Yep, after running thousands of flow bench tests on every component(OEM & aftermarket) ever made for the M9x engine and countless dyno runs with 1 piece changed at a time, you'd have to admit that Jake has more knowledge about what works and what doesn't in the M9x than anyone else inside or outside of Porsche.
Some Porsche engineer back in the early 2000s might have known all this, but I bet they're either no longer at Porsche and/or have moved on to the newer Flat6 engines.
Yes, he's going to extremes for even the smallest gains in airflow & HP, but to build the most powerful M9x you have to know ALL the little HP secrets and make them add up.
Without the meticulous attention to details like Jake(and the expensive test equipment) "competitors" will have to hope they get the combination correct and their engines will perform.
I can't wait to see the results from all of the R&D Jake is doing.
All I know is the M9x engines from F6I are going to be MUCH more powerful soon.
I wonder if the next level of engine will be nicknamed, "shut-up and hold on, this is gonna shock you."

 

I’m giving BRS-LN the benefit of doubt of being unaware Porschtech3 designed the UAOS which has famously been utilized in FSI engine builds…unless the FSI pictures of installed UAOS have been doctored.

Unless more details are provided I suspect the the FSI AOS is a catch can only., Or a modified approach to Porschetech3’s design. Either way the product claims and comments about group think are an insult to porschetech3 and his contributions to FSI engine builds.

FWIW, I do not personally have a UAOS installed. But, I fully appreciate and acknowledge the solution. And, clearly, Jake did as well to the point of installing the UAOS on builds.

 

Not really.....this wasnt @zbomb going after a product that he has already talked highly about on several occasions.

Oh he knows about the uaos......ln-e r the ones that sell it for skip

 

I've seen the dynojet measurements of his motors and they are impressive. I doubt there's much more without turning up the rpm

 

Another other point and question/comment....it's resonant tuning (reflections of pressure waves) of intakes and exhaust that produce >100% Volume efficiency, not maximum flow of a part of the system.

 

While no one has seen or been told how the development works at this point, Jake’s only statement about the UAOS is that what he is working with can be utilized in conjunction with, and parallel to the UAOS.

I have driven a car that employed this, but it has not been seen outside of Skunkwerks at this point. That car had a UAOS fitted and it did not appear modified. The entire engine bay appeared stock to me except the RX39 carbon airbox fitment.

As far as the gains in airflow through the last 33 weeks of Raby development, well I can tell you that they are not small. Tex Squirrel and other original FSI engine purchasers have seen these tests occur live in the FSI Owners Lounge. They have seen the data first hand, back to back from the flow bench, camshaft profiler and the dyno.
If you understand that airflow is everything to an engine, you will then understand that any gain in air flow through the entire induction system isn’t to be considered “small”.

I’m sure everyone else will have to wait till these findings are put into ink in the spring. Last I heard he was going to self publish, since all the publishers that he was working with had a 9 month wait or more. 93 people have seen these findings gathered first hand, and that included calibrations to the equipment before, during and after tests were ran.

It wasn’t my intent to ruffle feathers. LN and FSI respect the relationship that we have with Skip, and in the future what is being done will only add an additional element to the UAOS or the factory AOS. Nothing more. Jake says that what he has done is not limited to Porsche M9X fitments, and in fact trying to solve AOS issues for a non Porsche application led to the novel concept.

 

I am happy with the UAOS that I installed on my 3.8 Stage II . But if I can add an additional layer of engine insurance I will do so . Looking forward to the release of Jake's invention. I will probably add it to my 996 and Boxster S .

 

I've been watching the work that Jake has been doing and agree that it is quite remarkable. The method and rigor is unmistakable. On the boards here we have all the piecewise discussions. One will talk about plenums, Another talks about exhaust or X-pipes. Nobody talked about mods to the heads, cams, or intake, even though that is being done by individuals. But each conversation was an individual component. And most of the time there is limited data to back it up, or, the data was presented in a way that it could be refuted. Simply trying to compare dyno graphs from 2 different locations on the planet will make people dismiss the better one. This work pulls it all together. I'm really looking forward to the book. (and the X-pipe that I should have on the car by Christmas...)(did you know that Santa is a mechanic?)

 

Yes, the airflow gains are huge, but he has continued to go after even the last few CFM.
He's been redesigning his improvements so that no small gains are left on the table.
When he's done, you'll know that the airbox, intake, etc are as improved as possible.
The power gains are as good as they can safely be.

Watching this process live has been amazing!
While I don't know all of the improvements coming I do know that there are great things coming.

 

Jake's 356 project. Simply outstanding and very very cool. https://ww2.pca.org/panoreader/dec-2022/#page=62

 

Given that UAOS has now been used successfully on and off the track and with the addition of the drain back line it's essentially a maintenance free and a life time item, I'm genuinely curious to see what has been improved. FWIW, if you're going to improve on someones design that you also do business with I figured the right thing to do would be to give them a heads up rather than have them learn of it in a forum post ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

Dejeeper my comments were to keep the conversation productive I’m learning a lot and gather necessary info for my future build
Jason is a cool dude that has knowledge and experience on his build and he expected builders to back up their data which I get
I’m just a little tired of bickering in general on this site as a whole and not singling out 1 individual I’m also guilty of stirring shyte

 

Technically speaking ::

The UAOS design is not limited to Porsche cars..

Like I said... ALL the problems that the Factory AOS system has had for the 20+ years of production is solved with the UAOS.....

I know of no deficiencies of the UAOS system....( except price, but that even pays for itself over time)

Technical questions::

What problem does a new development fix?

 

question for you: why not just copy the original design and make it out of aluminum and use a better diaphragm?

 

Because part of the original problem is the difficulty in accessing the location for the diaphragm..Takes hours to access..

The UAOS uses a much thicker diaphragm, twice as thick, AND puts it in an easy to access place. It can littleraly be replaced in minutes..

The original "cyclone/body" has never been a problem, so making one from aluminum would just add to the cost without better performance...Keeping the original Polyamde 66/GF35 material cyclone/body, but modifying it , keeps the cost down and with the other components ( CNC Billet Black Anodized Accumulator , robust remote diaphragm ect.) outperforms the original design in every way...and then the Track drain.......