Chevrolet Cruze Forums banner
21 - 40 of 691 Posts
yea i figured with an intake you would be able to hear it more. guess ill have to wait till i order mine from turbotech. btw is the air box supposed to be somewhat lose on the passenger side after taking out the resonator. it wiggles
 
Discussion starter · #22 ·
Can hear mine with a CAI clear as day at 5500RPM...
I couldn't really justify the $200+ to hear a "whoosh-psss" when I'm trying to drive it to save fuel and save money.

yea i figured with an intake you would be able to hear it more. guess ill have to wait till i order mine from turbotech. btw is the air box supposed to be somewhat lose on the passenger side after taking out the resonator. it wiggles
It may wiggle a bit, and it will be a slight bit loose, but the bottom of the duct has a rubber seal over it so it won't be moving much at all. You will be able to hear it much better with the intake, although you'll also hear it better with a K&N drop-in filter.
 
Discussion starter · #24 ·
I never hear my turbo, I think it kicks in at 2500 rpm, and I rarely go up that high.
I can hear it from 1500RPM on up. Its a bit faint at 1500RPM, but its there. From 1600RPM on up, there's no way you wouldn't be able to hear it. I do remember it wasn't as loud with the stock paper filter than it is with the K&N panel filter, but you could still hear it.
 
I couldn't really justify the $200+ to hear a "whoosh-psss" when I'm trying to drive it to save fuel and save money.



It may wiggle a bit, and it will be a slight bit loose, but the bottom of the duct has a rubber seal over it so it won't be moving much at all. You will be able to hear it much better with the intake, although you'll also hear it better with a K&N drop-in filter.


I spent the money on an intake for something that was designed for an intent reason. I don't hack and slash a car to get marginal better flow (and hear the turbo noise as that is the only reason for what your doing). Plus if you want fuel economy you want an intake with a nice smooth tube, not the corrugated zip tube that comes on the car, creates a ton of turbulence...
 
Discussion starter · #27 · (Edited)
I spent the money on an intake for something that was designed for an intent reason. I don't hack and slash a car to get marginal better flow (and hear the turbo noise as that is the only reason for what your doing). Plus if you want fuel economy you want an intake with a nice smooth tube, not the corrugated zip tube that comes on the car, creates a ton of turbulence...
Its not a hack and slash. Its a bypass and a legitimate one at that. I know you spent $200+ on an intake, but nobody asked you to justify in this thread. The flow is more than marginal.

In the years I spent porting cylinder heads, I learned a few very important concepts, one of which is that a polished intake runner is slower than a rough one. Air moves faster and more smoothly over pockets of air than it does over mirror smooth metal surfaces. The only real "smooth surface" in the K&N intake is the tubing that goes from the filter to the 90 degree bend, which is still plastic and doesn't get replaced. If I thought that I could gain a massive amount of power from just replacing that tubing, I'd go on ebay and get myself a mandrel bent aluminum tube and be done with it. You probably know how golf balls work (if not, research it), and some very high end speaker designers use dimpled flared ports to improve output by way of reducing turbulence. How much do you want to wager that our stock accordion flex tube flows just as well as or better than a shiny aluminum tube of the same diameter?

With regard to "marginal difference," I don't have the money to spend on a dyno to prove to you that there is a performance increase, but I challenge you to consider where your performance increase comes from. How much of an air restriction does the stock airbox alone actually create?

K&N claims a 6.4hp increase going from the completely bone stock intake to their performance cone filter with a practically useless heat shield. You have nearly 4 feet of plumbing going from above the radiator support making a few bends down and around the radiator, into the bumper well, through a resonator, and up through the fender well. How much of that 6.4hp increase do you think was from bypassing that system alone?

Say you take the dense paper filter out of the stock airbox and drop a K&N panel filter in there while also bypassing the resonator and excessive tubing, (it has already been proven that even K&N panel filters out-flow paper). Now how much of a difference do you think there will be?

The K&N intake will suck in mostly hot air from the engine bay. To my kwowledge, K&N does not instruct you to remove the resonator duct. This mod will suck in mostly cool air from the fenderwell. Do the math. There's a chance my "hacked and slashed" intake with a used $25 (shipped to me by another member here) K&N panel filter is making [insignificantly] more power than a $200+ K&N performance cone filter

I can't see how removing nearly 4 feet of plumbing with 3-4 significant bends and an airbox resonator will provide only marginal gains (compared to a K&N intake) and serve only to allow us to hear the turbo.

I didn't spend money on an intake because the performance gains are minimal and at the end of the day, compared to this modification with a K&N panel filter, its really just for show (or sound), unless you think $200+ for a ~1-2hp gain is a bargain.

Here's an article I found regarding porting and polishing:

Porting and Polishing

PolishingFinally, we get to the subject of polishing. Polishing is, if possible, a myth within a myth. It is one of those traditional yet ineffective techniques which has somehow survived in the dank swamp of motorcycle mythology. However, the industry is more to blame than the unwitting public. The truth is, port polishing in a practical sense serves merely to "sell" expensive porting jobs. It's "eye candy." The customer has been conditioned to be more easily impressed by the unreality of what he sees than the reality of what he can't see. Sort of like the detail work done on your car during its 10,000 mile inspection... ...The polish gives the customer something to look at.
Furthermore, polish is not only unnecessary, it's actually harmful, in two ways. The first concerns the airflow itself. The experience of countless engine builders, plus research by Superflow, Boeing, and various members of the Society of Automotive Engineers, indicate that a smooth surface is not necessarily the slipperiest where air is concerned. Ever notice that an airplane's wings are not shiny smooth, but rough? The rough surface reduces air drag, and the wing glides through the air easier. Olympic bobsled teams stick sandpaper-like skateboard grip tape to the sides of the sled and the tops of their helmets for the same reason. Air tends to get lazy on a smooth surface. It's called the "boundary layer effect," and it refers to the fact that an ultra-smooth surface accumulates air pressure next to it. This pressure is really stagnant air, and it effectively obstructs airflow. A slightly roughened surface eliminates this boundary layer and increases airflow.


 
There is so much wrong with the above that I don't even know where to start.

Beside the point that you're trolling this thread as you have nothing to gain and nothing to contribute...

Its not a hack and slash. Its a bypass and a legitimate one at that. I know you spent $200+ on an intake, but nobody asked you to justify in this thread. The flow is more than marginal.

In the years I spent porting cylinder heads, I learned a few very important concepts, one of which is that a polished intake runner is slower than a rough one. Air moves faster and more smoothly over pockets of air than it does over mirror smooth metal surfaces. The only real "smooth surface" in the K&N intake is the tubing that goes from the filter to the 90 degree bend, which is still plastic and doesn't get replaced. If I thought that I could gain a massive amount of power from just replacing that tubing, I'd go on ebay and get myself a mandrel bent aluminum tube and be done with it. You probably know how golf balls work (if not, research it), and some very high end speaker designers use dimpled flared ports to improve output by way of reducing turbulence. How much do you want to wager that our stock accordion flex tube flows just as well as or better than a shiny aluminum tube of the same diameter?

With regard to "marginal difference," I don't have the money to spend on a dyno to prove to you that there is a performance increase, but I challenge you to use some logical thinking and consider where your performance increase comes from. How much of an air restriction does the stock airbox alone actually create?

Let me break it down for you. K&N claims a 6.4hp increase going from the completely bone stock intake to their performance cone filter with a practically useless heat shield. You have nearly 4 feet of plumbing going from above the radiator support making a few bends down and around the radiator, into the bumper well, through a resonator, and up through the fender well. How much of that 6.4hp increase do you think was from bypassing that system alone?

I'll give you a hint: most of it.

Lets go a step further. Say you take the dense paper filter out of the stock airbox and drop a K&N panel filter in there while also bypassing the resonator and excessive tubing, (it has already been proven that even K&N panel filters out-flow paper). Now how much of a difference do you think there will be? If you think there will be more than a 1-2hp difference between the two, you should talk to a few performance engineers.

Now, lets go even one step further. The K&N intake will suck in mostly hot air from the engine bay. To my kwowledge, they (K&N) do not instruct you to remove the resonator duct. This mod will suck in mostly cool air from the fenderwell. Do the math. There's a chance my "hacked and slashed" intake with a used $25 (shipped to me by another member here) K&N panel filter is making more power than a $200+ K&N performance cone filter

Perhaps you'd like to explain to me and everyone else in this thread how removing nearly 4 feet of plumbing with 3-4 significant bends and an airbox resonator will provide only marginal gains (compared to a K&N intake) and serve only to allow us to hear the turbo.

I didn't spend money on an intake because the performance gains are minimal and at the end of the day, compared to this modification with a K&N panel filter, its really just for show (or sound), unless you think $200+ for a ~1-2hp gain is a bargain.

Here's something to sink your teeth into before you reply. You'll find the same information in a number of other articles on porting and polishing.

Porting and Polishing



A rough metal surface (surface finish is rough) and corrugated(surface finish is smooth) piece of plastic aren't really comparable... thanks though.

When was the last time you put an engine on a dyno and looked at CA50, burn angles and so forth? I do that as part of my job...

I am just trying to help people understand that INJEN, K & N, ZZP actually did some research and flow analysis to make their products, your just telling people something helps with no actual data (as you pointed out above). The entire intake is designed to create a certain pressure drop pre turbo, along with resonance cancellation (not just noise but pressure waves as well)

a dyno will prove nothing to me, instrument with pressure sensors and than we can talk as that is how you analyze an intake system which is what the other companies would have done...

I didn't buy my intake for HP gains...
 
Any easy way for me to find that out?
 
I'm hoping the bigger entry is for the fender side, and the smaller is for the turbo?
 
Discussion starter · #34 · (Edited)
A rough metal surface (surface finish is rough) and corrugated(surface finish is smooth) piece of plastic aren't really comparable... thanks though.

When was the last time you put an engine on a dyno and looked at CA50, burn angles and so forth? I do that as part of my job...

I am just trying to help people understand that INJEN, K & N, ZZP actually did some research and flow analysis to make their products, your just telling people something helps with no actual data (as you pointed out above). The entire intake is designed to create a certain pressure drop pre turbo, along with resonance cancellation (not just noise but pressure waves as well)

a dyno will prove nothing to me, instrument with pressure sensors and than we can talk as that is how you analyze an intake system...
What exactly does your job have to do with this? I don't tell people that I'm a Systems Security Administrator when I'm on tech forums to make myself sound more credible.

If you're comparing the accordion tube to the shiny metal tube that the K&N intake uses, you're not going to see significant gains if you see any at all. The Cruze is not a high horsepower vehicle where some of those minimal gains could be realized.

Injen didn't do a lot of research. They made a tube, put a bung on it for the MAF sensor chose an appropriate filter, and even then it wasn't well designed as people reported rough idling issues. So much for "engineering." If it wasn't for the MAF needing a special bung welded to the intake tube, I would have made my own like I did on every other car I've driven.

You make it sound like dozens of hours of engineering went into these. Not quite. The only flow analysis they did was put the car on the dyno and record the numbers. Its a shallow bend and a generic K&N filter on an aluminum tube. Any additional flow analysis will have been absolutely useless because the only thing that matters when the intake is on your car is how much power it helps you put to the ground, and how well it filters particles, and in this case, not only is it insignificant between the stock and K&N/ZZP intake, but its even more insignificant between the bypassed modded intake and the K&N/ZZP intake, and I don't need a dyno, a bench flow test, and a myriad of engineering tests to prove it.

Resonance cancellation is not a significant area of concern with air filters or intakes. I could see if you were designing new intake runners, but your primary concern with intakes is flow and reduction or elimination of restriction. As you pointed out, you're looking for a pre-turbo pressure drop as there will always be a vacuum inside the pipe between the filter and the turbo.

There's no need to over-engineer or over-analyze this. The stock system is restrictive and it doesn't take a genius to see it. There are 3-4 feet of plumbing through which air has to pass through including a resonator box before it gets to the air filter box. I don't need charts, numbers, data, and proof to demonstrate that there's a restriction.

Fact: the stock system is restrictive
Fact: the K&N and ZZP intakes both measure 5-6whp better than the stock intake
Fact: the modified stock intake per this thread removes a great deal of restriction
Fact: the K&N and ZZP intakes will not measure 5-6whp better than the modified stock intake
 
Any easy way for me to find that out?
If you are that unsure, take the zip tube off at the turbo and check to see if the plastic fitting is there, otherwise remove the bits that this post is telling you to remove... you will find it somewhere in there.

Gotta be careful when working on your car mate!
 


im almost positive the bigger half. Should i just try starting it?
 
Discussion starter · #38 ·
View attachment 3798

im almost positive the bigger half. Should i just try starting it?
That's the resonator box you just bypassed. Whatever dropped in there will stay there until you pull back the bumper and remove the resonator box. Not a big deal at all. Air comes up through that box and into the filter box, during which it has to pass through the filter before it goes into the engine.

If you would have somehow dropped it inside the rubber tube that connects to your airbox that goes back into to the engine (directly into the turbo), you'd have to remove the tube to get it out.

Nothing to worry about here.
 
What exactly does your job have to do with this? I don't tell people that I'm a Systems Security Administrator when I'm on tech forums to make myself sound more credible.

If you're comparing the accordion tube to the shiny metal tube that the K&N intake uses, you're not going to see significant gains if you see any at all. The Cruze is not a high horsepower vehicle where some of those minimal gains could be realized.

Injen didn't do a lot of research. They made a tube, put a bung on it for the MAF sensor chose an appropriate filter, and even then it wasn't well designed as people reported rough idling issues. So much for "engineering." If it wasn't for the MAF needing a special bung welded to the intake tube, I would have made my own like I did on every other car I've driven.

You make it sound like dozens of hours of engineering went into these. Not quite, at least not for the Cruze, and certainly not for the K&N or the Injen intake. The only flow analysis they did was put the car on the dyno and record the numbers. Its a shallow bend and a generic K&N filter on an aluminum tube. Any additional flow analysis will have been absolutely useless because the only thing that matters when the intake is on your car is how much power it helps you put to the ground, and in this case, not only is it insignificant between the stock and K&N/ZZP intake, but its even more insignificant between the bypassed modded intake and the K&N/ZZP intake, and I don't need a dyno, a bench flow test, and a myriad of engineering tests to prove it.

Resonance cancellation is not an area of concern with air filters or intakes. I could see if you were designing new intake runners, but your primary concern with intakes is flow and reduction or elimination of restriction. As you pointed out, you're looking for a pre-turbo pressure drop as there will always be a vacuum inside the pipe between the filter and the turbo.

There's no need to over-engineer or over-analyze this. The stock system is restrictive and it doesn't take a genius to see it. There's 3-4 feet of plumbing through which air has to pass through including a resonator box before it gets to the air filter box. I don't need charts, numbers, data, and proof to demonstrate that there's a restriction.

Fact: the stock system is restrictive
Fact: the K&N and ZZP intakes both measure 5-6whp better than the stock intake
Fact: the modified stock intake per this thread removes a great deal of restriction
Fact: the K&N and ZZP intakes will not measure 5-6whp better than the modified stock intake

I leave it to you to waste a few hours of your time to prove the above facts.
Got no reason to waste my time... I spent the $200 cause I don't mind spending a little money when I already spent $18,000.

As I stated in my other thread... trying to simply prevent misinformation from spreading.

Fact: You can't prove your modified system to be less restrictive without doing some testing, you can make claims...
Fact: FYI pressure pulse in the intake will cause a restriction without a physical restriction being present. There is a reason they spend endless hours tuning that intake at OEM's.

What if the zip tube from the air box to the turbo is the choke point? You don't know, why don't you just put a filter right on the turbo an eliminate all restriction just to be sure.

I merely brought up the job to simply reinforce where my point of view was coming from, someone in industry whom deals with this on a daily basis, not a weekend warrior whom works in Systems Security Administration.

Regardless enjoy... and thanks for the sticky thread.

Also you would not know since you don't have the Injen, but there is more than a 'bung' welded on the intake tube... has a diversion dam as well around the MAF in order to protect from those pressure pulses that are created.
 
So it's ok to stay there then until a nice day when i can fully remove it? im ok to drive it then?
 
21 - 40 of 691 Posts