just got done getting flamed in another thread because I had

Put the stock intake back on to see if something else changed. Did you ever fuel up with lower octane gas?

>>15983524

been using 98 octane consistently. I think you americans call it 93RON? there is some strange mixup, but I've never filled anything but 98 octane for as long as I've owned it.

I'd have tried putting the OEM box back on, but I cannibalized it for some rubber buffers I wanted to install the new box with, and broke off the mounting points in the process.

>>15983517
Your ecu probably cant learn the extra airflow without a tune and its gonna push in extra fuel because your maf is detecting extra airflow

You probably damaged the MAF when you were fucking around with the intake.

>>15983537
Ok so that rules out the ECU correcting for octane. I think >>15983564 is on the right track.
Also I found the video.
https://youtu.be/OQvZNay27fo

>>15983564

forgive me for being a dumb dipshit, I'm relatively new and I'm just learning as I go.

would a tune help it gain more at all? I always thought the ECU would just learn by itself, considering its just a new air filter and tube. not anything else.

>>15983570

no failure codes are showing up and no CEL, and the car has gained -some- power. I'd have assumed something was broken, but the car is working better than before. just wasting more petrol is all.

in my crippled head I rationalize it as some kind of nigger rigged mini-forced induction. extra consumptuon doesn't really bother me at all, I just find it strange that it would jump that much.

>>15983576

fucking thanks, been searching for months

>>15983591
Lmao no, you've gained maybe a smidgen of power at most, you're hearing more noise and thinking it's faster. It happens to all of us. An intake isn't a compressor.

>>15983610

nice noise alone though is worth it imo.

>>15983616
I agree with you, just don't think you're getting any extra noticeable power. Rule of thumb is a 10% or more increase will be noticeable to a butt dyno, and there's no way an intake gave you 20+ hp.

File: 1474421494927.jpg (38KB, 384x288px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 384x288px

>>15983564
>extra airflow
>BRZ/FRS

Oh, you were being serious.

>>15983517
That pic is a guy trying to drift a Celica MK7, and he crashes into a curb.

It's top kek video, but I don't know what it's called

>>15983641
>10%
>N/A 2 liter
>A fucking aftermarket intake
>10%
>ten percent

more like 2 or 3 hp lmao

>>15983641

I'd say the same myself, but the OEM 86 box is all over the place. it feeds some air into the cabin for extra noise, some into a reservoir to cover all the real sucking sounds happening, and its basically just stupid.

trust me, there are gains, but nothing that wouldn't otherwise be there in a properly designed air intake. but again, a more clean engine bay and nicer noise alone, I'm happy.

>>15983651

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQvZNay27fo

watching it again for the fourth time now

>>15983658
Yeah, I'm agreeing with you, there's no way it gave him 20 hp. That's what I said.

>>15983670
ok sorry please don't be mad

>>15983641
>10%

A competent driver is going to notice a lot less than a 10% increase in power


That means my car would have to gain 27whp just to "notice it"

I can easily tell the difference between 89 and 93 octane let alone 27 extra wheel ponies

>>15983670

OP here. most other owners seem to dyno it in at 5-12+hp and the same figure in torques. and I guess that's more or less what I've gotten as well.

its not really a display of how much gain a simple intake can give you, just how fucking terrible the OEM air system is. I'll defend the 86 twins to the end of time, but every bit of exhaust behind the header, and the entire air intake is complete crap and needs to be thrown out the second you buy the car.

>>15983517
You're ecu is probably pulling timing to compensate for the extremely high IAT. The engine is burning more fuel now because it has to work harder to pump the same volume of air.

holy shit I lurked on that channel some more, this is the celica kid.

jesus christ he went all zyzz

>>15983718

so, tune?

doing the headers as well soon, so I'll wait til then in any case

File: Screenshot (324).png (779KB, 1124x636px) Image search: [Google]

779KB, 1124x636px

>>15983747

forgot picture. good job celica samoan

>>15983591
>I'm new I don't know what I'm doing
>I put in a SRI on my BRZ
>a car known to lose fucking power when you do that
>doesn't even know what a MAF is

Stop touching your car. Go pick up a fucking book.

>>15983659
That's the one! Thanks!

>Drifting a FF car
>Hue

>>15983785
>>a car known to lose fucking power when you do that

links? mishimoto, perrin and takeda are a bit all over the place depending on car and tune. but Injen seems to be pretty consistent in giving gains.

I did my research, and I know what a fucking air flow sensor is.

File: AiRaid3rdGear_zpscbe68dfc.jpg (84KB, 1024x593px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 1024x593px

>>15983838
>tune
Found your problem.

You don't put a tune on a car with a fucking CAI only. Damn near every single one of those CAI will mid torque loss and less high end hp.

And as it stands don't believe a fucking thing from a retailers website. Check for personal dynos.

File: brz med injen dyno.jpg (83KB, 1024x593px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 1024x593px

>>15983867

I'll make you real happy, and give you a dyno with my intake, from the very same people that did the dyno in your picture.

>>15983882
>183hp
>with only a intake
Nice try, but the BRZ rarely peaks above 170 if ever.

Hell a good majority of them came from the factory with as little as 135hp.

>>15983925
>Hell a good majority of them came from the factory with as little as 135hp.

just stop now please

File: 132hp BRZ.jpg (121KB, 720x960px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 720x960px

>>15983927

>>15983925
Different model dynos read differently. An FRS makes about 150whp on the Mustang dyno near me, and about 170whp on the dynojet a few cities over. Atmospheric conditions also play a part.

>>15983957

guessing that was in second gear?

why cant you american do anything right

>>15983971
>he frantically googled and read forums

>>15983957
>auto
>105 ambient temp
>127 degree intake temp

It's an auto, and also likely pulling timing.

>>15983957
>>15983987

the 175hp brz was a nice meme until everyone realized that every car in existence has drivetrain loss at 25-35%.

>>15983976
Not an argument. I know more about this stuff on my worst day than you could ever dream of on your best day, and it shows :-)

You should read a book and educate yourself, because you come across as not very intelligent.

>>15983747
>tune
No, put a cold air intake or the stock system back on. It will make more power.

I'm in the same boat. The k&n system that was put on my car by the previous owner is proven on the dyno to loose at least 20hp, closer to 30 on long drives with thoroughly heated engine bay. I don't have the stock system and its over $1000 new, so I'm looking for an alternative. I made a cold air housing out of foam core for now, made a big difference.

>>15984104

I already got a housing though. I wouldn't just drop a filter into a hot engine bay.

I'd put the old one on to test it, but I more or less murdered the box itself for parts, and tore off 3 rubber buffers that I reused on the new CAI housing, and ended up breaking the mounting points on the OEM box as a result.

>>15983718

That's not how it works. Hyper-milers actually route air from hotter areas of their engine bays to their intakes because the engine will naturally produce less power and use less fuel in the process.

>>15984116
So it sucks outside air? Maybe the intake length is fucking with harmonics at part throttle or some shit. Like someone else suggested, put the stock stuff back on for a couple weeks. Maybe you've just been putting your foot into it more because it sounds louder?

>>15984137
>Maybe you've just been putting your foot into it more because it sounds louder?

that was my first thought, so I've been taking it real grandma for a week.

went from 10.2l/100km, to 10.3l/100km, so that was pointless.

>>15984130
That's more for losses in colder climates, where underhood temps won't get ridiculous. Thermal efficiency relies on maximizing temperature change during combustion, while still making sure that all the fuel was atomized at that intake temp. Modern engine bays with belly pans easily get over 300f with normal driving.

>>15984153

Did you reset the ECU after installing it? ECU's are "supposed" to automatically adjust, but for something with wider piping and less air restriction people typically recommend doing a complete reset and letting it learn from scratch.

>>15984190

no, i assumed the ecu would just learn. I'll reset it once I got my new header on next week.

>>15984012
>intelligent
> :-)

File: 1445077410865.gif (85KB, 450x523px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 450x523px

>>15983691
>he thinks he can tell the difference between 89 and 93 octane