F-Type ( X152 ) 2014 - Onwards
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

Makeshift Intake

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #1  
Old 05-05-2015, 05:24 PM
WhiteTardis's Avatar
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 969
Received 397 Likes on 210 Posts
Default Makeshift Intake

Looking at the stock intake design, it seems restrictive considering that incoming air is channeled via two pipes to the air filter boxes.

My thoughts are to remove the stock air filter boxes and fake grills on the bumper and installing cone filters at the end of part 16 on the diagram.

Benefits would be a less restricted pathway for the air and a cooler intake charge as air would be going through the vents on the bumper. Not to mention..the intake noise!

Concerns would be a CEL light but considering the fact that the filter is before the MAF sensor it would seem unlikely. Filters would be by AEM which is a sister company of KN. AEM has a line of dry cone filters which rate pretty highly and remove the concerns with your typical oil based cone filter. AEM is highly regarded in the sport compact market.

 

Last edited by WhiteTardis; 05-05-2015 at 05:28 PM.
  #2  
Old 05-05-2015, 06:19 PM
RawwR's Avatar
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 187
Received 53 Likes on 36 Posts
Default

The majority of the problem with open element air filters are that they also suck in hot air from the engine compartment. The benefits of these "restrictive" box type induction systems is that all the air ingested by the engine is from outside the engine compartment. I would like to see a more efficient design, just not open elements.
 
  #3  
Old 05-05-2015, 06:24 PM
WhiteTardis's Avatar
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 969
Received 397 Likes on 210 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by RawwR
The majority of the problem with open element air filters are that they also suck in hot air from the engine compartment. The benefits of these "restrictive" box type induction systems is that all the air ingested by the engine is from outside the engine compartment. I would like to see a more efficient design, just not open elements.
While I understand what you are referring to, the filter air boxes are away from the engine bay and in the front fender wells immediately behind the fake grill vents on the bumper(circled in red in picture)

That being said..the filters as is are already located away from the engine bay. Removing the fake vents in the bumper will ensure that outside air will be channel directly onto the proposed cone filters.
 

Last edited by WhiteTardis; 05-05-2015 at 06:33 PM.
  #4  
Old 05-05-2015, 06:54 PM
mshedden's Avatar
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Central Virginia
Posts: 701
Received 192 Likes on 128 Posts
Default

Parts #5 & #6 pull the air in from 'up high', no doubt this is to avoid hydrolocking the engine in the case that a higher than normal quantity of water is encountered.

Not sure I'd risk pulling it in from down low.

You could put the filter @ part #9, but warm air.

Also there was a discussion recently wrt oiled filters and air flow where the conclusion was the increase in air flow was likely minimal (fractions of a %) and there was a corresponding increase in dirt through the filter.
 

Last edited by mshedden; 05-05-2015 at 07:00 PM.
  #5  
Old 05-05-2015, 07:01 PM
Stohlen's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Detroit, MI
Posts: 2,032
Received 642 Likes on 411 Posts
Default

I think this will net minimal gains at best. The stock system flows plenty for the stock tune. It wasn't a car designed for anything other than performance.
 
  #6  
Old 05-05-2015, 07:05 PM
WhiteTardis's Avatar
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 969
Received 397 Likes on 210 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Stohlen
I think this will net minimal gains at best. The stock system flows plenty for the stock tune. It wasn't a car designed for anything other than performance.
Not really looking at it from a performance standpoint. Although it may alleviate some of that "choking" feeling that the base V6 suffers from higher RPMs. And not to mention..awesome intake noise on top of the exhaust..


Originally Posted by mshedden
Parts #5 & #6 pull the air in from 'up high', no doubt this is to avoid hydrolocking the engine in the case that a higher than normal quantity of water is encountered.

Not sure I'd risk pulling it in from down low.
I considered that as well however a cone filter would need to be completely submerged underwater for an engine to be hydrolocked. Some light splashing is acceptable. The filter would be upside down anyways so any water would be drained.
 

Last edited by WhiteTardis; 05-05-2015 at 07:08 PM.
  #7  
Old 05-06-2015, 05:16 PM
F-typical's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Herefordshire, England
Posts: 1,498
Received 179 Likes on 153 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by WhiteTardis
Not really looking at it from a performance standpoint. Although it may alleviate some of that "choking" feeling that the base V6 suffers from higher RPMs. And not to mention..awesome intake noise on top of the exhaust.

I considered that as well however a cone filter would need to be completely submerged underwater for an engine to be hydrolocked. Some light splashing is acceptable. The filter would be upside down anyways so any water would be drained.
Noting that the only difference between the Base and S V6 is the tune, I doubt changing the intake system will relieve the 'choking' you speak of above 5k RPM ...
 
  #8  
Old 05-06-2015, 07:32 PM
Unhingd's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Maryland, US
Posts: 16,939
Received 4,661 Likes on 3,366 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by WhiteTardis
Although it may alleviate some of that "choking" feeling that the base V6 suffers from higher RPMs.
The only thing that will significantly address the high rpm "choking" is different cam profiles or porting and polishing the heads if Jag has not already done that.
 
  #9  
Old 05-06-2015, 07:41 PM
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 8,638
Received 4,454 Likes on 2,426 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by WhiteTardis
Not really looking at it from a performance standpoint. Although it may alleviate some of that "choking" feeling that the base V6 suffers from higher RPMs. And not to mention..awesome intake noise on top of the exhaust..
That "choking feeling" will be the ECU pulling the throttle back to limit the power ouput.

You want to free things up, flash the V6S tune into your car, or one of the aftermarket tunes..

The intakes on the V6 are identical to the V8, flow more than enough for the V6...
 
The following 3 users liked this post by Cambo:
FrickenJag (07-21-2015), Panthro (05-29-2016), Schwabe (05-24-2016)
  #10  
Old 05-06-2015, 08:05 PM
Unhingd's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Maryland, US
Posts: 16,939
Received 4,661 Likes on 3,366 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Cambo
That "choking feeling" will be the ECU pulling the throttle back to limit the power ouput.

You want to free things up, flash the V6S tune into your car, or one of the aftermarket tunes..

The intakes on the V6 are identical to the V8, flow more than enough for the V6...
Others on this forum delight in claiming the V6S will burst into flames if you try to tune it.
 
  #11  
Old 05-06-2015, 08:10 PM
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 8,638
Received 4,454 Likes on 2,426 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by lhoboy
Others on this forum delight in claiming the V6S will burst into flames if you try to tune it.
That was regarding pulleys. Tune and pulley are different things.
 
The following users liked this post:
Foosh (05-07-2015)
  #12  
Old 05-06-2015, 08:47 PM
Unhingd's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Maryland, US
Posts: 16,939
Received 4,661 Likes on 3,366 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Cambo
That was regarding pulleys.
I don't believe that differentiation was made at the time. The claim was the the V6S couldn't handle any additional power. Certainly, Jaguar has proven that the base model can handle a tune..
 
  #13  
Old 05-06-2015, 08:53 PM
DJS's Avatar
DJS
DJS is offline
Veteran Member
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Metrowest Boston
Posts: 6,286
Received 2,106 Likes on 1,406 Posts
Default

And, of course, Cambo was suggesting applying the V6S tune to the base V6. I think.

Cambo, you're probably aware that the Apple spellchecker changes you to Cambodia.
 
  #14  
Old 05-06-2015, 10:09 PM
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 8,638
Received 4,454 Likes on 2,426 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by lhoboy
I don't believe that differentiation was made at the time. The claim was the the V6S couldn't handle any additional power. Certainly, Jaguar has proven that the base model can handle a tune..
No it was very much about the pulley.... https://www.jaguarforums.com/forum/f...pulley-139579/

Originally Posted by DJS
And, of course, Cambo was suggesting applying the V6S tune to the base V6. I think.
Exactly what I meant. Flash the V6S file into the standard V6, or load tune without a pulley e.g. Rica for 398hp.

Originally Posted by DJS
Cambo, you're probably aware that the Apple spellchecker changes you to Cambodia.
Hasn't happened in a while but yeah, has been known
 
  #15  
Old 05-07-2015, 07:10 AM
Foosh's Avatar
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Maryland, USA
Posts: 6,177
Received 1,028 Likes on 854 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Cambo
No it was very much about the pulley.... https://www.jaguarforums.com/forum/f...pulley-139579/


Exactly what I meant. Flash the V6S file into the standard V6, or load tune without a pulley e.g. Rica for 398hp.
+1, and I'm nearly convinced that this is a safe way to go. I thought the pulley distinction was always clear, and it was also fairly compelling that the V6S tune is near the edge of what the V6 design can safely handle.
 
  #16  
Old 07-21-2015, 07:27 AM
strippersteel's Avatar
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Douglasville GA
Posts: 257
Received 51 Likes on 31 Posts
Default

Sorry to bring up an old thread but this is the only one I could find about the intake. What about just replacing #7 and #8 on the graph(intake tubes) for a little more power and noise? They appear to have ribs in them so I wonder if they are restrictive at all? Also i'm not a fan of oil based air filters like K&N but what about a couple high performance dry filters?
 
  #17  
Old 07-21-2015, 07:59 AM
FrickenJag's Avatar
Former Sponsor
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Charlotte
Posts: 847
Received 184 Likes on 126 Posts
Default

To add some light to this subject. I've done some testing on the 4.2 Induction thus far (Which has a split tube entry) similar to the 5.0L and it has proven that the stock system isn't that restrictive. I would venture to say the same for the 5.0L. The resonator's surely eliminate some sound, and the ribbed links certainly impact a little on the air flow side.
The overall design of both systems is pretty adequate for stock boost levels. I wired in a MAP sensor in front of the throttle and did some vacuum measurements to see if the system was trying to draw additional air. I wasn't reading more than 1.2 inhg .

With the dual entry, the restriction in the system would be left to the throttle's capability. I would look at half shafting, porting/polishing the throttle first.

If you are interested in smooth carbon replacement parts with resonators removed, I'm working on a mold for this shortly. I just need the plastic parts from throttle to MAF.

If there is enough interest in this I can push development on this faster.

Regards,

Derek Fricke
 
The following 2 users liked this post by FrickenJag:
Panthro (05-29-2016), strippersteel (07-21-2015)
  #18  
Old 07-21-2015, 08:04 AM
strippersteel's Avatar
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Douglasville GA
Posts: 257
Received 51 Likes on 31 Posts
Default

Thanks for your input Derek and i'm defiantly very interested in some smooth intake tubes for my V6 S. I don't see any dry filters yet available yet for my car but I think with the smooth intake tubes and a couple dry filters installed I might see at least a little gain in horsepower and sound.
 
The following users liked this post:
FrickenJag (07-21-2015)
  #19  
Old 07-21-2015, 10:32 AM
FrickenJag's Avatar
Former Sponsor
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Charlotte
Posts: 847
Received 184 Likes on 126 Posts
Default

I agree. Tweaking the entry to the throttle to be more of a bell-mouth would certainly help. Certainly some gain in the sound area as well.

I'll try to get a set of tubing to scan for reverse-engineering asap.

Regards,
Derek Fricke
 
  #20  
Old 07-22-2015, 04:12 AM
domino_z's Avatar
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Australia
Posts: 656
Received 134 Likes on 94 Posts
Default

going to order one of these intakes - not really fussed with the power, more so want to run an open filter element to get more charger whine

Eventuri Carbon Intake Kit Jaguar F Type 5.0 SC - Jaguar F-Type Forum
 
The following users liked this post:
FrickenJag (07-23-2015)


Quick Reply: Makeshift Intake



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:40 AM.