Polo Intake Thread

[mitch_gti]

polo intake

Mitch sweeps up the feathers

[Timbo]

lol no it doesn't. your thesis proposes that the engineers have perfected intakes to the point that replacing (or improving them) is unwarranted. the Seat intake upgrade supports the view that the stock intake is far too restricted.

How What tangible evidence do you have supporting this view

Are Seat engineers renowned for this knowledge, relative to their VW brethren...or are we judging by look and sound here

[Timbo]

...and just to add a bit more contention to the debate, it is my firm personal opinion that intake mods for modern FI cars are just about the closest thing to snake oil that exists in modern engine tuning

By all means change your air filter (but be aware you are often reducing its ability to filter -- that may be ok where you live), but if you are seriously considering spending real money on intake mods, please send the money to me -- I love drinking fine wine, gambling and entertaining beautiful women, and I will clearly have more fun and get much better value than you

[Timbo]

Go for it! I'm full of expectations, so please don't disappoint

[mitch_gti]

Polo Intake thread

Timbo you seem like quite the Fabio haha, send some women my way !

i have terrible luck, i got the flick last night ! very frustrating.

[shaneth]

the Seat intake upgrade supports the view that the stock intake is far too restricted.

I couldnt agrre more.

My rationale is this: we're dealing with a factory FI car here; the factory engineers have everything to gain in making the intake side of the engine as efficient as possible, so they do;

Timbo are you chipped???
HEre is what i think.
Car manufacturers dont make the Perfect intake. These guys are there to make money not the perfect car. Hence why there are so many performance car mobs around for nearly every make and model and i am sure the intake mods are in everyone of them. NOw lets look at the polo. It makes 150ps at the fly standard but yet the seat ibiza cupra makes 180ps and one of the differences Seat made is the the intake is larger. So even if your theory is right, seat being a car manufacture and making a perfect intake suggests that with more power you need larger intake. Does this make sense.

Sorry about the power figures being in PS but i pulled them straight off the uk websites.

edit - dont forget Seat is also the performance wing of VW

[DubSteve]

It makes 150ps at the fly standard

In other words 110kw or 150hp

[shaneth]

In other words 110kw or 150hp

Like i said.

Sorry about the power figures being in PS but i pulled them straight off the uk websites.

[GT3]

It makes 150ps at the fly standard but yet the seat ibiza cupra makes 180ps and one of the differences Seat made is the the intake is larger. .. suggests that with more power you need larger intake.

that's my point, stock the standard intake is fine, but chipped, they need more air (hence why they choke off at 5000rpm). chipped we're pushing 150kw+, check out what the engineers considered when they designed the Audi TT 1.8T 132kw and 165kw engines (see intake).

http://www.sae.org/automag/newenginereview/audi.htm

[Timbo]

[QUOTE=GT3;74698]

you seem like quite the Fabio QUOTE]

beautiful women admire quality, and Fabio doesn't have to resort to $$$$ to acquire them ; )

Neil, stop hijacking the hijack that you made to the original thread n:

[rant] Now, for those of you with the Seat intake and who are "true believers", rather than all this keyboard stuff, how about doing us all a favour and making some tests. I'm not fussy what -- using the same dyno is good, 1/4 times are ok, 80-120 passing test times are also useful -- but please show me the value of this mod in some type of objective measures.

As to Seat and its 180ps output....well, with respect Shane, that's rampant within VAG. They have been segmenting the market based on different outputs flowing from basically the same 1.8t motor for years, and the intake has bugger all to do with it. It's all in the ECU ...and whether they add a KO4!

That's why the BEST, BIGGEST BANG FOR THE BUCK mod for the Polo is to chip it...because that's what VAG does themselves... Even when they produce a "Cup", R, RSI or whatever version...the VAG companies do very little to the intake; they adjust the tune to liberate a bit more of the power the engine is safely capable of producing (OK, and sometimes they do a bit of strengthening here and there, too --- but you get my drift).

So, I repeat: if you believe the mod you have made to your intake makes a real difference, get off your arse and demonstrate what that difference is in some measurable way, so that we, as the Polo community in this forum, are better informed and have a better idea where to spend our money.

My approach to this forum is to share as much knowledge as I can about what works and what doesn't, and the basis upon which I have based my opinion. I am also really, really keen to learn from others. But, yes, I set a fairly high bar in terms of how an opinion should be supported by evidence, mainly because I want to know that the result achieved is replicable and was not due to other factors. [/rant]

[Guy_H]

Why doesn't some one get a Vag Com & log it to see if the Mass Air flow increases? - would be a good start.

look at the bottom of the text here:

"Information on Fuel Trim originally posted by Andy@Ross-Tech IE our Vag-Com God
Some of the most common fault codes (DTC's) pertain to fuel trim. Here is an explanation of fuel trim and what it does for us.
The ECU controls Air/Fuel mixture in order to maintain power, efficiency, and emissions. A/F is expressed as either a ratio (14.7:1 for example) or as a Lambda value. With iso-octane ("ideal" gasoline), Lambda of 1.0 is equal to 14.7:1 A/F. This is known as "Stoichiometric", a condition where there is a perfect balance between oxygen molecules and the various hydrogen and carbon based molecules in petroleum. With the oxygenated gasoline that most of us use, actual A/F ratio of 15:1 is closer to stoichiometric.

If Lambda is greater than 1.0, then there is a surplus of air and the engine is running lean. If Lambda is less than 1.0, then there is a surplus of fuel and the engine is running rich. It should be noted that the ratios are mass-based, not volume-based.

So, why don't we always run at 1.0 all the time? Well, we do MOST of the
time. At cruise and idle, mixture is held tightly to 1.0 to keep the catalytic convertor at optimal efficiency, so the emissions are minimized. However, when we need acceleration, the mixture gets richer. Why? Maximum power is made between 0.85 to 0.95 Lambda (12.5 to 14.0 A/F with iso-octane). So, under acceleration, mixtures get richer. Sometimes you want to get even richer under acceleration to keep detonation (pre-ignition of the mixture from excess cylinder temperatures) away. The 1.8T has a relatively high compression ratio for a turbocharged engine, which especially under lots of boost, is very succeptible to detonation).

So, now that we know that the ECU wants to be able to control the A/F ratio. It has a prescribed set of values (maps) for a given RPM, Load, etc. So, the ECU tells the injectors to pulse for exactly XX.X milliseconds and that SHOULD get us the proper A/F ratio that we want. Well, if you tell an employee to go do something, you want to make sure they actually did it, right? The ECU has some snitches (the front O2 sensor and the MAF, for the most part) that will report back whether or not the desired mixture has been attained. The rear O2 sensor is used mostly to monitor the condition of the catalytic convertor, although in some applications it also contributes to trim information.

Based on feedback from the snitches, the ECU learns to apply a correction factor to its commands to the fuel injectors. If you know that your employees take longer than the standard allotted time to do a specified job, you will need to adjust for that in your planning (injectors are in a union, so it is tough to fire them ). The learned values go between the maps in the ECU's Flash ROM (the "chip") and the signal to the fuel injectors. These learned compensations are known as "trim". So, when you see "trim", it means "compensation".

"Add" means additive trim, which is addressing an imbalance at idle. When the ECU is using additive trim, it is telling the injectors to stay open a fixed amount longer or shorter. The malfunction (e.g. vacuum leak) becomes less significant as RPM increase. For additive adaptation values, the injection timing is changed by a fixed amount. This value is not dependent on the basic injection timing.

"Mult" mean multiplicative trim, which is addressing an imbalance at all engine speeds. The malfunction (e.g. clogged injector) becomes more severe at increased RPM. For multiplicative adaptation values, there is a
percentage change in injection timing. This change is dependent on the basic injection timing.

You can check your current state of trim by using VAG-COM or equivalent to look in Group 032 in your engine measuring blocks. The first two fields will have percentages. The first field tells the fuel trim at idle (Additive). The second field tells the fuel trim at elevated engine speeds (Multiplicative). Negative values indicate that the engine is running too rich and oxygen sensor control is therefore making it more lean by reducing the amount of time that the injectors are open. Positive values indicate that the engine is running too lean and oxygen sensor control is therefore making it richer by increasing the amount of time that the injectors are open.

It is totally normal for both the first and second fields to be something other than zero. In fact, zeros indicate either you just cleared codes (which will reset fuel trim values) or something isn't working properly. If values get too far away from zero, it will cause a DTC (fault code) and can set off the MIL (commonly referred to as the Check Engine Light, or CEL). Specifications for normal operation are usually somewhere near +/- 10%.

In general, an out-of-spec value in the first field (Additive) indicates a vacuum leak since it is mostly present at idle, when vacuum is highest. An out-of-spec value in the second field (Multiplicative) indicates a fault at higher RPM, and may point to a faulty MAF.

Here's a good sanity check for the status of your MAF. Do a full-throttle run all the way to redline in a single gear (second works fine). Group 002 usually shows air mass in g/s. Your peak airflow should be roughly 0.80 times your horsepower. So, if you have a stock 150 hp 1.8T, expect around 120 g/s. If you see significantly less than that, you MAF may be on the way out. This still works if you are chipped, but "race" programs may make more power through timing, rather than airflow. Therefore, take all readings with a grain of salt."

[Adam]

Why doesn't some one get a Vag Com & log it to see if the Mass Air flow increases? - would be a good start.

GUY IS THE BEST!!!!

But the result from the test would be most interesting... especially the comparison between the [stock polo] and a [stock polo+seat intake.]

[Timbo]

Yep, I agree...a VAG-COM log would be measure

[Wand Weaver]

That's why the BEST, BIGGEST BANG FOR THE BUCK mod for the Polo is to chip it...because that's what VAG does themselves...

Not doubting that VAG do change the chip tune, but they often change the turbo too.

As Guy and Seb will attest to - the K03 isn't a large turbocharger, and is responsible for the power "drop off" above 5500RPM. Simply, it can't shift enough air. The turbo in the 1.8T, especially in the lower powered variants is designed to fatten up the torque curve rather than provide huge boost - something the K03 does very well with minimal lag.

This is with the standard intake - giving the turbo even more air isn't likely to make it shift more air - it already can't shift the air coming through the standard intake pipe.

I'm willing to eat some crow if a dyno run proves that it generates more power, though.

[GT3]

[QUOTE=Wand Weaver;74784]Not doubting that VAG do change the chip tune, but they often change the turbo too.QUOTE]

sure and they often change the intake too (see changes made to TT 1.8T 165kw), despite everyone's reluctance to acknowledge that they do.

"A Type K04 turbocharger forces air into the combustion chamber via two charge-air intercoolers. Compared to the less powerful 132-kW unit, a modified airflow path, together with a larger air cleaner, ensures that the air reaching the engine has a temperature only about 30¡C higher than ambient. This 80% charge-air intercooler efficiency keeps the engine supplied with an optimum flow of oxygen-rich air. Maximum boost pressure at the intake manifold can reach 200 kPa (29 lb/in2)."