T0M993

I am considering this for my 95 C2 and was wondering if anyone else has had any experience with this or similar products? Worth it?

http://www.evoms.com/marketplace/Vie...8DB35115B01%7D

Resident Sicko

Hmm. Curious as well. I would think the "shield" would be better served being designed to protect the intake from engine heat with an RS type scoop.
Wonder if the HP/TQ claims are accurate?

Quadcammer

waste of money.

trophy

Our engine bays while the car is moving has an air temp just above ambient temp. The air flow into the engine via the grill is quite amazing. When compared to a front engined car, the air has to go through a hot radiator before the engine bay.

On the dyno we saw these numbers on my car, I don't run the rain shield generally. It does put the filter right under the grill open to air coming over the car.

Based on what? Interested in your experience.

doc_porsche

only for the 95 variant?

race911

On the other hand, Kim spent basically the price of a good used 993 for the 3.8L that's in the car I have now, built by one of our truly unimpeachable and professional list sponsors. With stock exhaust, it dyno'd right at 300HP. Hate to think of him kicking himself that a mere air filter swap for ~1% of the cost of that could have gotten 50% of the gain....................................................

trophy

Everything I do to my car gets tested, either back to back on a dyno or at the track. In the case of the Evo intake, I got it for nothing so it was a case of nothing ventured nothing gained. It also worked well as I was removing the MAF.

Maybe if Kim had also put the EVO intake on he may have seen 310hp

race911

I'm sure one would have been installed if there was benefit.

trophy

Of course he wouldn't know a benefit or not if it wasn't actually tested.

NP993

You get what, 2-3 hp running without any air filter or airbox? But a plastic elbow and a cone filter gets you 10? Right.

race911

I'm not going to speak for Steve W., but I'll take a wild-assed guess and say if it was worth it one would have been installed.

(My personal experience with altering air intake, both dyno and Fred Flintstone era data, stopped with the 3.0L cars. And we heard pretty much everything there is to know on the subject on the 3.2L cars from Jerry Woods/Bruce Anderson in the Garretson days. You know, the guys who had Bobby Rahal and Brian Redman in their 935.)

Steve Weiner-Rennsport Systems

Yessir,...dat be true,...

The cone filters that attach directly to the MAFS generally reduce airflow and introduce turbulence that upsets the airflow resulting a power loss and uneven metering.

Cone filters on AFM's do better, albeit with some required software changes.

The factory 993 airbox, while not the most attractive device to many people and a PITA to reattach the clips, works pretty darned well, as we've found on the engine dyno. One can drill some 2" holes in the cover to get a real 2-3 BHP, however you cannot fell that.

I would tell anyone asking me about these "Powerflo" or "V-flow" devices to save some money and perhaps take their significant other to a nice dinner or maybe buy something much more useful for their car*.






*I can offer some suggestions if interested.

nile13

It would be logical to ask a cab owner that joined the list all of a month ago what he's looking to accomplish with the car. Maybe he just wants the cool sound of wooshing air.

lopro

http://www.evoms.com/marketplace/Vie...8DB35115B01%7D

do you mean this one?

Mark in Baltimore

These things have been discussed many times in the past ten years. The benefits, if any, are marginal. Stick with the stock airbox and filter.