Standard Airbox vs Fatty Induction Tested

[MorroN]

Hi Guys,

A few months back I had my car mapped at EFI. The engine is close to standard, it's had the centre silencer deleted and the catalyst modified to remove the olive join.

I was unsure about what induction to run so kindly Chris at EFI offered to test both the standard airbox and the fatty set up back to back. He did three runs of both and here are the results: Black is airbox - Red is Fatty

As you can see the standard airbox has a noticeable spike in torque in the mid rev range!

In the end I decided to run the fatty for the remap and here are the results of that: Red is standard with fatty, Black is mapped with fatty.

As you can see the there are some good gains with the map throughout the rev range!



Interestingly, Chris reckons that a remap with the standard airbox would see similar gains throughout the rev range and keep the mid range torque spike you see in the first graph. I'm happy as even with the fatty, I've still got plenty of low end torque. Car drives really well and idles nicely, not a massive peak gain but you really feel that extra 'area under the graph'.

Big thank you to Chris at EFI for doing this for us, I was looking for this info before I got the car mapped. Hopefully this will help other people make a decision on what they want to run!

 

[Landyman]

The standard air box will have been designed to deliver the most power while being effective at filtering air.
I believe that the “acoustic valve” so readily binned by owners is there to increase mid range torque by altering air flow in some way.

 

[imprezaworks]

Mines mapped with a fatty style kit, similar figures too yours.

Sorry yours is 167lb mine was 163.

 

[MorroN]

The standard air box will have been designed to deliver the most power while being effective at filtering air.
I believe that the “acoustic valve” so readily binned by owners is there to increase mid range torque by altering air flow in some way.

The acoustic valve was installed for this rolling road run.

 

[imprezaworks]

@bloke

 

[Landyman]

A blast from the past! But still relevant.

https://www.cliosport.net/threads/fastcar-clio-172-air-filter-test.445339/

 

[davo172]

A blast from the past! But still relevant.

https://www.cliosport.net/threads/fastcar-clio-172-air-filter-test.445339/

Phase 1 airbox is more efficient than the ph2 one.

 

[bloke]

think i turned up just as you were leaving, chris was talking to me about it.

 

[imprezaworks]

So the kit does work well then.

 

[bloke]

So the kit does work well then.

would be interesting to see it compared to phase 1 airbox and no airbox.

 

[imprezaworks]

You will know better. But the phase 1 box better than the 2?

 

[bloke]

yup.

 

[Brigsy]

I wonder how the v6 espace airbox compares to the above?

I have tried a couple of different setups on mine - have also noted that low down torque feels better with stock ph2 box compared to v6 and ph1setup. Top end pull feels better with the latter though.

 

[MorroN]

think i turned up just as you were leaving, chris was talking to me about it.

Were you in a blue 182?

 

[hsustyle]

I run a Ph1 airbox

with Itg filter on the side of the throttle body.
Sounds brilliant without the cold air feeds but I keep them on, not sure I notice any difference.

 

[bloke]

Were you in a blue 182?

Haven't got a clue sorry!! Am up there loads but dropped a boosted 182 up there around then so possibly in that.

 

[imprezaworks]

I run a Ph1 airbox View attachment 1384923with Itg filter on the side of the throttle body.
Sounds brilliant without the cold air feeds but I keep them on, not sure I notice any difference.

Similar setup to a phase 1 @bloke I had. Seemed to work well.

 

[Brucefil]

What about one of these?

3 x 13 racing. 3 x the luck

 

[Landyman]

I have got together all the parts to refit the standard airbox to my 182.
But it’s been rolling road tuned and if l fit the standard airbox l assume it will mess up the tune.
So currently the parts are in a box in my shed.

 

[imprezaworks]

I dont think it would make a huge difference

 

[Landyman]

The car performs so well as it is that l don’t want to risk it!

 

[davo172]

Cup racers use ph1 airbox

 

[Landyman]

Strange that the PH1 has the better airbox as the PH2 develops more power. You’d think they would retain the better design as l am sure everything would have been looked at in the efforts to improve BHP.

 

[hsustyle]

Strange that the PH1 has the better airbox as the PH2 develops more power. You’d think they would retain the better design as l am sure everything would have been looked at in the efforts to improve BHP.

I believe Ph1 has better head with bigger exhaust ports.
182 manifold is where the 182 gets a bit more power, I have one on my 172.

 

[Crayola]

Ph1 head is better flowing as standard

182 head looks like it’s been attacked with a f**king dremmel by a pikey in a shed

 

[Landyman]

But 182 BHP from a normally aspirated 2.0 litre is still good going for a standard road car back in 2003.
My 1998 Alfa Romeo 145 2.0 Cloverleaf had all the toys, VVC twin spark plugs 16v fancy manifolds etc and while a great unit it still only managed 155bhp.
The engine was used in the GTV and other Alfa’s well into the new century and BHP never reached 182.

 

[imprezaworks]

Tbf most 182's out the factory don't make that

 

[Crayola]

Most of them are in the 170’’s (if that) not 182

 

[MorroN]

Most of them are in the 170’’s (if that) not 182

I believe the 182 is PS so 179 BHP claimed

 

[Usr117063]

Wanted to do this for a while

 

[imprezaworks]

Yeah

 

[Landyman]

Mine was putting out a rolling road varified 180bhp at the wheels with just a Janspeed exhaust, decat, induction kit and remap.
Before the remap (but still with the other kit) it was about 30bhp less.
It still managed the same economy as before, and passed the MOT last month.
I had to refit the CAT for the MOT of course, so power is probably down now, but it shows what can be achieved.
Fortunately the CAT was supplied with the car when l bought it.
I may get the remap done again with the CAT installed, but tbh to actually drive it feels pretty much the same as before l refitted it.

 

[imprezaworks]

Same spec as mine

 

[bloke]

Mine was putting out a rolling road varified 180bhp at the wheelst

Flywheel?

 

[Landyman]

No at the wheels, on a rolling road after it was given a custom remap. (using said rolling road)
Before the remap it was about 150bhp at the wheels according to the printout.
I would expect a standard Clio 182 to put out close to 180bhp at the flywheel.

 

[MorroN]

No at the wheels, on a rolling road after it was given a custom remap. (using said rolling road)
Before the remap it was about 150bhp at the wheels according to the printout.
I would expect a standard Clio 182 to put out close to 180bhp at the flywheel.

Got a print out? 30hp gain from an exhaust and remap seems... a lot...

 

[BoatNonce]

180 at the wheels is nigh on 200bhp at the fly.

Safe to say it didn’t.

 

[imprezaworks]

Be about 160 at the wheels?

 

[Landyman]

Well l found the print out graph and it shows 180bhp but you are all correct it’s at the flywheel! I don’t mind as it feels great to drive, really strong with no flat spots and generally nothing to complain about at all.

https://www.cliosport.net/proxy.php?image=https%3A%2F%2Fuploads.tapatalk-cdn.com%2F20180328%2F620ba0cf8d5316223bb116900b73d00d.jpg&hash=cc33bcb808c9b06ae05f7e2c5882df18

 

[imprezaworks]

Good improvement over the before lines