Welcome to Just Commodores, a site specifically designed for all people who share the same passion as yourself.

New Posts Contact us

Just Commodores Forum Community

It takes just a moment to join our fantastic community

Register

[Ecotec] Tests on Pod/Panel - Dyno differences in CAI/Intakes

HamaTime™

VIP Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2008
Messages
1,807
Reaction score
61
Points
48
Location
Melbourne
Members Ride
C Class AMG
Alright, well this should make for interesting discussion.

At my recent dyno session where I was power testing my current combo and then subsequent power runs with different intakes/CAI's on, I came across some interesting results which I think would make for a good discussion.

I had a number of different dyno runs, I will describe each setup, and the power yielded from that setup, unfortunately I didn't get all the dyno readouts, would have been good to see the torque/power band differences and all that, but never mind.

Temperature of the day: 26 degrees

Dyno Run #1: - Current Setup (running 98 Premium)
- Stock Airbox
- K&N Panel Filter
- L67 Super 6 OTR
- Stock Intake tube
- IMPCO Gas mixer cone on intake before Throttle Body

Power = 94rwkw

Dyno Run #2: - Current Setup (running LPG)
- Stock Airbox
- K&N Panel Filter
- L67 Super 6 OTR
- Stock Intake tube
- IMPCO Gas mixer cone on intake before Throttle Body

Power = 72rwkw

Dyno Run #3: - Power Setup 1 (running 98 Premium)
- Stock Airbox
- K&N Panel Filter
- L67 Super 6 OTR
- 3" Heat resistant plastic Intake tube
- Gas mixer cone REMOVED from intake tube, straight pipe into throttle body (no restriction)

Power = 123rwkw

Dyno Run #3: - Power Setup 1a (running LPG)
- Stock Airbox
- K&N Panel Filter
- L67 Super 6 OTR
- 3" Heat resistant plastic Intake tube
- IMPCO Gas mixer cone on intake before Throttle Body

Power = 73rwkw

Dyno Run #3: - Power Setup 2 (running 98 Premium)
- MACE (style) enclosed pod airbox
- 3" K&N Pod Filter
- 3" Heat resistant plastic Intake tube
- Gas mixer cone REMOVED from intake tube, straight pipe into throttle body (no restriction)

Power = 122rwkw

Dyno Run #3: - Power Setup 2a (running LPG)
- MACE (style) enclosed pod airbox
- 3" K&N Pod Filter
- 3" Heat resistant plastic Intake tube
- IMPCO Gas mixer cone on intake before Throttle Body

Power = 72rwkw

So if we see the trend from the above dyno runs....what is that saying?

  1. That the LPG Mixer cone saps a huge 29-30rwkw off the power figure
  2. The enclosed Pod really didn't help?
  3. The OTR is not the best setup, however did prove to be more effective at speed (had the air machine pushing air into the intake)
All these runs were done twice, both with the bonnet up and the bonnet down to simulate actual road driving (fluid dynamics of how the air gets pushed into the intakes...the difference was barely anything so not worth mentioning.

Anyway, surprise surprise to those who swear by an enclosed POD setup, and rubbish the OTR Super 6 CAI. In saying this, I felt absolutely nothing change with the installation of the CAI, (both the L67 and the Enclosed POD) and obviously this is due to the fact that it is really hard to notice a mod that doesn't add at least 5kw or isn't paired with supporting mods, i.e. changing how the air is fed to the intake helps, but difference is only really felt when the whole system is upgraded, rather than just the intake mouth.
This being said though, the dyno result proved it to yield more power, most likely due to fluid air flow through the intake into the airbox/MAF.

Anyway, this is now up for discussion. Interested to see what you guys have to say....bare in mind that this was real life tests, so theory which has been covered about 50 times in previous threads will do no good to this thread....try and get some actual evidence/tests.
 
Last edited:

383 hatch

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2005
Messages
3,922
Reaction score
65
Points
48
Age
39
Location
Cowes, Phillip Island
Members Ride
VG Ute 5.0,Torana hatch 383,WB Ute 5.0,VR stato5.0
All it shows to me is that LPG is just as **** as i thought it was....

LOL @ 50 rwkw difference from gas to petrol.

However, IMO the L67 CAI with the stock airbox is about the best you will do on a stock Ecotec. On higher power/blown set-ups they can and do become a restriction though.

I picked up 9 rwkw by removing the L67 CAI on my L67. While it doesn't sound like a lot, 9 rwkw is still a fair restriction.
 
T

tommySV6Ute

Guest
Nice effort you have made there HT.

I'd really be interested in some before & after runs with those Mace spacers. An impartial test would be nice if Mace were kind enough to send you a set & if you have the time..
 

Dr HaxZaw

New Member
Joined
May 6, 2010
Messages
1,462
Reaction score
11
Points
0
Location
Sydney
Members Ride
R34 GT-T
out of curiosity what exhaust are you running if any?? cause having a sweet intake aint gonna do anything if your exhuast isnt that good
 

MACE

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2008
Messages
3,154
Reaction score
71
Points
48
HamaTime,

Do you have the dyno graphs handy you can post up?

I'm surprised given that they're not a new item on the market with lots of feedback of them being better then the factory OTR setup from our own experience over the years along with other customers. Every car is different it is what it is I guess. Case in point an enthusiast recently was disappointed, understandably, with gaining only 2wrkw from a set of 1.9:1 ratio rockers on his L67. If those sort of figures were common they definitely wouldn't be a popular as they are as a mod.

As for the product being advertised as gaining 5 kw that figure is not at the rears and is with respect to the standard air box assembly without the factory over the radiator cold air intake, that's how it was tested on my VN 4 years ago.

As for having our range of products independently tested by professionals we've had it done before and am happy to have it done again.

Case in point streeet commodores had tested our twin throttle manifold on a VX V6 with bolt on's (which is on their website still for all to see) it wasn't ideally installed, but copped it on the chin and made a 3.5kw gain at the wheels for the world to see. For those fixated on peak power it would have been disappointing, however panning you head to the left hand side of the graph revealed gains of around 15% at the wheels, which was reflected by the reduction in quarter mile times by around .7 of a second.
 

MACE

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 30, 2008
Messages
3,154
Reaction score
71
Points
48

HamaTime™

VIP Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2008
Messages
1,807
Reaction score
61
Points
48
Location
Melbourne
Members Ride
C Class AMG
All it shows to me is that LPG is just as **** as i thought it was....

LOL @ 50 rwkw difference from gas to petrol.

However, IMO the L67 CAI with the stock airbox is about the best you will do on a stock Ecotec. On higher power/blown set-ups they can and do become a restriction though.

I picked up 9 rwkw by removing the L67 CAI on my L67. While it doesn't sound like a lot, 9 rwkw is still a fair restriction.
LPG is rubbish as a dual fuel setup, the higher octane rating of the fuel does have benefits, but it's all relative, you aren't going to see gains or even on par performance, running even the best LPG system on a petrol built/purpose motor. You need to rebuild and suit the build to a straight gas direct injection drive.

That being said, I despise LPG and I hate it on my car. However it is staying as I am upgrading. I have lost any interest I had in V6's....

Nice effort you have made there HT.

I'd really be interested in some before & after runs with those Mace spacers. An impartial test would be nice if Mace were kind enough to send you a set & if you have the time..
Don't have any before and after runs with the spacers. However, I noticed a significant increase in torque down low, the longer runners shift the torque band, and start the 'pull' alot earlier. Big fan of those two mods. Pair them with a decent cam and head work and the full potential will be realised.

Anyway, off topic. This is about CAI's.

out of curiosity what exhaust are you running if any?? cause having a sweet intake aint gonna do anything if your exhuast isnt that good
Read my thread.

Pacemakers into 2.25" Pipe with Redback Hiflo/straight through muffler.

HamaTime,

Do you have the dyno graphs handy you can post up?

I'm surprised given that they're not a new item on the market with lots of feedback of them being better then the factory OTR setup from our own experience over the years along with other customers. Every car is different it is what it is I guess. Case in point an enthusiast recently was disappointed, understandably, with gaining only 2wrkw from a set of 1.9:1 ratio rockers on his L67. If those sort of figures were common they definitely wouldn't be a popular as they are as a mod.

As for the product being advertised as gaining 5 kw that figure is not at the rears and is with respect to the standard air box assembly without the factory over the radiator cold air intake, that's how it was tested on my VN 4 years ago.

As for having our range of products independently tested by professionals we've had it done before and am happy to have it done again.

Case in point streeet commodores had tested our twin throttle manifold on a VX V6 with bolt on's (which is on their website still for all to see) it wasn't ideally installed, but copped it on the chin and made a 3.5kw gain at the wheels for the world to see. For those fixated on peak power it would have been disappointing, however panning you head to the left hand side of the graph revealed gains of around 15% at the wheels, which was reflected by the reduction in quarter mile times by around .7 of a second.
I don't have any of the dyno graphs handy. They were all just computer readouts, rather than actually beings saved/printed off. My apologies.

Cars do demonstrate varying results now and then, however I re-read my original post and noticed a couple of flaws/typeo errors which could be misleading.

1. The enclosed product was not a 'MACE' product, however being perfectly identical in parts, being an enclosed POD in stainless steel enclosure. Point of this discussion is the varying results between the L67 OTR intake and the enclosed POD dyno runs on my car.

2. The differences I noticed in driving after installing the L67 CAI = 0, apart from a louder induction hiss (which is actually quite annoying as it sounds like an air leak, similar to when I blew the Bleed hose off the throttle body after a bad backfire whilst tuning mixtures). The differences in driving after installing the enclosed POD = 0, more induction noise.

I know this goes against the widely thought opinion that enclosed setups do offer a distintive advantage over stock airbox/L67, however, the dyno gave these results.

Surprising given my insight and research into airflow and fluid dynamics. The L67 CAI has alot more bends and restrictions to the airflow, however it yielded more on the dyno sheet.

Anyway, the point of this discussion was to look into both the power outputs of LPG/Dual Fuel etc...how restrictive the Air Mixer cone is, and also how the different intake mouths (i.e. the L67 OTR vs Enclosed POD work).
 

immortality

Can't live without smoky bacon!
Staff member
Joined
Apr 15, 2006
Messages
17,256
Reaction score
6,605
Points
113
Location
Sth Auck, NZ
Members Ride
HSV VS Senator, VX s2 Calais S/C
If you refer back to my test results you will note they were done in real world conditions, what i refer to in particular is the heat soak issue associated with the factory airbox/L67 CAI. your testing would not have this issue because there is a bloody great big fan keeping lots of airflow into the front of the car (and the L67 intake) at all times. this airflow in the dyno facility is also right in front of the radiator to ensure big HP cars don't overheat so not really a good comparison to real world conditions.

with all other conditions being equal, the intake that provides the coolest inlet temps is going to make the most power.

can you post of pic of the enclosed POD set up you used in these tests.

cheers

Bart
 

HamaTime™

VIP Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2008
Messages
1,807
Reaction score
61
Points
48
Location
Melbourne
Members Ride
C Class AMG
I've seen your tests, and they were quite comprehensive.

Agreed, Dyno tests do not reflect on the whole the real world conditions. But you are correct, the issue would be alleiviated when the car is actually on the road with normal air flow etc etc etc....

However, what I am trying to get at, is in spite of all the above evidence, all the theory etc...why did it come out with a smaller (albeit 1kw) yield on the DYNO. If the fan in front of the car pushing air into the radiator and through the OTR, if the POD setup is better in terms of airflow and greater pickup of cooler air Why wouldn't it show on the tests?

I don't have a picture of the POD set up, however it was a square stainless steel enclosure (pretty much same size as the mainstream marketed ones) with stainless steel lid, 3" K&N Pod Filter, sensor into the back/firewall side of the enclosure, MAF about 1" back from the enclosure (if that).
 
Top