CGS SS Air Intake
07-04-2008, 11:09 AM
#21
Senior Member
Join Date: 08-18-2007
Location: Warrington PA
Posts: 602
thanks for the pics, it seems like it needs that plate (from the GMPP setup)around the bottom to help reflect the engine heat away from the filter. it will be interesting to see if there is any gain at all in HP &TQ with this unit. only time will tell. BTW, good pics
07-04-2008, 12:09 PM
#22
Senior Member
Join Date: 04-03-2008
Location: A state of L N F Performance
Posts: 1,434
Dyno claims 11 wheel hp
07-04-2008, 01:09 PM
#23
Platinum Member
Join Date: 05-09-2006
Location: "Upland" Mesa, Arizona
Posts: 6,805
But remember, that's with the hood up. I know, I know, ALL aftermarket intake manufacturers test with the hood up. Yep, that's probably correct. But the auto manufacturers, at least GM, do not. They test in a carefully control chamber, that provides REAL WORLD/USE numbers and the hood is down.
Also remember, the CGS intake is a "heat soak" intake which pulls air from the engine area. Obviously testing with the hood up would provide favorable results, since the heat dispates rapidly in a non-confined environment (think about the HOOD BLANKET that the SS DOES NOT HAVE....wonder why). GM's stock intake pulls intake air from the front grill/fender area. A difference of some 30-60 degrees (3-6 HP). Now think about this......why would GM include the additional cost of the tube (although somewhat minor....but multiply that times 50,000-70,000) to capture the air from the front of the engine compartment vs. from INSIDE the engine compartment?
Here's an idea....
Do a dyno test with the stock intake removed. Put a filter on the end of the MAS tub (to prevent dirt/dust ingestion) and run the dyno with the hood up. Do you suppose you could/would witness a HP increase? You bet....I've seen it done when the first CGS/HHR arguement appeared (If a former member was still participating on this forum, he could validate my statements. I provided him the info).
Realize, I'm NOT indicating you will not recognize SOME power increase with the CGS. But, I seriously doubt that 11 HP is realistic.....more like 2-4. Especially with an intake sucking air from an engine compartment that generates additional heat do to a turbo.
Also remember, the CGS intake is a "heat soak" intake which pulls air from the engine area. Obviously testing with the hood up would provide favorable results, since the heat dispates rapidly in a non-confined environment (think about the HOOD BLANKET that the SS DOES NOT HAVE....wonder why). GM's stock intake pulls intake air from the front grill/fender area. A difference of some 30-60 degrees (3-6 HP). Now think about this......why would GM include the additional cost of the tube (although somewhat minor....but multiply that times 50,000-70,000) to capture the air from the front of the engine compartment vs. from INSIDE the engine compartment?
Here's an idea....
Do a dyno test with the stock intake removed. Put a filter on the end of the MAS tub (to prevent dirt/dust ingestion) and run the dyno with the hood up. Do you suppose you could/would witness a HP increase? You bet....I've seen it done when the first CGS/HHR arguement appeared (If a former member was still participating on this forum, he could validate my statements. I provided him the info).
Realize, I'm NOT indicating you will not recognize SOME power increase with the CGS. But, I seriously doubt that 11 HP is realistic.....more like 2-4. Especially with an intake sucking air from an engine compartment that generates additional heat do to a turbo.
07-04-2008, 01:23 PM
#24
Senior Member
Join Date: 06-27-2008
Location: Arlington, Texas
Posts: 276
But remember, that's with the hood up. I know, I know, ALL aftermarket intake manufacturers test with the hood up. Yep, that's probably correct. But the auto manufacturers, at least GM, do not. They test in a carefully control chamber, that provides REAL WORLD/USE numbers and the hood is down.
Also remember, the CGS intake is a "heat soak" intake which pulls air from the engine area. Obviously testing with the hood up would provide favorable results, since the heat dispates rapidly in a non-confined environment (think about the HOOD BLANKET that the SS DOES NOT HAVE....wonder why). GM's stock intake pulls intake air from the front grill/fender area. A difference of some 30-60 degrees (3-6 HP). Now think about this......why would GM include the additional cost of the tube (although somewhat minor....but multiply that times 50,000-70,000) to capture the air from the front of the engine compartment vs. from INSIDE the engine compartment?
Here's an idea....
Do a dyno test with the stock intake removed. Put a filter on the end of the MAS tub (to prevent dirt/dust ingestion) and run the dyno with the hood up. Do you suppose you could/would witness a HP increase? You bet....I've seen it done when the first CGS/HHR arguement appeared (If a former member was still participating on this forum, he could validate my statements. I provided him the info).
Realize, I'm NOT indicating you will not recognize SOME power increase with the CGS. But, I seriously doubt that 11 HP is realistic.....more like 2-4. Especially with an intake sucking air from an engine compartment that generates additional heat do to a turbo.
Also remember, the CGS intake is a "heat soak" intake which pulls air from the engine area. Obviously testing with the hood up would provide favorable results, since the heat dispates rapidly in a non-confined environment (think about the HOOD BLANKET that the SS DOES NOT HAVE....wonder why). GM's stock intake pulls intake air from the front grill/fender area. A difference of some 30-60 degrees (3-6 HP). Now think about this......why would GM include the additional cost of the tube (although somewhat minor....but multiply that times 50,000-70,000) to capture the air from the front of the engine compartment vs. from INSIDE the engine compartment?
Here's an idea....
Do a dyno test with the stock intake removed. Put a filter on the end of the MAS tub (to prevent dirt/dust ingestion) and run the dyno with the hood up. Do you suppose you could/would witness a HP increase? You bet....I've seen it done when the first CGS/HHR arguement appeared (If a former member was still participating on this forum, he could validate my statements. I provided him the info).
Realize, I'm NOT indicating you will not recognize SOME power increase with the CGS. But, I seriously doubt that 11 HP is realistic.....more like 2-4. Especially with an intake sucking air from an engine compartment that generates additional heat do to a turbo.
07-04-2008, 01:55 PM
#25
Senior Member
Join Date: 04-03-2008
Location: A state of L N F Performance
Posts: 1,434
But remember, that's with the hood up. I know, I know, ALL aftermarket intake manufacturers test with the hood up. Yep, that's probably correct. But the auto manufacturers, at least GM, do not. They test in a carefully control chamber, that provides REAL WORLD/USE numbers and the hood is down.
Also remember, the CGS intake is a "heat soak" intake which pulls air from the engine area. Obviously testing with the hood up would provide favorable results, since the heat dispates rapidly in a non-confined environment (think about the HOOD BLANKET that the SS DOES NOT HAVE....wonder why). GM's stock intake pulls intake air from the front grill/fender area. A difference of some 30-60 degrees (3-6 HP). Now think about this......why would GM include the additional cost of the tube (although somewhat minor....but multiply that times 50,000-70,000) to capture the air from the front of the engine compartment vs. from INSIDE the engine compartment?
Here's an idea....
Do a dyno test with the stock intake removed. Put a filter on the end of the MAS tub (to prevent dirt/dust ingestion) and run the dyno with the hood up. Do you suppose you could/would witness a HP increase? You bet....I've seen it done when the first CGS/HHR arguement appeared (If a former member was still participating on this forum, he could validate my statements. I provided him the info).
Realize, I'm NOT indicating you will not recognize SOME power increase with the CGS. But, I seriously doubt that 11 HP is realistic.....more like 2-4. Especially with an intake sucking air from an engine compartment that generates additional heat do to a turbo.
Also remember, the CGS intake is a "heat soak" intake which pulls air from the engine area. Obviously testing with the hood up would provide favorable results, since the heat dispates rapidly in a non-confined environment (think about the HOOD BLANKET that the SS DOES NOT HAVE....wonder why). GM's stock intake pulls intake air from the front grill/fender area. A difference of some 30-60 degrees (3-6 HP). Now think about this......why would GM include the additional cost of the tube (although somewhat minor....but multiply that times 50,000-70,000) to capture the air from the front of the engine compartment vs. from INSIDE the engine compartment?
Here's an idea....
Do a dyno test with the stock intake removed. Put a filter on the end of the MAS tub (to prevent dirt/dust ingestion) and run the dyno with the hood up. Do you suppose you could/would witness a HP increase? You bet....I've seen it done when the first CGS/HHR arguement appeared (If a former member was still participating on this forum, he could validate my statements. I provided him the info).
Realize, I'm NOT indicating you will not recognize SOME power increase with the CGS. But, I seriously doubt that 11 HP is realistic.....more like 2-4. Especially with an intake sucking air from an engine compartment that generates additional heat do to a turbo.
07-04-2008, 01:59 PM
#26
Senior Member
Join Date: 01-14-2006
Location: La Crescenta, CA
Posts: 1,615
Thanks Snoopy for the info about dyno for an engine on an engine stand if that is how it is done in the controlled room.
With the discussion of openor closed hood I was wondering how sitting on an egine stand compared.
IMO I do not know if/how much torque increase/lose is but when I put my foot in it coming up a hill I felt more torque steer.
With the discussion of openor closed hood I was wondering how sitting on an egine stand compared.
IMO I do not know if/how much torque increase/lose is but when I put my foot in it coming up a hill I felt more torque steer.
07-06-2008, 11:20 AM
#27
Banned
Join Date: 06-20-2008
Location: Chi-Towns burbs
Posts: 1,682
try to see if you can find a carbon fiber pipe for the intake that would help you. On the other hand does anyone know if we can gt a cold air intake for the car, it looks like it comes with one stock though too.
07-07-2008, 07:48 PM
#30
Former Sponsor
Join Date: 04-15-2008
Location: Mckinney
Posts: 142
Under hood temps,my favorite read-By Jim Bell
I am not bashing open element under hood filters,so please don't take this the wrong way.These are hard facts that I love to send people to read....one of my favorites by Jim bell!
Andy
http://www.kennebell.net/techinfo/ge...AirWARNING.pdf
Andy
http://www.kennebell.net/techinfo/ge...AirWARNING.pdf