Polo Intake Thread

[shaneth]

and if you strongly believe that the intake mods really are giving your Polo a tangible increase in power, then you shouldn't need me, or anyone else to justify that for you.

I couldnt agree more mate well said. I was just going to post that everyone has there own experience and from this comes there opinion. Im impressed by the level of maturity everyone has displayed in this topic as it oculd have turn pear shaped very quickly. And please can we keep this level as well.

I think a few of us will have to agree to disagree. But i know what my Butt dyno tells me and thats all that matters to me.

EDIT - I will say before making your decision based on whats said in this thread (including what i have said) go into some other forums and do searches and see what other people have said about the TIP and CAI as you may be suprised. Especially in the MK4 Golf sections.

[Timbo]

I think Spec83 (and Wand Weaver's inital research kick start) fairly clearly set out the basis for the results I have found, or observed. And, while I have seen many posts in other forums about CAI and TIP, I've not seen any data supporting the claims. Despite what some of you might think (Neil!), I have an open mind and am perfectly prepared to recant where the data is produced.

That said, no-one here is forcing anyone to do anything and if you like and believe what you have done, go for it. Indeed, I suspect some intake work and the TIP will "smooth" the airflow so power feels more linear, but this is not the same as more power. Likewise, I understand the attraction of more induction noise and turbo whistle...but again, beware the psychological effect of these.

The Pog is a sub-30k car; if you are keen on improving its performance, as I am, you have to do this with a firm eye on costs, as it's all too easy to overspend without achieving real results (OK, so I'm tight!!). As I said, the real value of these forums is to pass on knowledge about what works, to avoid people making the same mistakes, being sucked in by marketing hype, or making decisions based on information which reflects little more than "tribal" loyalties (see "wars, chip" )

I spent the first 6 mths of ownership reading and listening, trying to understand what works. In the end, I've followed some accepted wisdom, and run a couple of experiments. I have posted my results regardless of the outcome, so others can make their own judgement.

The dump pipe was one such experiment. I, too, had read Guy's notes re the APR Polo...but there was also quite a bit of evidence from the MkIV world suggesting a dump might liberate something. I wasn't prepared to go for one of the built brand dumps+cat at $1k+, so had a custom job done for less than half that. There are many good reasons others will choose not to do this, but I was quite startled by the results...to the extent I doubted them! When these were confirmed, I became a believer, and posted as such.

I am obviously not a mechanic or tuner by trade, but I know a couple who are very handy, and I've taken the opportunity to discuss what I have discovered with them, and we have theorised about these results. One factor is the Euro vs Jap approach, where Japanese cars tend to be tuned down, based on intake and exhaust restrictions (the long running 206Kw gentlemen's agreement), whereas Euro cars are exhaust restricted due to EU emissions regs. So, the Euro car makers build intakes to deliver airflows that match the turbo, but restrict the exhaust side, whereas the Jap makers may do both.

I reckon this has been a really useful discussion. Despite what Neil suggests, I am very open-minded, really have no ego in this and more than prepared to change my views where the data supports, so please let's continue the discussion

[shaneth]

Indeed, I suspect some intake work and the TIP will "smooth" the airflow so power feels more linear, but this is not the same as more power.

Yes what you say could be true but more linear power is a good thing.

really have no ego in this and more than prepared to change my views where the data supports, so please let's continue the discussion

Thats the attitude everyone should have, good on you mate. I will be getting mine Dynoed, Just not sure when i am going to get time. And if i can get my hands on a Vag-com then i will be doing that as well and hopefully finding a stock standard polo in Brisbane so i can do the same test on it. Like you i only ever started doing this as an experiment and can tell you how it feels but i want to see it in black and white so that i can prove or disprove what i have done is worth it or not.

[GT3]

ok I'm going to say my bit and leave it at that.

..despite how my comments have been misconstrued from time to time, these are the facts as to what I've claimed:

1. I provided dyno evidence on the Forge TIP in which I said (power wise) there was no gain - although I acknowledged it provided other induction benefits, albeit marginal. I suggested that ppl were better off spending money elsewhere if improvements in induction were desirable (possibly air filter). I don't think this makes me an induction mod zealot, it demonstrates otherwise.

2. I also posted a thread (FMIC dyno) with before/after dynos after installing an APR FMIC. The results spoke for themselves, and Guy posted some excellent R&D on the thread also however it was followed by a defeaning silence from the anti-intake collective. The results demonstated that the effect of a FMIC was profound - and extended beyond the narrow measure that's very popular on this forum (the popular expressions are - bang for buck, kw atw, oh, and power, power, and sometimes even power).

3. I have never gone into detail or discussed the benefits of my air filter mod (BMC CDA) other than to suggest that there were a range of options available and ppl could experiment with and determine for themselves. Unfortunately, thereafter, various responses implied that if anyone didn't agree with the view that intake mods were useless, then they were ridiculed for 'wasting their money'. This was implicit and totally unnecessary.

That's why trying to explain these benefits to those who only see gains in terms of peak power alone is futile, ..things like a more linear, usable and wider power band just doesn't meet their narrow interpretation of 'power', so they dismiss these benefits outright.

I can only say (as much as this will be rejected by the anti-intake mod collective) that the intake mods I've done have produced amasing results. My engine has been totally tranformed from its awkward to use narrow power band (3000-5000rpm) to a now linear and free-reving power band that's an absolute delight to use. It has effectively transformed the car to the next level, ..and some of us 'can' ascertain whether the benefits are real and not just 'noise' and 'whistle'.

[mitch_gti]

Polo Intake thread

GT3 no laughing here dude, only at HSV clubsport drivers when they attempt to take on the GTI.

I can vouch for intake mods on the polo, BMC panel filter, TIP and Cupra R have made a noticeable difference (for the better).

[ryan_GTI]

great arguments!

However for $160+ for a cupra intake, it's a good investment considering how restrictive the stock intake is... whether it gains any power or not... surely there is *some* sort of benefit from more free flowing air.

the TIP mod however, is a different story~ for $300 odd.

[Spec83]

I can only say (as much as this will be rejected by the anti-intake mod collective) that the intake mods I've done have produced amasing results. My engine has been totally tranformed from its awkward to use narrow power band (3000-5000rpm) to a now linear and free-reving power band that's an absolute delight to use.

I am not discounting the effects of marginally freeing up the intake - I have mentioned that adding a pod style filter will allow the turbo to spool a bit earlier and free up the lower ranges... but once you get PAST the turbo's peak efficency (~5000rpm) the turbo is dropping sharply off the back of the curve and the only thing to solve this is to move to a turbo with bigger wheels - The response curve of the turbo does not lie....

I also agreed with you with regards to the intercooler for different reasons. It allows the ecu to run more timing or lean out the mixtures. With regards to the turbo the intercooler allows you to run a little more boost as it is removing the increased heat levels in the air due to a reduction in turbo efficency. the turbo has its limits though. You have to remember that the turbo cooling system is designed to work at ~60% turbo efficency. If you run it at 55% efficency the turbo will not get cooled properly and it will fail. I don't know why you would run past 1 bar boost anyway cause you are then missing out on the peak midrang power for a theoretical 5hp gain at the top... stupid idea!!!

I re-interate that this is why APR and other such chips run at the same efficency as stock - none of the system should be effected by running the increased boost levels - but any further increse on an otherwise stock car will reduce mechanical longevity. This is why any tuining $$$$ should be put towards a chip first before any other modifications... $200 on an intake and $400 for a dump pipe = $600 towards an ECU tune that WILL give you the biggest gains.

I suggest that you read peoples responses in the future

[Timbo]

I can only say (as much as this will be rejected by the anti-intake mod collective) that the intake mods I've done have produced amasing results. My engine has been totally tranformed from its awkward to use narrow power band (3000-5000rpm) to a now linear and free-reving power band that's an absolute delight to use. It has effectively transformed the car to the next level, ..and some of us 'can' ascertain whether the benefits are real and not just 'noise' and 'whistle'.

Let's just drop the 'them and us' thing -- certainly not my intention
I certainly commented favourably on the dyno results you produced. And I absolutely acknowledge the benefits of more linear power delivery; IMHO, the least useful part of a dyno chart is the peak power/torque figures; much more information is contained in observing changes in the curve shape.

However, in the case of the dyno results you showed us, the issue is (and please, this is no personal criticism, just an observation) to what do you attribute the results? The FMIC, the BMC CDA, the Forge TIP or

In an ideal world, we would have a series of tests which reflect the effects of incremental changes; we don't have these but we do have a good explanation of the likely scenario, as set out by Spec83 above.

Time for a beer

[mitch_gti]

Polo intake thread

Speaking of constructive charts how bout someone formulates a pie chart showing the states with the highest concentration of single fit birds. So that i can best know where to move

[Wand Weaver]

Let's just drop the 'them and us' thing -- certainly not my intention

Now that this seems to have calmed down a little, I'd like to add that it wasn't my intention either - in fact, the last sentence in the very first post I posted up in this thread was that I was willing to be proved wrong by data to the contrary, something I again implied in my second post.

I guess I then reacted to some hostility from the pro-intake mod crowd when it was suggested I was just pulling assertions out of the proverbial. While it wasn't particularly pretty, the result was some pretty valuable information being thrown around on both sides, and everyone can benefit from that.

Now, we've just got to get that info out there without the hostility

But - in summary, great work on both sides, and certainly no hard feelings.

[Spec83]

Hey Guys,

Was doing a bit of a look around at 'work' today and came across this intake kit that includes heat shields, filters etc... It is for a MkIV Golf GTI but I reckon it would fit our Polo's...

http://www.afefilters.com/IntakeSytemstest.php

And select Gas > Volkswagen > Golf > 2003