5 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHAirflow with EVOMS V-flow intake
Leading reported evidence
Use )
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Performed · outcome unconfirmed · Original poster
I was extra conservative in calculating this 5% (two close data points were averaged for Vflow and the higher BMC value was used).
Leading evidence: 'Use )' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Replace over' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion · Original poster
I was changing over from a BMC filter in the stock housing (orange cap mod) to the V-flow setup in my 2001 C4.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion · Original poster
There are two sets of data for each filter but I just put them all on one plot grouped because I didn't have nice rpm set points.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
You can set the stdev to the chart also, which will show you and error (variation) within the data.
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
5 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
Rennlist: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
2 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Outcome without a verified action link
I was honestly hoping to see/hear no difference to give myself an excuse to pull it out of the car and sell it.
I recently picked up an EVOMS V-flow intake. Other than some fitment issues, I had only heard good things about the intake so I thought I'd take the plunge. As others have alluded to, there are issues with fitment. See my other thread in which I'm trying to sort things out.
This morning I decided to give it a shot even with fitment issues. I was honestly hoping to see/hear no difference to give myself an excuse to pull it out of the car and sell it. The fitment issues annoy me and now I need to find solutions.
I was changing over from a BMC filter in the stock housing (orange cap mod) to the V-flow setup in my 2001 C4. I took each setup out on the road and logged the rpm, air temperature, and mass air flowrate (stock MAF). I gave the car the same warm up in both cases and took the measurements over the same stretch of road. I did two pulls from ~3000rpm to ~6000 rpm with each setup. I would have liked to have done more and taken more data at each rpm but the situation didn't allow for that. I also would have liked to have take the data on the same day and temperature but again the fitment issues stopped me from collecting the data on the V-flow yesterday. There was a 10 degree temperature difference between yesterday (warmer-BMC) and today. This temperature difference was reflected in the intake air temperatures almost exactly. That said, I believe hot wire MAF's account for temperature in their measurement of mass so this shouldn't be an issue.
It looks like there is no difference below 4000 rpm but above that value you pick up about 5% more flow. I was extra conservative in calculating this 5% (two close data points were averaged for Vflow and the higher BMC value was used).
I did some quick efficiency calculations and roughly this intake increases the volumetric efficiency of the engine from the 90-95% range to the 95-100% range.
I didn't notice any improvement in sound.
I still wish it fit better, but I'm pretty convinced that you're getting more airflow with this intake. Assuming that ECU can compensate with additional fuel you should be making more power from 4000 rpm and up.
-Shawn
One question:
If you have more than one set of points, did you also take the standard deviation aside from the average of those points?
Seeing the standard deviation (sigma) would also be interesting aside from the average values. You can set the stdev to the chart also, which will show you and error (variation) within the data.
Anree, that's a good point. If I had multiple sets of data with nice fixed rpm points that's exactly what I would have done. There are two sets of data for each filter but I just put them all on one plot grouped because I didn't have nice rpm set points. I would have to plot both x and y error bars which weren't that meaningful (only n=2) and I felt like they would confuse people. Just to give you a rough feel, the Vflow data is plus or minus about 2.5% and the BMC data is plus or minus 2%. Given those numbers the difference is probably real, but I wouldn't bet my job on it.
