there is a pressure build up in the airbox it would probably be most in the area behind the stack I'd imagine, but ram air is what another 2-3whp at what, 100mph...? So probably not much of an issue.
+ Reply To Thread
  • [Type to search users.]
  • Quick Reply
    Thread Information
    There are currently ? users browsing this thread. (? members & ? guests)
    StubUserName

    Back to top