Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

Hey guys,

At the moment ive just got my pod sitting in the engine bay and i dont think its doing the best thing for performance. So i want to ask all the people that have bought those Cold air boxes from the group buys, what do you think of them? Are they worthwhile? Did you notice any difference in power?

Is it worth me spending close to $200 on one, or as i have seen some other people just buy a special material from clark rubber and just use it as a divider is that just as good?

Im leaning towards buying the divider from clark rubber, as its cheaper and i get the feeling that the aluminum boxes would get very hot having such a small enclosed space. Also i just want to know what is the material called? Id like to know what im asking the person behind the counter :D

Cheers

Matt

Link to comment
https://www.sau.com.au/forums/topic/40102-people-with-cai-boxes/
Share on other sites

Hi guys,

I had HKS Pods on my GTR, when we fitted the new turbo's and all my upgrades we opted to throw out the Pods and re-fit the standard airbox with a KN Filter. Considering my upgrades and comparing them to other GTR with pods, I made the same power if not more, I also noticed I can't hear my blow valves anymore... Personally I found in hot weather with the Pods you really felt the heat & power loss, we'll see how the standard box goes.

Some food for thought, the Mines R34GTR N1 runs standard airbox with a mines fliter, and it produced the the lap record at tzsukba [spelling]

well i fitted mine weeks ago.. considering the quality of contruction and how every little hole was exactly the right place, i reckon it was $160 well spent. Only really because i already had the pod, and going back to a box would cost more than staying with the pod.

But as for performance.. only drove it one day with the box on. When i get it back will do some more "in depth" testing. I did notice the heat soak previously there, especially when driving in traffic and the like.

MJ, not sure where you got the $200 figure, I organised the group buy, and they're $160 delivered from Perth.

Jimbo, I went from standard airbox with K&N panel filter to Apexi dual funnel and CAI box. Definitely seems more responsive, love the sound, the box itself doesn't heat up much at... If you're after insulation stuff, I just went onto a building site and asked the guys for a metre or so of that insulation stuff they use in walls. Used race tape to really seal the box up nice and tight.

I bought some of that worm like plastic piping that bends (? what it's called) which was $10. Hear of other people just using drain pipe too! Gonna make some sort of bracket up for the end that sits inside the box and make something up to fit my front bar so I get direct air feed.

Nice mod to do, as you dress up your engine bay, healthier for your engine and you would have to get a few extra kilowatts out of this mod.

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


  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Yeah, that's fine**. But the numbers you came up with are just wrong. Try it for yourself. Put in any voltage from the possible range and see what result you get. You get nonsense. ** When I say "fine", I mean, it's still shit. The very simple linear formula (slope & intercept) is shit for a sensor with a non-linear response. This is the curve, from your data above. Look at the CURVE! It's only really linear between about 30 and 90 °C. And if you used only that range to define a curve, it would be great. But you would go more and more wrong as you went to higher temps. And that is why the slope & intercept found when you use 50 and 150 as the end points is so bad halfway between those points. The real curve is a long way below the linear curve which just zips straight between the end points, like this one. You could probably use the same slope and a lower intercept, to move that straight line down, and spread the error out. But you would 5-10°C off in a lot of places. You'd need to say what temperature range you really wanted to be most right - say, 100 to 130, and plop the line closest to teh real curve in that region, which would make it quite wrong down at the lower temperatures. Let me just say that HPTuners are not being realistic in only allowing for a simple linear curve. 
    • I feel I should re-iterate. The above picture is the only option available in the software and the blurb from HP Tuners I quoted earlier is the only way to add data to it and that's the description they offer as to how to figure it out. The only fields available is the blank box after (Input/ ) and the box right before = Output. Those are the only numbers that can be entered.
    • No, your formula is arse backwards. Mine is totally different to yours, and is the one I said was bang on at 50 and 150. I'll put your data into Excel (actually it already is, chart it and fit a linear fit to it, aiming to make it evenly wrong across the whole span. But not now. Other things to do first.
    • God damnit. The only option I actually have in the software is the one that is screenshotted. I am glad that I at least got it right... for those two points. Would it actually change anything if I chose/used 80C and 120C as the two points instead? My brain wants to imagine the formula put into HPtuners would be the same equation, otherwise none of this makes sense to me, unless: 1) The formula you put into VCM Scanner/HPTuners is always linear 2) The two points/input pairs are only arbitrary to choose (as the documentation implies) IF the actual scaling of the sensor is linear. then 3) If the scaling is not linear, the two points you choose matter a great deal, because the formula will draw a line between those two points only.
    • Nah, that is hella wrong. If I do a simple linear between 150°C (0.407v) and 50°C (2.98v) I get the formula Temperature = -38.8651*voltage + 165.8181 It is perfectly correct at 50 and 150, but it is as much as 20° out in the region of 110°C, because the actual data is significantly non-linear there. It is no more than 4° out down at the lowest temperatures, but is is seriously shit almost everywhere. I cannot believe that the instruction is to do a 2 point linear fit. I would say the method I used previously would have to be better.
×
×
  • Create New...