987 "Performance" air filter thoughts.....

[peteslag]

I think as long as you know what to expect, "performance" air filters are a good thing. My friend has his own tuning company and I can tell you that they don't really affect the way the engine performs. The only experience he had of a performance filter affecting horse power is when a cone filter has been mounted in a hot engine bay (less horse power!).

 

With this knowledge I still put one on my old 5 cylinder fiat and a V8 Jag. Both times it drastically improved the noise produced by the engine.

 

I love performance filters, they are a cheap way of adding a bit of drama.

[Craiglm68]

On 29/04/2020 at 16:50, Dougle_turbo said:

They are in the basket on the design911 website! I'll mull it over for a few days......

##Great minds D man.....I have been thinking about the side scoops too the past week (I saw that chap's post back in March...a few others have put out some interesting graphics etc re the low pressure area down the side. I've not seen seen them installed on a 987.1 yet

[sevenfourate]

3 minutes ago, Craiglm68 said:

##Great minds D man.....I have been thinking about the side scoops too the past week (I saw that chap's post back in March...a few others have put out some interesting graphics etc re the low pressure area down the side. I've not seen seen them installed on a 987.1 yet

 

We need a guinea pig and a Dyno......

[Bushman]

on recommendation from a mate who owns Fast Eddie's in Norwich and preps track and race cars including his own 986 Poxster, I fitted a Pipercross replacement element in the stock airbox, not sure if there are gains on a road car cos you dont spend enough time up in the revs, sounds good though. I fitted side scoops a couple of years ago to mine, not so much for ram air gains which there definitely is, but for looks, I love the proper gt4 type scoops and dont like 987 side grilles. 

to test the ram air theory, one evening after hrs at work, we bent a piece of ali sheet to the rough size and shape of my scoops and screwed it to a piece of ply with a 100mm holesawed hole underneath. we put this on a blower rig ( normally used to cool our vibration test rig), with the wood in line with the airflow. the blast that came through the hole was quite substantial but we didnt measure it. did the same without the scoop and actually got negative flow across the hole and it created a slight vacuum. that was good enough for me.

[sevenfourate]

On 29/04/2020 at 16:50, Dougle_turbo said:

They are in the basket on the design911 website! I'll mull it over for a few days......

 

Not the prettiest version i've seen by along way. And the GT4 logo is ghastly on anything but that. But maybe they are the most functional ? (Common theory seems to be +4 bhp @ 62 mph).

 

Now some of the Taiwanese / Chinese Carbon jobbies look a much better [Rounded} shape to my eye / more suited to a 987 body. But then you have to wonder over quality and fit of course.....

 

How would you "fit" Doug ? Some Extra heavy duty 3M tape, or would you bond / Tiger seal on ?

[Dougle_turbo]

3 minutes ago, sevenfourate said:

 

Not the prettiest version i've seen by along way. And the GT4 logo is ghastly on anything but that. But maybe they are the most functional ? (Common theory seems to be +4 bhp @ 62 mph).

 

Now some of the Taiwanese / Chinese Carbon jobbies look a much better [Rounded} shape to my eye / more suited to a 987 body. But then you have to wonder over quality and fit of course.....

 

How would you "fit" Doug ? Some Extra heavy duty 3M tape, or would you bond / Tiger seal on ?

I would try a combination of 3m heavy duty tap and silicone. The silicone would primarily protect the 3M tape from wind and moisture lift, but would also be its own form of adhesive. My Canards are on with 3M tape and survived 174 MPH.

[Dougle_turbo]

I've just purchased some!

[sevenfourate]

Just now, Dougle_turbo said:

I've just purchased some!

 

The +4 bhp comment was enough..... 🤣

 

Look forward to seeing them on: and your thoughts on performance of course !

[Dougle_turbo]

I might get down to DMS again this year for a map tweak, then we can find out! 🤣

 

[TritonII]

On ‎07‎/‎05‎/‎2020 at 20:52, Dougle_turbo said:

I've just purchased some!

I see a pattern here @Dougle_turbo, you post an idea you are having, quick debate with forum friends, and you bite the bullet...…..

 

Love the enthusiasm and thanks for sharing, we all get to benefit from your pioneering approach.  Brilliant!

[FLAT STICK]

Hi All

I had a K&N fitted to my CS and to be fair was a pig to fit then I had the car serviced and the garaged removed it and put a std one back in, but when I had the car remaped I fitted a pipercross  with no issues it went straight in. The K&N would not go back in at all!!!

 

Dean

[sevenfourate]

9 minutes ago, FLAT STICK said:

Hi All

I had a K&N fitted to my CS and to be fair was a pig to fit then I had the car serviced and the garaged removed it and put a std one back in, but when I had the car remaped I fitted a pipercross  with no issues it went straight in. The K&N would not go back in at all!!!

 

Dean

 

Seems to be a universal train amongst Cayman owners: that the K&N is an appalling fit !

[FLAT STICK]

Ye I don't  know how K&N have not picked up on it in their quality control

[MartinF6]

Just fitted the BMC filter to a 987.2 3.4. Otherwise standard re induction and exhaust etc. Only bought it hoping it'd give a bit more induction noise. Didn't even do that.

 

Fit and quality looks fine, went in no problem at all. But for an otherwise standard car, I'd say don't bother. Tangible benefits are zero and there is some debate whether these kinds of oiled cotton filters allow more dirt into the engine and / or can foul the MAF. I'm not saying those things are true, it's hard to get definitive info to absolutely prove those issues one way or the other. But given it won't make a standard 987 sound better (it's never going to make it go better or improve throttle response), then there's no point in taking the risk, even if it's very low.

 

It's just about possible that it may benefit a highly modified car that depends on improved breathing at high revs. But I doubt even that, to be honest. You get the odd claim that the BMC improves induction noise. That didn't seem likely as I was fitting it - you've still got a filter of exactly the same size going into an enclosed housing, which itself is located within a largely enclosed engine bay surrounded by sound deadening. It's one of those things where people have expectations that distorts their judgement, i think, hence claims of improved induction sound. It might make a very small difference to the noise. But I can say categorically that it does not make even a moderate difference, let alone an obvious difference.

[Yorkie]

I fitted one a few months ago. Didn’t expect any performance gains that I could feel. I did think there was an increase in induction noise though only marginally 

[MartinF6]

There might be a small one. I don't think I can hear any change, but like I said willing to accept maybe there is a small one. Still, the overarching point, I'd say, is that whatever change is noise there is, it's somewhere between naff all and very slight.

 

Then, as I said, factor in the possibility (hard to judge definitively) that it might let more dirt into the engine and I think it's a pretty easy no. No upside plus possible major downside for me = nope. Again, the whole increased dirt into the engine thing may be an overstatement or not true at all. But it's hard to be totally sure one way or the other and so I'd want a clear upside to take that risk. If the filter gave me a nice, clear improvement in induction noise, I'd be happy to take that risk. It definitely doesn't do that.

[Aaron]

5 hours ago, MartinF6 said:

There might be a small one. I don't think I can hear any change, but like I said willing to accept maybe there is a small one. Still, the overarching point, I'd say, is that whatever change is noise there is, it's somewhere between naff all and very slight.

 

Then, as I said, factor in the possibility (hard to judge definitively) that it might let more dirt into the engine and I think it's a pretty easy no. No upside plus possible major downside for me = nope. Again, the whole increased dirt into the engine thing may be an overstatement or not true at all. But it's hard to be totally sure one way or the other and so I'd want a clear upside to take that risk. If the filter gave me a nice, clear improvement in induction noise, I'd be happy to take that risk. It definitely doesn't do that.

 

I had a BMC filter on my CR for 20k/7 years.  It never messed up the MAF or the engine.  The MAF issues come from over oiling the filter and I'm sure there are those out there that may have done this unknowingly.  I obviously can't comment on the longevity over only 20k, but I would be inclined to agree that there is no need to pay the premium over an OEM or equivalent filter.

 

The perf difference is not something I can comment upon as I did it in tandem with other mods and a map.  I doubt it makes any increase at all, personally.  The intake noise difference was definitely negligible, as you say.

[MartinF6]

Yeah, I think any possible downsides re engine wear would be over the very, very long term. Over 20k a bit more wear wouldn't be apparent to the end user even if it's there. I'm thinking more along the lines of your bottom end bearings might be toast in 150k miles rather than 200k miles! Or not! Impossible to say, really.

 

I see conflicting reports re the MAF fouling. Even if it can do, I don't see that as a huge deal. I'd tolerate it if it made the engine sound noticeably better!