So i shouldn't take the MAF screen off if i only have a K&N panel filter?
#11
True that our engines don't really need any more ir than the stock airbox flows...
and further, our engines can't suck enough air until a CFM equal to or just over 330HP before a significant pressure drop is encountered. But if I flow just the MAF it starts becoming a restriction at/near a CFM rating at/near 225-230HP. The 2.8 airbox/plenum is well suited for all but the most radically modified car. It's that friggin MAF that needs to be modified or replaced. Sooner or later I'll get around to that.
When running a Davtron gauge in the airbox I found that mounting a foil-faced/foam back self-adhesive heatshield (motorcycle header/fairing material) on the entire outside diameter of the airbox and the MAF there was little benefit other than for the first 10-15 minutes. During that time it ran cooler temps than a non-insulated airbox. But it was a dismal failure at shedding that heat, taking over an hour to get back to where a non-insulated box was in 10-15 minutes. On a 160 mile highway trip after the first 15 or so minutes the internal airbox temps were identical with/without insulation. And both were about 4* cooler than ambient. But then I don't have a glowing turbo and catalytic converter sitting within inches and directly under the air box on my 2.8. Do have on my UrS4 and 1.8T but those are a whole different ballgame airbox-wise... they pose different problems and require different solutions.
No doubt an exposed cone is a faster to inspect and/or remove. But except during timed pitstops the 2-3 minute swap differential hasn't proven sufficient incentive to motivate me to build a shield/enclosed box. Proven power increase may well, if it turns out that way. And I'm really obsessed with getting the most power I can fom the 2.8 with the least invasive/intrusive mods possible.
But I have run cones, and lots of em. But I'm experimenting with a different direction this time.
And your 2.8 heatshield is clearly head & shoulders more effective than 99+% of ALL the others out there for a 2.8. But again, it wasn't done by a weekend warrior with minimal tools or mechanical ability. And while duplicating it isn't rocket science I'm sure you would still agree it's probably above the skill level of the "average" Audi owner.
When running a Davtron gauge in the airbox I found that mounting a foil-faced/foam back self-adhesive heatshield (motorcycle header/fairing material) on the entire outside diameter of the airbox and the MAF there was little benefit other than for the first 10-15 minutes. During that time it ran cooler temps than a non-insulated airbox. But it was a dismal failure at shedding that heat, taking over an hour to get back to where a non-insulated box was in 10-15 minutes. On a 160 mile highway trip after the first 15 or so minutes the internal airbox temps were identical with/without insulation. And both were about 4* cooler than ambient. But then I don't have a glowing turbo and catalytic converter sitting within inches and directly under the air box on my 2.8. Do have on my UrS4 and 1.8T but those are a whole different ballgame airbox-wise... they pose different problems and require different solutions.
No doubt an exposed cone is a faster to inspect and/or remove. But except during timed pitstops the 2-3 minute swap differential hasn't proven sufficient incentive to motivate me to build a shield/enclosed box. Proven power increase may well, if it turns out that way. And I'm really obsessed with getting the most power I can fom the 2.8 with the least invasive/intrusive mods possible.
But I have run cones, and lots of em. But I'm experimenting with a different direction this time.
And your 2.8 heatshield is clearly head & shoulders more effective than 99+% of ALL the others out there for a 2.8. But again, it wasn't done by a weekend warrior with minimal tools or mechanical ability. And while duplicating it isn't rocket science I'm sure you would still agree it's probably above the skill level of the "average" Audi owner.
#12
Bingo! Or go to a muffler shop and have them swage you a flared...
piece of 3" diameter exhaust pipe with a .500" larger flare on the swaged end that is approx 3" long. When it's done it should be +or- 2.75" tall x 3" outlet/3.5" inlet. Then just de-burr and smooth the bore out at each end and press it in up to the MAF screen then remove the MAF to get the screen out. Sounds more complicated than it is.
#15
They're to large at the inlet... and due to profile can't be turned down to fit
If memory serves they are almost 6" wide at the inlet (top) and the stock airbox won't accept anything larger than 3.5"-3.625" and even at that its a tight fit.
See Mr D's throttle body install pics out front and you can see he had to trim a cast rib to get the one I had made for him into the MAF airbox outlet.
See Mr D's throttle body install pics out front and you can see he had to trim a cast rib to get the one I had made for him into the MAF airbox outlet.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
drgolfnut
S4 / RS4 (B5 Platform) Discussion
3
08-28-2006 03:05 PM
VelocityS4
S4 / RS4 (B5 Platform) Discussion
4
12-30-2005 10:56 AM
NCFioren
Audi 90 / 80 / Coupe quattro / Cabriolet
3
11-17-2001 01:15 PM