D6lc

So a few weeks back I fitted an Evoms intake on my 40th, the car is in great condition fully serviced and has 47k miles on. I wanted to wait until I got the car dyno’d before posting. I wanted a clear back to back test, I wasn’t interested in manufacturer claims. I really wanted to understand what/if it does indeed give a performance gain. My car’s current “Standard” intake is the Schnell type, with the resonator blocked off and the filter is EOM Porsche with a round 3k on.

So my first impressions driving the car the last few weeks were:

1. It’s louder throughout the rev range, not too intrusive but noticeable.
2. Just off idle it feels like it bogs a little, you get used to us and it doesn’t stall, but off throttle it doesn’t feel as clean as the standard setup
3. Above 4,000rpm it feels like it had a little more punch but not dramatically more, I was conscious whether it really was better or just louder.
4. I can hear the SAI pump now on startup that I couldn’t before. I presume some pump resonance is now being transferred to the car with the new mounting bracket. I will work on this as I expect you can get rid of it, I couldn’t hear it with the original mounting.

So dyno’d the car this morning, on one of MN’s hottest and most humid days!, not great for a total number but this was all about a back to back. The dyno had cooling air to the front rads, but no airflow to the rear intake, i.e. the flow you get just driving the car. This I expected to affect the Evoms more as the intake is less insulated from the heat than with the standard setup. So a cooler day, and airflow would probably help the total numbers. The car was first run ~6 time with the Evoms, then I swapped the standard setup back in and run again, car was also running on 91 octane pump gas. The dyno operator used the 2nd run for each setup for comparison.

Evoms intake: Max = 296.2 bhp & 240 ftlb, this I think was on around the 4th or 5th run.




Standard intake: Max = 290.9 bhp & 235 ftlb, this I think was again around the 4th or 5th run.




2nd Run comparison: Evoms = 294bhp & 239 fltb, Standard = 287bhp & 233 ftlb




So overall, not a massive increase but as you can see above it’s +5-7hp from around 4,500 rpm, so a decent increase and not dips across the power curve. I guess with some high flow cats and a tune this could be improved on.

pszikla

Excellent information!
thanks
Peter

alpine003

FWIW, back to back might not be truly representational either as you're not allowing enough time for the ECU to adapt.

You also didn't do "the secret" evoms mod. There's more than one dyno showing the Evoms performs better if you're willing to cut a secondary ventilation hole above the filter. The other bigger gain is to pair it with a proper ecu tune to take maximum advantage. Not sure if it will be worthwhile on a 40th though. But there's a couple dyno's floating out there with significant gains on a regular m96. It could also be that the 40th is just that much more tapped out.

FWIW I also have the Evoms along with a few other mods but my butt dyno must've became desensitized after owning a stage 3 WRX.

But one day I would like to dyno against a local stock 996 as well as race it in the quarter mile to see how much our trap speeds differ. Just to quantify and/or cry about all the money I spent.

D6lc

Alpine, do you have any details of the Evoms secondary hole mod?

PORCAR

I would have said they were worthless based on mine, but the proof is right there. I can certainly vouch for 4), I'm finding it rather annoying.

alpine003

It just involves cutting the inside of your deck above the filter area to let it breath more.

EVOMS

Very cool test, thanks for doing it right! We rate that intake for 10hp and 6ft-lb at the crank, so you're right in the ballpark with those numbers gains considering the heat and airflow conditions on the dyno.

Also, for future reference if anyone is looking for x50 dyno charts, DB Performance uses a Dyno Dynamics dyno. It's a nice setup, but it typically returns very low numbers relative to other dyno manufacturers--especially Dynojet. We affectionately called it the heartbreaker dyno in MN. I once dynoed a car that put down around 295whp at DB, then went across town the same day to run on a Dynojet where the same car made 352whp while categorically performing exactly the same (logs showed same boost, timing, air:fuel, MAF readings, intake temps). Anyways, D6lc did a great job of doing a back-to-back test, showing the results of an individual component change in a controlled environment, which is really how chassis dynos are best utilized.

Sam

jrgordonsenior

If it's above the filter then you're allowing unfiltered air into the intake yes?....

alpine003

No. What I meant was to cut the underside of your trunk lid so the air filter can not only draw air from the factory air intake location but also draw air from the right side through the spoiler vent area.

D6lc

Dumb question, dont you risk the filter getting wet when it rains?, thought that was the reason it sealed to the deck lid

alpine003

Yes there is some risk but more so from washing the car vs just rain. But obviously this mod isn't for everyone and would have to depend on their risk/comfort level.

I wish you would've done another run with the intake in place and the trunk lid up just to get another data point. I've only seen 2 independent dyno results thus far with this configuration. IIRC, Jake has done something like this in the past with the same intake FWIW.

D6lc

thanks for the info, if I had know I would definately have tried a lid up run