I think you misunderstand me - I'm absolutely not saying there's a "slightly more power" proofpoint.

What I am saying at is that, unless I'm missing something, "the stock intake can handle 1000hp" doesn't mean "the aftermarket intake won't do any better." The two aren't connected imo, but I am open to being wrong and want to know how I might be.

 

Again, nothing to say it will do better OR worse. So best to avoid. You're comparing a fact vs. a maybe....love to see someone dig into this and do a before/after. In fact, there is a tell here that is being overlooked - this part is $3K USD; you would think that part of the RnD would have been analysis of the before and after with some facts and figures. The notion that there isn't suggest to me a massive oversight, or they did it and it wasn't a selling feature.

The idea that we simply don't know, even within this thread has turned into "for sure it does" and "what says it won't be any better". Would you buy a tune like that? These opinions becoming facts is how the internet works too...for example, I say "Elephants are really good at climbing up and hiding in trees." I can even go as far as pointing to not seeing them as proof supporting how good they are at it. On some websites that quickly becomes fact, and even evolves into "I saw one once". We. as a group, seem to do a good job of avoiding that.

 

https://www.eventuri.net/products/me...mg-gtr-gts-gt/

There has been multiple references to dyno test before and after the Eventuri system was installed to validate the performance improvement as advertised....After almost 3 weeks of numerous post, I was some what curious that neither Eventuri nor ReNNtec responded with input to the questions of performance results.. (maybe they don't follow these post)... regardless, I reached out to Eventuri and the above post was sent to me to review the multiple test runs under specific parameters to test the effectiveness of the Eventuri product... Each of you looking at this post can attempt to evaluate the graphs presented,,, personally, I have a difficult time seeing a big (whatever that means) improvement in performance,,, It does appear there is no negative effect at any rpm level with or without the ECU programing when the Eventuri system is present... I'm a torque happy guy and if I'm gonna spend my dollars, I want to have a Butt Dyno moment that I can feel .. After all is said and done, I don't think the dyno graphs presented show me much encouragement to spend the funds on the Eventuri system... For those of you with much greater engineering background, I would appreciate your interpretation of the graphs and your impressions.....Thanks...

 

thank you for sharing!

If your butt dyno feels that change you're a better man than me. I think my whistle in the exhaust pipe gives more bang for the buck tho - just sayin.

Also, FWIW it doesnt look like RT decided to sell it...at least from what I can see.

 

So, according to 4 different before/after tests the intake provides a very minor power bumps (12-18hp, 10-15ft-lb) across the rev range. Probably not enough to feel, but definitely not negative.

 

now imagine the eventuri intake with that exhaust pipe whistle
the hp gain would be insane!!!!!!!

 

Hi Hetzle,

I'd like to take a swipe at this. Let's use some axioms and some deductive inferences, maybe we can be on a similar track or continue to see it in different ways.

First I'd like to put some facts out there and if there is disagreement we (or anyone) can bring those up and we can work through them, but I'll assume this is all acceptable until I hear differently:

1. The intake system starts at the grill > intake (including pipes, filter, more pipes) > Turbos > more pipes > intercooler > more pipes > throttle body > intake manifold > cyl head > intake valves > HOME where the power is made.
2. I've highlighted the place, (the component above) that is topic of this whole discussion, but important to define the entire path of airflow.
3. There are a couple different formulas out there that calculate the relationship between HP and Airflow needed to support that HP. The one I like is:
Airflow (in CFM) = (HP x 0.625) x 1.1104. This becomes distorted on an FI platform which becomes more complicated, but for simplicity....
4. For the discussion that follows, I'd like to use the early AMG GTS which produces about 503 HP (according to factory). I picked this one BC it is approximately at the low middle of the GTx family and we know the same intake is used on the entire family from the GT at about 459HP, to the GTR at about 550HP to the BS FP crank engine at about 720HP. Then, of course, we have at least one example above somewhere in this thread where we see the factory intake used on a big build of 1100HP (BTW, I don't want to wander, but actually I've heard of tuners doing big builds that have used the factory sys on 1300HP where it does finally seem to start hitting a wall).
5. The highlighted intake component in #1 DOES NOT GENERATE AIRFLOW (This is very important). This component is like a corridor or passageway. It can only ALLOW airflow to pass (or restrict it).

Again, any disagreements on any of the above, let's talk through them in future posts. This is especially true for #5.

Let's take the early AMG GTS now - 503 HP. If I apply the formula in #3. it takes 349.08 CFM of air volume to flow through the entire intake system as described in #1, to produce 503HP. Just for simplicity's sake, I'll add all the other family members in CFM
GT = 318.55 CFM
GTR = 381.7 CFM
GT BS = 499.68 CFM
1100hp + 763.4 CFM
1300hp = 902.2 CFM

To continue, I have a question to ask. When engineers contemplate an engine design they ponder this same question. Here is the entire air intake system again:

grill > intake (including pipes, filter, more pipes) > Turbos > more pipes > intercooler > more pipes > throttle body > intake manifold > cyl head > intake valves > HOME where the power is made.

Thinking of AIRFLOW and what it takes to produce a given HP - where is the GATE in this intake? In other words, what component poses the biggest risk or challenge to accomplishing the target HP? In this case 503. When engineers design a platform, they actually ID the GATE (beside the obvious one), then redesign it, then find the next gate, redesign, then on and on until they're satisfied.

For those who have made decisions to discard the factory front intake, starting past the grille and up to the turbos, (where an aftermarket like the Eventuri would replace) have already decided that the highlighted component IS the gate. Is it?

If you decided that the factory intake is the restriction, the gate, then how can you explain (or argue) that same system (unchanged), can support enough airflow to produce - 550HP; 720HP; 1100HP? That's a spread of 350CFM to 763CFM; or, in another way, the stock intake on the GTs is only being used at 70% of the capacity needed on the BS; or only 45% of the 1100 HP build.

So back to this part of the above quote - "the stock intake can handle 1000hp" doesn't mean "the aftermarket intake won't do any better." I'll take the double negative to mean you think the aftermarket intake CAN produce maybe some more HP than 503. How would it do that, BC if you agree with #5, this system cannot generate airflow, it can only pass air through to the turbo which is the source of the ariflow demand to produce 503HP. I can make an additional 5 to 10 to 15 to 50 more HP by commanding the turbos to demand more CFM which we already know the intake has no problem handling. So the argument that at 503HP the intake causes unintended resistance to flow, but doesn't at 1100HP is a false argument.

One last comment and I'll restate - When engineers design a platform, they actually ID the GATE, then redesign it, then find the next gate, redesign, then on and on until they're satisfied.

The reason I am so skeptical of these aftermarket systems, it presumes the "factory engineering team" went ***** out on this engine, created a great product, then just crapped the bed on the intake part. Then I have to believe it was some genius mechanic in some garage somewhere that "discovered" the mistake and corrected it with an aftermarket intake system. And stranger yet, practically EVERY performance car, regardless of the brand name, those engineers made the same mistakes on their designs too. They somehow just gave up on the intake and every one of those cars have "aftermarket" solutions to find HP/TQ the engineering teams missed. There is one intake system for the GT platform being sold on these forums and the guy who designed it was a bicycle mechanic before he tried his hand at solving intake airflow problems that factory engineering teams missed.

Aftermarket intake systems are low hanging fruit. Easy to snap something together that looks cool. Put enough Kool-Aid in the marketing writeup and they come running with cash in hand. I don't deny them the right to earn a living!

I'll look forward to any follow on discussions..no issues with disagreeing with anything I put up here.

All the Best,

Acta

 

I know bilal at eventuri worked for Dyson designing and also studied aero to get in to that field. You can see his expertise in the videos they show designing their products which other brands don’t do. They show everything from cad design step by step to dyno testing etc so lots of info. They are very popular for the other marques and evolve automotive who are linked to eventuri are bmw tuning specialists in the uk and they don’t mess around.

il probably buy a set for my car next season. Hopefully current owners of the intake can post some sound clips as I have not found any on YouTube and would like to hear it first if possible!

 

But most importantly, where is the actual Flow Data via multiple Flow Bench Testing runs, etc to show their claimed superiority vs OEM?

Many in this thread share manufacturer graphs that somehow reveal xx "Increases" in HP/TQ on Dyno Tests.
These claimed xx "Increases" are also quite small relative to the Dyno's own error tolerances, and usually, the claims can fall within this margin of error.
Notably, Dynos can be manipulated 8 ways to Sunday to show what one wants to show, and again, there is quite a bit of variability even with same day, back to back A/B Testing.
Also, Dyno runs are not able to truly simulate Real World Loads or Real World Air Flow at front grill, etc.

Better, Real World testing would be ET and Trap Speeds during multiple, multi-day 1/4 Mile Runs using the same car, and switching Intakes for every test pair run. But this too is subject to multiple variables that are difficult to control.

Hence, Air Flow Data via Flow Bench testing would be able negate/control many of the above potentially confounding variables.

Another method that seems very plausible/accurate and uses Real World Loads/Air Flow is below.
Can anyone with an actual Engineering/Air Flow Dynamics degree validate the below testing method? Acta et al, your input is always appreciated.

 

I think they talk about some of that stuff in this video on the rs6 development.

it’s a well designed patented product by eventuri and that gives me enough assurance it’s good to run on my stock car. But I see the arguments for owners with tuned cars not seeing enough gains to justify the price of the carbon intake system.

 

Great informed discussion Acta but you shorted my GT R out of 27 BHP!

 

So sorry! I hate it when I do that. My apologies…..

 

Hey acta

In your opinion what are the best mods to do on the Gts for horsepower!?

 

Hi AMG,

Think of your horsepower investments in terms of DOLLARS SPENT per HORSEPOWER.

The absolute best investment in $/HP is a tune.

A generic Stage I tune on a GTS - roughly $1200 for roughly 50HP gained = Roughly $24 per HP gained

The two WORST performance mods on the GT platform are:

Aftermarket intake - (estimate the Eventuri) at $2500 (or $3000) for 0 HP gained = $2500 per 0 HP gained (even if you want to believe 5 hp gained then $500 per HP)
Catless downtubes - estimate $2500 for tubes and install for 5-8 HP = $385 per HP gained

With a stage I tune you do NOT need an intake or exhaust mod. Neither will do any better than the 50 hp gain from the tune.

Best to you GTS

Acta

 

Acta,

How much horsepower is gained by deleting the secondary cats??

 

Hi Mike,

I don’t know, but guessing nothing. Some have removed the secondary cats only bc it sounds better.

Stenzel might weigh in I believe he gutted his.

Modern cats are nothing like the “ old days”. They do so well they only start to be an obstruction on a BIG build. But the commercial tunes being sold for this platform do just as well with the fac cats in place.

 

I’m gonna be doing a stage 2 tune next week.
so I’ll have: catless downpipes, Intake, blow off valves and tune
The shop im getting it done at says it’s gonna bring it to 650-670 hp (I can’t remember exactly how much he said)
what do u suggest I get done after that?

 

If you’re going bigger past this point you have to consider turbos.


Just a caution, you have to be careful about the lower end of the GTS. It’s different than the shortblock configuration on the GTR. You’re going to run out of range maybe even with bigger turbos BC the compression is too high on the GT/GTS.

 

Friend of mine with black series with renntech stage 1 tune and my GTR that has stage 2 eurocharged dyno tune and catless downpipes..

His car maybe fast but doesnt sound good at all, sounds muted so even if going catless isnt giving u any better performance i would still do it every single time just because it sounds much better than stock

 

Yes, wiser decision to make this mod for sound. Secondary Cats delete is supposed to change sound too but I am not sure if the noise is cumulative removing both.

 

Are you saying it sounds better because of the Stage 2 tune or the catless downpipes?

 

Hi MBNRG,

The video was very good and some very important points were made, especially about filters which I hope everyone caught.

The thing about air filters - If they're doing their job, scrubbing the air charge clean of foreign particles, they eventually sacrifice their lives because the accumulation of dirt becomes a restriction to air flow. It happens slowly day after day. One of the best PMs a performance guy could do is clean (or replace a paper filter) the filter twice as often as recommended. Far more to gain here than replacing the entire intake with yet another type of filter that will experience the same as the factory

Regarding flow, the best day any air filter has is the first day. Then it is minutely downhill each day after that.

Aftermarket companies selling intakes have complete control how they compare their products to a "factory" intake and filter. Obviously I cannot comment specifically without being there, but there are so many ways to make an aftermarket intake look like it performs better than factory. This is yet another one.

On your comments about dynos, I agree with your comments. I started a thread on my experiences with dynos here:

A Discussion About Dynos - MBWorld.org Forums

 

Acta

I agree with everything your saying. And yet still we need some form of measurement. If we can’t trust dynos, then what? Honestly I think this whole discussion has denigrated into a sort of mental back and forth. A dyno is just another tool. Each one is different. Each operator is different. Atmospheric conditions a re different. You either accept them or you don’t. I feel like this discussion has just spiraled out of control…..it’s exhausting.

 

Hi Mike,

yes I agree. We just about said all that can be said on all sides. I take a stronger stand from my tuning experience on other platforms. There I have done tunes with datalogging on platforms with factory intakes then immediately after with aftermarkets.

Not once could I find any data showing the aftermarkets did anything and in a number of cases went backwards. With DLs I was especially looking at the CA aspects which we haven’t even discussed much here.

On the topic of airflow, on MAF platforms (this is not a MAF platform but uses VVE solely instead) I’ve seen major disruption in airflow around the sensor when the factory intake was replaced, enough to defeat performance but irrelevant here. I could do a whole thread with proofpoints and have on other forums.

This thread was slowing to a stop at one point but picked up again. I will stop at this post maybe others will too. I already hit a nerve with one vendor who is PMing me now. I really don’t want to disrupt the vendor relationship on the forum so over/out.

 

Interesting reading. I am sure you have read my previous post, and perhaps we are all going around in circles here now. The C190GT intake is quite good compared to the other intakes on the M177/8 platform, W205 being the worst as mentioned.
However AMG/Mercedes have not only performance in mind, they have cost, emissions etc too as you know. Most owners of these cars are happy to leave them stock and drive them. However some (I assume most on these forums) like to modify. So let's let them modify!
Aftermarket intakes are an easy mod, they can improve power, especially once you start tuning these engines beyond the manufacturers original intent, but they also improve looks and sound. If you enjoy driving cars, like induction noise, turbo spool etc you will likely be thrilled by your purchase regardless of supposed power increases.

(PS I am not sure what manufacturer used to be a bicycle mechanic, but it is ironic as I also used to have a business in this industry designing and building composite rims and frames , mech eng 20 years , specialised in composites 10years &#128521