Jump to content
SAU Community

Pod Filter & Intake Setup...

boostED82

By boostED82,
in Engines & Forced Induction

 Share

Recommended Posts

boostED82 Collaborator

boostED82

Posted
Posted

Hi guys, just wondering, for those who are running non-AFM tuned R34 GTR's, what are most of you running in terms of pod filter setup and intake design? I know that R32 and R33 are different so this is really a thread for R34 GTR only.

There's the APEXi twin power intake kit, then there's the HKS and Trust versions. BUT what options are there available if I wanted to run twin K&N pods? Must the intake pipes be custom fabricated or is there a kit available?

Interested to hear what people have done as I have a D-Jetro and want to upgrade my standard air box.

Cheers,

Ed

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/277070-pod-filter-intake-setup/
Share on other sites
Johnny Veteran

Johnny

Posted
Posted

Any reason why u wanna run the knn filters? seems apexi got the best rating for airflow/filtration so a simple kit from them would be the best bet.

knn i recall uses a hoseclamp so you could use the standard rubber intake hoses and a piece of alluminuim/stainless to adapt the filter onto; woud be very simple and cheap as knn filters are washable....but then again, so are apexi and you can buy new ones every 2 years or so for 150bsu so they always look new.

as you have a vs2, id say money aint too big an issue, possibly an arc airbox to keep the cops from asking too many questions.

(OO)SKYLINE(OO) Grand Master

(OO)SKYLINE(OO)

Posted
Posted

There is not much difference between the R32/R33/R34 GTR intake systems.

As Johnny said APexi are decent pod filters and the kit should come with 2 metal intake pipes to you can bolt on the air pods then bolt on to the AFM's.

One of the reasons I think to run an APexi D-Jetro, is for the GTR's which run massive single turbo conversions and there is no AFM, but I too have seen it on twin turbo setups.

I am not too clear why or what the difference is... Instead of having the 2 AFM's, they are replaced by 2 Map Sensors... Probably so the APexi Power FC can monitor it... Control it too... Maybe.

APexi pods - http://www.nengun.com/apexi/power-intake-gtr

Looks like they do come with pieces of aluminium/stainless to adapt the pods on.

Any reason for modifying to twin air pods?

The standard R34 GTR air box and filter is good for over 300 kW's.

boostED82 Collaborator

boostED82

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Hey thanks for your replies guys, appreciate your thoughts.

Johnny:

My tuner is getting better results from K&N's over the APEXi's. I've seen results from comparisons on an R32 GTR and Mazda 6 MPS. The ARC airbox is close to double the price, and is it really worth it for the extra 10hp or so gain vs twin pods? It's not really that stock either, it's big and silver with orange filters haha. But I do appreciate it is a good piece of gear though.

(OO)SKYLINE(OO):

I went wth D-Jetro as the AFM's max out. Yes they run off MAP sensors and yes you can use oiled filters now that the AFM's are bypassed/removed. Also, this means the intake pipe can also be increased in diameter to a custom or off the shelf kit . The APEXi Power intake kit retains the AFM piping so I'm really looking to get rid of them all together as I don't need them there. As for reason in modifying, I'm convinced that twin pods will flow better than the stock air box.

GTRNUR Grand Master

GTRNUR

Posted
Posted

I kept the AFM's installed for that "stock" appearance when I ran a map based ecu in my R33. They arent a performance restriction unless your chasing over 600hp. That opens up the world of other options for AFM based air filters. I was using an aluminium ARC air box. They have nice trumpets inside the box where the MAF sensors bolt onto it.

(OO)SKYLINE(OO) Grand Master

(OO)SKYLINE(OO)

Posted
Posted
Hey thanks for your replies guys, appreciate your thoughts.

Johnny:

My tuner is getting better results from K&N's over the APEXi's. I've seen results from comparisons on an R32 GTR and Mazda 6 MPS. The ARC airbox is close to double the price, and is it really worth it for the extra 10hp or so gain vs twin pods? It's not really that stock either, it's big and silver with orange filters haha. But I do appreciate it is a good piece of gear though.

(OO)SKYLINE(OO):

I went wth D-Jetro as the AFM's max out. Yes they run off MAP sensors and yes you can use oiled filters now that the AFM's are bypassed/removed. Also, this means the intake pipe can also be increased in diameter to a custom or off the shelf kit . The APEXi Power intake kit retains the AFM piping so I'm really looking to get rid of them all together as I don't need them there. As for reason in modifying, I'm convinced that twin pods will flow better than the stock air box.

Right I see.

That explains the point of D-Jetro. Maxing out the AFM's and want even more air = Have a bigger air pod... LOL!

So how big of a pod do you want?

You could take off the AFM piping and just have the pod itself... :P

Yeah, you will get a lot of air in with twin pods... Since you have a Nur, which runs 1.2 Bar = 17.4 Psi, pods will free up the air flow with your test proven.

I guess you can shield off the pods on the side and retain the standard air feed to feed air to the pods.

boostED82 Collaborator

boostED82

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I want to run standard size'd K&N pod's with the AFM's removed so I have a slightly larger diameter intake but don't know what pipes I need. At this stage I think they'd have to be custom made as I see no kits available from K&N or even a generic type to suit 34GTR. I know APEXi and HKS do the full 'hard piping' kits but they're stupidly overpriced in my opinion (in excess of $750+) - may as well go a full ARC intake box.

Anyway thanks guys, appreciate all your comments. I just wanted to know if anyone else was running K&N pod's and what piping kits were/are available to suit them non-AFM style.

Cheers,

Ed

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      Yup. You can get creative and make a sort of "bracket" with cable ties. Put 2 around the sender with a third passing underneath them strapped down against the sender. Then that third one is able to be passed through some hole at right angles to the orientation of the sender. Or some variation on the theme. Yes.... ummm, with caveats? I mean, the sender is BSP and you would likely have AN stuff on the hose, so yes, there would be the adapter you mention. But the block end will either be 1/8 NPT if that thread is still OK in there, or you can drill and tap it out to 1/4 BSP or NPT and use appropriate adapter there. As it stands, your mention of 1/8 BSPT male seems... wrong for the 1/8 NPT female it has to go into. The hose will be better, because even with the bush, the mass of the sender will be "hanging" off a hard threaded connection and will add some stress/strain to that. It might fail in the future. The hose eliminates almost all such risk - but adds in several more threaded connections to leak from! It really should be tapered, but it looks very long in that photo with no taper visible. If you have it in hand you should be able to see if it tapered or not. There technically is no possibility of a mechanical seal with a parallel male in a parallel female, so it is hard to believe that it is parallel male, but weirder things have happened. Maybe it's meant to seat on some surface when screwed in on the original installation? Anyway, at that thread size, parallel in parallel, with tape and goop, will seal just fine.
    • Kinkstaah
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Kinkstaah · Posted

      How do you propose I cable tie this: To something securely? Is it really just a case of finding a couple of holes and ziptying it there so it never goes flying or starts dangling around, more or less? Then run a 1/8 BSP Female to [hose adapter of choice?/AN?] and then the opposing fitting at the bush-into-oil-block end? being the hose-into-realistically likely a 1/8 BSPT male) Is this going to provide any real benefit over using a stainless/steel 1/4 to 1/8 BSPT reducing bush? I am making the assumption the OEM sender is BSPT not BSPP/BSP
    • funkymonkey
      Jacks that fit under GTR lips that can reach the subframe?

      By funkymonkey · Posted

      I fashioned a ramp out of a couple of pieces of 140x35 lumber, to get the bumper up slightly, and then one of these is what I use
    • GTSBoy
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By GTSBoy · Posted

      I wouldn't worry about dissimilar metal corrosion, should you just buy/make a steel replacement. There will be thread tape and sealant compound between the metals. The few little spots where they touch each other will be deep inside the joint, unable to get wet. And the alloy block is much much larger than a small steel fitting, so there is plenty of "sacrificial" capacity there. Any bush you put in there will be dissimilar anyway. Either steel or brass. Maybe stainless. All of them are different to the other parts in the chain. But what I said above still applies.
    • Duncan
      Mistakes were made, my R34 Story

      By Duncan · Posted

      You are all good then, I didn't realise the port was in a part you can (have!) remove. Just pull the broken part out, clean it and the threads should be fine. Yes, the whole point about remote mounting is it takes almost all of the vibration out via the flexible hose. You just need a convenient chassis point and a cable tie or 3.
×
×
  • Create New...