2023 VB Subaru WRX Ultimate Intake Test: Stock vs Drop-in filter vs modded vs ETS intake.
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 2 окт 2023
- In this video we exhaustively test the capability of the stock intake system on the new Subaru VB WRX with the fa24 turbo engine. Back to back to back dyno testing of the factory airbox, AEM drop-in filter, modded airbox (both stock filter and AEM) and the Extreme Turbo Systems ETS cold air intake system with airbox. At the end we test an aftermarket intake duct from APR Carbon Fiber as well.
Авто/Мото
Awesome job! We always appreciate the support from our friends at PRE Racing! 👍👍👍👍 #TeamETS
There's more where this came from!
My Impreza passed emissions test without the charcoal filter ..fyi incase anyone is wondering !
Thank you for making this video!
Thank you for watching!
Great video. Thanks for sharing
You'd still win in a drag race 😅
Great comparison, Thank you!
Thank you I love this stuff. Let’s do more and more part comparisons 🙏🏽 please
More are coming!
Awesome video!
Thank you! Glad you enjoyed it!
Great video!! 👍
Thank you! 👍
Awesome video
Thank you for watching!
Great video! I’ve been waiting for someone to do a comparison just between filters and the carbon element. I’ve read many respected forum and Facebook members (mainly Ascent ones) claim these things do nothing.
This explains my seat of the pants feel almost perfectly on our Ascent with a Cobb AP on the 87+ tune, no other mods. I added the AEM dry flow filter only about 5k miles after the Cobb AP and I noticed a little better throttle response everywhere, smoother low speed throttle inputs and slightly more power past about 3500rpm. Later (probably 10k miles later) I removed the carbon element and it felt like almost the same effect after I added the AEM filter. My theory is that the carbon element also disrupts smooth airflow and when removed it likely helps the MAF have a more accurate reading. I’ve also noticed around a 1mpg bump on average and I’ve tracked mpg since new, especially at higher speeds like 85mph (SD speed limit is 80) where it allows boost responses quicker for elevation changes and such. So even for the normal daily driver, I think at least the filter is worth it and it’s re-usable.
I didn't see any noticeable difference in the "smoothness" of the maf signal at WOT but part throttle you may be correct.
@@WT4T I think it’s more noticeable on the Ascent with the wonky CVT logic. There is a notable dead spot at 17-20mph with constant throttle input when the torque converter locks. I wish that Subaru would also get rid of the fake shifts over 50% throttle and just let the CVT do what it’s supposed to do. It’s not as noticeable in the Outback XT and WRX, likely because they are lighter.
I can't stand the fake shifts either
Having my ETS intake installed and tuned this weekend, super pumped.
What the specs on those wheels/tires and what spoiler is that?
I love this stuff, I've been street tuning my own on and off for well over a year now (22psi VF52). Not sure if it's normal, but my Cobb SF intake caused lower MAF readings (bigger tube diameter so lower air flow g/s readings?) and therefore lower calc. loads cells so I had to lower timing quite a bit to keep the knock down, especially over 5200 rpm, it's basically flat from there up. Rumble ON.
That's normal, the maf readings i mentioned in this video were only overstated because my base maf cal for the ETS was a little to conservative (had negative fuel trim) normally if you are running the stock maf calibration you'll see crazy understated numbers from a big maf like what you saw.
Thanks for the reply, that makes sense, adding fuel via MAF adds to the calc. load and vise versa, great info! @@WT4T
@ivtec4fun55 it's easier to think of anything having to do with the MAF as adding or removing airflow. The more air the ecu measures the more fuel you need. If you hide air by oversizing the tube you understate load therefore running lean with too much timing
Thanks for this. I have a drop in with the carbon filter delete, and I definitely had a better throttle response. I would like to point out that the carbon filter is more subject to a state by state basis, even down to some only having emissions testing in specific counties. Check the state/county that your car is registered in if you need to do emissions testing or not.
It's federal law, so it's not state by state but the actual enforcement is. Thing is, any place can decide to enforce at ANY time so best to just be safe.
@@WT4T ahh gotcha, that makes sense. Thanks for correcting me on that
This is a good one because those drop in filters and the ping pong ball look like it can help but we shall see.
Ping pong ball? Lol
@@WT4T yeah at Autozone they used to have the contraption it was the regular air filter and K&N filter and it had a fan and a ping pong ball to show the flow vs the stock filter
@E85_STI Haha. Yeah I remember those!
You should also try the velossa tech big mouth ram air on the fa24. Curious if that would help too
Typically true ram air intakes and MAF's don't get along well but if they want to send one over I'll test it
Id like to see you test the temperature differences of buldge hoodscoop affect on stock/upgraded tmic. Then stock vs sport grill with and without a velossatech ram air snorkel. I realise that these are all small changes but I really want to know the true optimal way to run a TMIC and optimize against heatsoak. Id send you some $$$ for those numbers.
I have the APR scoop I need to put in.
Great test !
Will that AEM filter be ok on a stock tune and not cause detonation?
Also do you think that the AEM panel filter sufficiently as the stock filter is so thick ?
Thankyou
Probably, but realistically you shouldn't do anything to the intake on stock tune.
I have been looking for TMIC comparison between ETS and Mishimoto. Supposedly the bar&plate design from Mishimoto will take longer to heat-up and be more consistent with heat soak from multiple runs. Any experience/feedback here ... or plans to compare with similar dyno tests?
Honestly, I've never been a fan of mishimoto intercoolers. They have a really good warranty though
I'd love to see a comparison of the stock airbox with the new cobb intake tube compared to a normal stock airbox and tube, and then the ETS intake.
Will do, send parts!
@@WT4Ti was about to order the the cobb intake which is basically a pipe that replaces Post Maf and retains stock airbox but looks like the oem airbox itself will be the main restrictive part and open intakes like would still yield more HP.. hmm what to do 😅
@topzki47 get the ETS and my s1 tune and never look back!
@@WT4T that’s what I’m leaning towards now! Does your tune support 91 octane from California?
Yes, you'll receive a package of tunes for 91acn, 92, and 93 oct.
Is the carbon trap new to the WRX? I remember seeing Cobb address this in a recent video; can't remember if my '17 STI had it (airbox is on a box somewhere). My '16 Forester has it and, based on your analysis, it's probably not worth removing the carbon trap from an NA Subaru that cruises around town, but I might try it out if I come across a junk yard airbox. lol
Yes its new to the 22+ models. Other Subaru models have it as well as the WRX such as the BRZ
is the ecu pulling boost back through the rev range? These newer cars are torque mapped as opposed to to the older method right?
It's target based not really torque based. Well, kind of both. I went over it in an earlier video a bit. Answer for this video is all pulls boost targets were the same and the car is hitting its targets. It peeks about 18.5psi and tapers to 15 at 6200. I could have raised boost targets on the free'er intakes to make even more power but for the sake of comparison I wanted identical boost and timing numbers
ETS FTW🎉♡
Just wait until you see what's coming soon!
My Va hasn’t had the scoop for the hood time I had it I should try to find one probably robing power
Your engine will most likely appreciate cold fresh air over stagnant hot engine bay air. I'd recommend as much ducting as possible on these cars.
I'm taking that carbon trap off per your recommendation! thanks
Uhhhhhhh, I didn't say that 😅
Me 2, and on my JB4 I immediately noticed the difference AFR went up 0.3 so I had to add more fuel bias. Definitely just removing carbon filter and tune adds noticeable amount of horse power.
I do not like aftermarket filters like ETS , because their filtration quality is not so good as stock filter.
So activated charcoal filters get saturated after a relatively short time. They really should be easily replaceable with the intake filter (like on my in home air purifiers)
I'll probably cut mine out after a year or two since by then they'll likely be useless and just restricting airflow.
Question though, would a good tune eliminate that spool up overshoot/torque loss?
Yeah, it's silly they are not replaceable without replacing the entire intake box
I saw in the video the wheels were mentioned to be NT03RR's but what are the specs? I've got a white VB and am digging how this looks and might want to copy.
www.preracing.com/products/enkei-nt03rr-17x8-5x114-3-35mm-offset-75mm-bore-gunmetal-wheel?_pos=2&_sid=e7f156ac5&_ss=r
www.preracing.com/products/falken-azenis-rt660-xl-255-40r17?_pos=1&_psq=falken&_ss=e&_v=1.0
Hey saw you guys out with this at Woodburn today I think? Was that this car?
Yess that was me! Ended up running a 12.6 @ 109. I'll get videos up soon
This is unrelated, but I would love to see a test of the crawford power blocks for the fb20 for us NA guys. They claim modest HP and torque gains just by effectively lengthening the intake runners. It kinda makes sense, but I am a bit skeptical. I'd love to see some real dyno numbers. Thanks! Love your channel! good stuff! keep it coming!
We have a ton of shop crosstreks for Rallitek r&d, basically every year change 😅 maybe if i can get my hands on a set we could test them but I'm not about to give Crawford a dollar after they knocked off some of our stuff 😥
Whoa that's not very cool of them. I was also wondering if stacking up gutted TGVs might have a similar effect as the power blocks. As a cheaper alternative that anyone with an extra set of gutted TGVs can do. @@WT4T
CVT Owner here! Id love to pair an intake like the ETS intake with my axleback exhaust but didnt want to have to tune it because reliability & warranty. With the ETS intake or any intake is it a must to tune it or does any company make one for the CVT that doesnt require a tune ?
The only intake that's not going to require a tune is the cobb.
@WT4T You are much appreciated thank you! Us CVT owners want a little bit of safe power and fun sounds without going crazy 🔥
Yeah the cobb intake or any panel filter or an air box mod like I did in this video plus the cat back exhaust and an intercooler are all things you can do on the stock tune
So... are aftermarket intakes an off- road modification on this particular car? Not that it makes any difference, I'm not in California.
Yes most are, although some are currently carb approved such as the Cobb kit.
Is it possible to tune this car in a way where you gain a bit more horsepower and give up some torque?
Running less boost down low will help keep intake temps lower at higher rpm which can effectively increase hp at the cost of torque but ultimately the car's fastest by maximizing total area under the curve which means a decent amount of torque.
@@WT4T Thank you, sir.
What's your tire setup? Those look meaty.
www.preracing.com/products/falken-azenis-rt660-xl-255-40r17?_pos=1&_psq=falken&_ss=e&_v=1.0
I have a 2005 STi with an EJ207 and I just replaced the air filter with a K&N (rest stock intake) and after that the car ran much richer and the timing was 3 degrees lower at high engine load. The result was a slower car. This means the MAF calibration doesn't match and what I don't understand is why do I need to reduce the MAF calibration instead of increasing the g/s to volts? So basically, to get the same AFR I need to reduce for example at 4.5 volts the g/s value for about 5%. Does that mean that with less air it can produce the same power?
Sounds like maybe the filter you put on was very oily and coated the MAF or something. Or you damaged it somehow. Usually on a drop in I see maybe a hair leaner in open loop (like 0.1 afr leaner) which equates to possibly 1% more calculated load which shouldn't change ignition timing at all really.
@@WT4T I've changed the filters back and forth (stock, k&n) and also tried it without a filter and the interesting thing is that it's even worse without the filter. So it looks like the air is not being distributed properly after the filter change but with the stock it's great again so the MAF works perfectly. But it still doesn't make sense to me why there is less g/s after MAF calibration with the new filter with allegedly more air flow. I heard that the intake of the older subarus are very sensitive but it's just does not make sense this way.
@SubiCarLous is hard to say what's going on there without being there but something doesn't sound right. I've never noticed a major change off just a dropin filter. I also don't really consider the g/s calculation as an indication of anything. Calc load on the other hand is very telling.
@@WT4T Did you tested it on pre 2007 subarus or only on newer? There are for sure big differences in the intake systems. On my car I know that the g/s is a direct measure from the MAF and the Engine Load is caculated from g/s and rpm so in my case it doesnt matter. I still checked both values. I don't know how it's on newer subarus.
@SubiCarLous I've tuned thousands of pre 2007 Subarus.
wheels are 8.5 or 9.5? offset? Thank you
These should be them but I'll check Monday.
www.preracing.com/products/enkei-nt03rr-17x8-5x114-3-35mm-offset-75mm-bore-gunmetal-wheel
Could you also test AEM drop-in filter with stock and carbon intake duct. I believe carbon should give some difference in this case.
There is no difference with ETS, because its box is not closed from the bottom side and it takes a lot of air from there.
I did test AEM on both carbon and no trap. ETS made considerable power increase.
@@WT4T I mean AEM and remove intake duct. I am sure especially intake duct is a bottleneck in stock system
Maybe on the dyno with the hood open but hot air is a major enemy on these cars so on the track you'll want all the ducting you can get
@@WT4T I think custom duck with bigger diameter can improve stock filter box a lot. Need just to test this theory on dyno.
For sure, however we did install the APR carbon one and had no change on the dyno. Definately larger internal area.
These engines are way too sensitive to AFR changes, this would run a bit lean and maybe even drop the DAM in warm days (no filter + drop in). Isn't the same issue as running the ETS intake with no tune?
Very very very different.
@@WT4T could you elaborate please?
Tune runs in closed loop and proper maf scaling means no afr changes or fuel trim issues
@@WT4TI see thanks! So, for the stock airbox the diameter is the same is just less restriction (without the carbon filter), whereas the ETS intake that has longer diameter, is this correct?
Yes, ets absolutely requires a tune but if you watch the video I go over this. All the examples in this video are running either my Stock airbox tune or my ets intake tune.
Did you change the Rev limiter?
Just a tad, think I have it at 6400 currently
@@WT4T sweet.. tyvm
What your local
In Portland Oregon at PREracing if that's what you're asking
The scx24 at 2:00 was a nice surprise, tuning cars big and small 😂
Haha! Nice catch!
Subaru engines keep blowing up because people dont understand the science behind adding more air volume to their engines. You dont need another intake than oem. it is good till 350 hp. after that power level, the injectors will pump out more fuel and thennnnn you can introduce more air to utilize more fuel. It is well suited for race applications where engines see full loads and frequent rebuilds. Not recommended for daily traffic where you use little fuel and too much air.
The mod path poeple choose is certainly one reason but these new fa24 engines are far removed from the older ej engines you're probably referring to
Ya you don’t need a aftermarket intake but it makes the system more efficient. You can get more power with the exact same boost level, so its a good mod path for these fa24s
The main reason for aftermarket intake is more turbo sound I believe. And I agree that stock filter is the best solution for these who run 350hp or less
@@JohnDoe-tm1rv i am still on my original 2006 wrx ej255 motor. oem intake, while the world has blown a million of them
@@JohnDoe-tm1rv no it’s to make that 350 less stressful. Why run 20psi to have 350 when you can do it on 17psi. Less stress on everything not just for sound