URS4's intake setup with cone filter?
08-10-2003, 10:51 AM
#1
AudiWorld Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
URS4's intake setup with cone filter?
Just curious if anyone has URS4's intake setup (MAF, TB, silicone hose) working with their cone rather than his airbox modifications. Let me know. Thanks!
08-10-2003, 10:55 AM
#2
Cone filters suck...
And they are a waste of money.
Totally defeating the idea of a "cold" air intake. Heatshields arent worth the trouble to make and put together because unless you spend days and days making one, it wont help.
Totally defeating the idea of a "cold" air intake. Heatshields arent worth the trouble to make and put together because unless you spend days and days making one, it wont help.
08-10-2003, 12:48 PM
#3
Member
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 2,302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Even with days and days of work, they still just suck in hot engine bay air . . .
For a cone filter to become a true cold intake system, you need to get the cone right behind the lower front grill of the car (a long distance on our A4's) or through the fire wall and toward the cold air pocket between the wind shield and the hood (requiring relocating the battery to the trunk).
For all the newbie's out there who read this, BMW used our exact panel filter size on its 300 hp 4.0l V-8 (540 and 740 models); thus, the stock panel filter flows far beyond our engines' ability to create hp.
For all the newbie's out there who read this, BMW used our exact panel filter size on its 300 hp 4.0l V-8 (540 and 740 models); thus, the stock panel filter flows far beyond our engines' ability to create hp.
08-10-2003, 03:40 PM
#4
I do, and it works fine with the cone! ;o)
<center><img src="http://home.ec.rr.com/miktip/3sil2a.jpg"></center><p>However, URS4 has made substancial improvements to the stock airbox, which look to rival the cone.
I'm seriously considering reinstalling the airbox, along with URS4's mods! ;O)
I'm seriously considering reinstalling the airbox, along with URS4's mods! ;O)
08-10-2003, 06:24 PM
#5
AudiWorld Super User
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Haverhill Ma.
Posts: 2,527
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Even with days and days of work, they still just suck in hot engine bay air . . .
<center><img src="http://pictureposter.audiworld.com/44005/big_maf2.jpg"></center><p>or you can do this...
my cone is in my airbox and it only took a few hours ;o)
my cone is in my airbox and it only took a few hours ;o)
08-10-2003, 08:46 PM
#7
Member
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 2,302
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As long as you do not do it as most of the tuner kits do . . .
and leave it exposed in the engine bay--which does little or nothing to improve performance for $300+!!! It's outrageous what most tuners charge for their "cold air intake" kits. Most of us can get better performance on a budget of $50 and a little common sense.
Trending Topics
08-11-2003, 04:56 AM
#8
the problem with the cone in the airbox is it's relative closeness to the inner walls...
which creates huge negative pressure in the intake tract. Thats why the stock airbox has SO much clearance below the panel filter and not just an inch or two clearance between the panel and the airbox.
You gained the cool air benefit of the box but compromised much surface area of the cone filter. Air will always seek an outlet thru the path of least resistance so your internal filter is only breathing a disproportionately large volume of it's intake air thru the surfaces that are the greatest distance from any wall/obstruction.
If I flow a cone filter on the flow bench it will show a pressure drop from a can of WD40 sitting on the same table thats 3 inches away from the filter element. If I move it further away the flow increases but it needs to be almost 6" away to not affect the flow rate at all. Probably why our airboxes are SO large compared to the filter element they serve (7" below/6" above) with directional and vaned walls guiding the air up and thru the filter from below and towards the airbox outlet above the filter element. We have 6-7" all around our panel filters for a very good reason. Now throw our panel filter into a cigar box with 1-2" clearance all around with a 4" diameter hole above and below it and see how it flows. Trust me, it wont and thats what the cone filter in the square airbox is doing to a greater/lesser degree. Additionally it will concentrate all of the filters effective filtering media to a roughly 4" diameter sweet spot in the filter... even if the holes were offset at opposite ends of the cigar box, the inlet end will still be doing all the filtering. In a round filter it will always be the the most open area that does most of the filtering cuz thats the area thats doing most of the breathing.
And this may well be much ado about nothing. Maybe not a feelable restriction. But just the fact that it's there and measurable is motivation enough for me to want to rid myself of it.
With the cone in the airbox you'd likely enjoy an even greater perception of improvement with an auxillary cold air intake than those of us running a stock panel filter due to you now being even more restricted than we (panel filter users)are. But you'll still have less airflow, less filter surface area and greater internal negative pressures than a panel filter in that same enclosure due to the "round peg in a square hole" dynamic. Put the round cone in a round box with 6" of air space between the housing and the filter and you'll be back to stock airbox equivalent. But the size of that setup precludes any practical fitment under our hood.
You gained the cool air benefit of the box but compromised much surface area of the cone filter. Air will always seek an outlet thru the path of least resistance so your internal filter is only breathing a disproportionately large volume of it's intake air thru the surfaces that are the greatest distance from any wall/obstruction.
If I flow a cone filter on the flow bench it will show a pressure drop from a can of WD40 sitting on the same table thats 3 inches away from the filter element. If I move it further away the flow increases but it needs to be almost 6" away to not affect the flow rate at all. Probably why our airboxes are SO large compared to the filter element they serve (7" below/6" above) with directional and vaned walls guiding the air up and thru the filter from below and towards the airbox outlet above the filter element. We have 6-7" all around our panel filters for a very good reason. Now throw our panel filter into a cigar box with 1-2" clearance all around with a 4" diameter hole above and below it and see how it flows. Trust me, it wont and thats what the cone filter in the square airbox is doing to a greater/lesser degree. Additionally it will concentrate all of the filters effective filtering media to a roughly 4" diameter sweet spot in the filter... even if the holes were offset at opposite ends of the cigar box, the inlet end will still be doing all the filtering. In a round filter it will always be the the most open area that does most of the filtering cuz thats the area thats doing most of the breathing.
And this may well be much ado about nothing. Maybe not a feelable restriction. But just the fact that it's there and measurable is motivation enough for me to want to rid myself of it.
With the cone in the airbox you'd likely enjoy an even greater perception of improvement with an auxillary cold air intake than those of us running a stock panel filter due to you now being even more restricted than we (panel filter users)are. But you'll still have less airflow, less filter surface area and greater internal negative pressures than a panel filter in that same enclosure due to the "round peg in a square hole" dynamic. Put the round cone in a round box with 6" of air space between the housing and the filter and you'll be back to stock airbox equivalent. But the size of that setup precludes any practical fitment under our hood.
08-11-2003, 05:46 AM
#9
AudiWorld Super User
Join Date: Oct 2000
Posts: 8,778
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've had my cone "exposed" for 3 years now and I love it. One of the best mods I've done!
Performance improvements ARE there and my G-TECH confirmed them. I do think that they are mostly because of the build in velocity stack since when I try to run with a non VS cone the gains aren't there. The best part about the cone is the sound and that is worth all the money I paid for it and it wasn't 300 like some posts mention below. I do suggest that you build your own kit if you want to go that route. Should run you around 100 bucks. That is if you don't have one installed already. 
