Jump to content
LegacyGT.com

GrimmSpeed 05-09 LGT Intake - Any Interest?


Recommended Posts

Following the successful development and release of our 08-14 WRX/STI intake, we're proud to announce a near future release of the 05-09 LGT intake. After a final round of testing and production is complete, we'll offer this as an introductory groupbuy. However, lets not get ahead of ourselves, as we have a wealth of information to share about our intake design.

 

http://www.grimmspeed.com/content/images/intake_0814wrx_lgtfit_1.jpg

 

http://www.grimmspeed.com/content/images/intake_0814wrx_lgtfit_2.jpg

 

 

Here we have two pictures of a prototype unit during the initial test fittings a few months ago.

 

 

http://www.grimmspeed.com/content/images/lgt_intake_production1.jpg

 

http://www.grimmspeed.com/content/images/lgt_intake_production2.jpg

 

http://www.grimmspeed.com/content/images/lgt_intake_production3.jpg

 

 

And here we have a pipe, in LGT fitment, ready for powdercoat. With welds that beautiful it is almost a shame to cover them up, but it's hard to argue with the finished product:

 

 

http://cdn2.bigcommerce.com/server5000/8fmm9av/products/353/images/1664/intake_subaru_0814_wrxsti_21_1600__67684.1431537458.1280.1280.jpg?c=2

 

 

Initial development of this particular intake design was heavily guided by asking Subaru owners what they want from an intake. With these vehicles having been around for several years already there are lots of choices of intakes from other companies. However, everyone knows what they do and don't like about existing designs, and helped us compile a list of goals for our intake:

 

1. Filter location that's somewhere between 'airbox' and 'too low, near the ground'.

2. Airbox/heat shield that isn't 'sitting in the engine bay'.

3. Desire to have an OTS map that's compatible.

4. Airbox/heat shield that seals the filter from the engine bay.

5. Velocity stack at filter end.

6. Air straightener if needed.

7. Competitively priced.

 

So we took these ideas and ran with them. This lead to the inital design concept that we kept calling "a hybrid sri/cai." Several intakes achieve the goal of being a cold air intake by using a long pipe, and locating the filter in the fenderwell. Sometimes these designs have a heatshield to try and isolate heat from the engine bay away from where the filter is in the fenderwell. The major drawbacks of this design is that when you increase the length of the pipe you increase restriction (think what it's like to suck through a short straw vs a long straw of the same diameter). Also, as you increase length you will always end up increasing bend angles in order to get from the turbo inlet to the fenderwell, this also increases restriction. Other intakes use the short ram intake idea, and make the pipe as short as possible, and minimize bend angles, but end up placing the air filter in the engine bay to ingest hot air. There is a decrease in overall restriction, but a loss in air density which is not helpful for power production.

 

The solution to us was obvious, but the execution was not. We decided on creating a pipe with minimal length and bend angles, and to create a heatshield to isolate the cooler air in the fenderwell, and effectively bring it into the engine bay area. The end result is a true hybrid cold air/short ram intake. We then spent a lot of time trying to create a design that gets consistent, predictable, similar to OEM MAF readings.

 

 

http://cdn2.bigcommerce.com/server5000/8fmm9av/product_images/uploaded_images/intake-subaru-0814-wrxsti-15-original.jpg?t=1430767065

 

http://cdn2.bigcommerce.com/server5000/8fmm9av/product_images/uploaded_images/intake-subaru-0814-wrxsti-16-original.jpg?t=1430767128

 

 

We considered the intake as an entire system, and started to use CFD to tweak the design. The first criteria was to maintain the OEM MAF diameter, which guided the design. The second criteria we wanted to hit was to remove the MAF sensor from the hot engine bay, and locate it with the cooler air in the fenderwell. The objective here is to isolate additional heat from the MAF sensor that contributes to false readings. Using this location also strongly contributes to a more accurate velocity profile, compared to intakes that have their sensor location after a bend, or too far away from the entrance of the intake. We then custom spec'd an air filter with an integrated velocity stack (as it was found to contribute to more predictable flow intake the intake pipe), and then designed a weld-on air straightener in the same dimensions as the stock unit. We then experimented with MAF sensor clocking and location until we settled on a design that should behave close to the OEM unit.

 

 

http://www.grimmspeed.com/content/images/intake_subaru_0814_wrxsti_17_original.jpg

 

 

Using our 08-14 WRX/STI unit on a 2013 WRX (which is identical to the LGT version other than the MAF flange), we brought the car to DB Performance in Rogers, Minnesota. We did a lot of dyno testing this day, but our main goal was to identify if we would be able to use an existing OTS map for the accessport.

 

The main information to take away from this graph is that even with our heavy effort on being able to use this intake without a tune, we were unsuccessful. The car ran lean on a stock map, and ran lean on the OTS stock intake maps (stage 1 and 2). However, this also shows that our efforts to achieve OEM-like MAF readings were successful, albeit scaled. Our tuner simply applied a 12% global MAF scale on the OTS stock intake stg 2 map, and brought the AFRs right back to where they were with the stock airbox on that OTS. So the MAF still needs to be scaled to accommodate for the additional flow, but is substantially easier to scale than other intakes, making it very tuner friendly. As a contrast, the car ran extremely rich when using an OTS map for the AEM/Cobb SF intake, making that map safe, but not ideal.

 

 

http://www.grimmspeed.com/content/images/intake_subaru_0814_wrxsti_18_original.jpg

 

 

The power gains over the stock intake, and the stock intake with OTS tune, and a competitor intake with OTS tune are impressive as well (especially considering we test on low reading Dyno Dynamics dynos).

 

The sound of an intake is also something that is to be strongly considered when intake shopping, and ours has been strongly received. Some of our competitor's intakes are quite loud all the time, and get old quickly. We have had several customers remove those intakes and install our own, and have been very happy with the results. Despite our minimal restriction design (which should increase sound), our superior sealing airbox does an incredible job of minimizing sound during regular driving. The result is an intake that you don't even hear until you roll into boost. At that point it has been described as sounding "like an f-18 fighter jet." I would describe it as being mature and refined around town, but rowdy when you mash the loud pedal.

 

 

http://cdn2.bigcommerce.com/server5000/8fmm9av/products/353/images/1651/intake_subaru_0814_wrxsti_3_1600__10167.1430764380.1280.1280.jpg?c=2

 

http://cdn2.bigcommerce.com/server5000/8fmm9av/products/353/images/1660/intake_subaru_0814_wrxsti_14_1600__85070.1430764400.1280.1280.jpg?c=2

 

 

I know this is a lot of initial information, but since most of the hard work has already been done we have access to it. Since the product is so similar to the WRX/STI version this link serves as a good sneak preview:

 

http://www.grimmspeed.com/grimmspeed-cold-air-intake-08-14-subaru-wrx-sti-09-13-forester-xt/

 

But for now ask me anything while we perform final testing and run through production. Also we'll be keeping everyone updated as we get closer to the groupbuy!

 

Chase

Engineering

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 348
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Power gains over a KN typhoon that has been properly tuned for?

 

If you're wondering if i bought a K&N Typhoon, installed it on an LGT, and then protuned it, I did not. We didn't do that with the competitor's intake in the WRX tests either. We wanted something more "standardized." Using OTS tunes seemed like a good way to achieve a standard rather than relying on protunes to be consistent and fair.

 

This is why we've presented the runs in the graph that contain: Stock airbox and stock tune, stock airbox and Stg 2 Stock airbox OTS, GrimmSpeed intake and Stg 2 Stock airbox OTS +12% MAF scale, and GrimmSpeed intake and Stg 2 Stock airbox OTS +12% MAF scale +10% WGDC (to hit target boost).

 

Our tuner knew to apply the 12% MAF scale because we preformed a dyno run previous to that pull with our intake and the stock airbox Stg 2 OTS tune. The car made great power at 253 ftlbs, and was at 238 whp and climbing when the tuner backed out of the pull due to knock. The AFRs were in the low 12:1. With the MAF scale applied the power output was IDENTICAL, but the AFRs were within a tenth of a point of stock at 10.5:1.

 

This tells us two things: This intake is not safe to use on stock tune, it will run lean and it will knock. But it also debunks the myth that the stock intake is "good enough to 350whp" which is said way too much on the forums. The stock intake and OTS tune made 220whp (up from 201whp). However, when we did nothing at all except change the stock intake to our own (no change in the tune) power went up to 238whp, and was still increasing AND knocking. Now the typical argument here is that it being lean is where all the power was coming from. Well that myth is also debunked as we made the exact same horsepower and torque after the MAF scaling bring the AFR to 10.5:1.

 

So what does this have to do with the K&N intake? Well, the K&N intake is supposedly safe on the stock tune, and i've seen data that it's not bad. This is achieved because the piping diameter is smaller than the stock MAF diameter. I can tell this without having even touched one. Since it uses a straight coupler to get to the turbo inlet, the outer tubing diameter is about 2.75in, which is equal to the stock MAF diameter. I've handled other Subaru K&N intakes though, and that's why I can accurately guess it's probably right around 65mm, as opposed to the 70mm diameter on the LGTs. This "MAF trickery" is the only may you can get away with running an intake on stock tune.

 

So? Who cares? Well, you do. Smaller diameter tubing means more restriction. You're going to be hard pressed to somehow produce more power with a more restrictive pipe. But adding to that, the tubing is longer, and there are two bends when. This is all needless additional restriction compared to our design. And on top of that, their airbox is far from being sealed, and their heatshield for the MAF is a good attempt, but it doesn't work nearly as well as our completely enclosed and isolated design does.

 

And just to drive the point home again, using the exact same tune, this is the difference between an intake with a 65mm MAF diameter, and our stock MAF diameter:

 

http://www.grimmspeed.com/content/images/intake_subaru_0814_wrxsti_18_original.jpg

 

I hope this answers your question short of actually performing what you're asking. Based on the inadequacies of the design in question, I think it's safe to say ours will out perform it every time.

 

Chase

Engineering

Link to comment
Share on other sites

how well does your airbox play with Racer X FMIC piping?

 

I have no idea, as we don't sell or design for FMICs typically. Doing so would make a major design compromise. Can you show me a picture of where it routes?

 

Chase

Engineering

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no idea, as we don't sell or design for FMICs typically. Doing so would make a major design compromise. Can you show me a picture of where it routes?

 

Chase

Engineering

 

It routes between the motor and the stock airbox.

"Striving to better, oft we mar what's well." - Bill Shakespeare - car modder
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im all for new products and appreciate the development but your dyno plots are misleading.

 

The only two plots that should be up there are the ones that have no map alterations except for scaling for BOTH intakes. Maybe the stock intake could benefit from an increased % across the board on scaling?

 

If we then compare the two dyno plots that are most closely related (ots tunes with no wgdc added) we see a 22hp and 14tq gain. I have a feeling these gains would be slightly minimized if the stock maf was scaled properly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

how well does your airbox play with Racer X FMIC piping?

I was super excited about this until I remembered my piping as well. My typhoon is an extremely snug fit and sits on the pipe. I'm wondering if this is smaller?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

how well does your airbox play with Racer X FMIC piping?

 

It routes between the motor and the stock airbox.

 

I take that back actually, it looks like it has the potential to fit. I assume the coupler will make contact with the side of our heatshield, but it just might fit based on the photos I've seen. Clever design that Racer X pipe is.

 

Curios about compatibility with my avo fmic and is their an 73mm option.

 

I think there is no chance of compatibility with the AVO pipe. That pipe appears to run into the fenderwell, while our heatshield completely encloses that opening.

 

And there will be no 73mm option. The 3mm increase in diameter really doesn't add a ton of flow metering capability or enough of a decrease in restriction to warrant straying from the stock MAF diameter. I would wager the reason the 73mm option exists is because an off the shelf 3in OD 16ga aluminum pipe (which just so happens to have about a 73mm ID) is pretty cheap. We chose to go the less cheap route in an effort to create an intake that behaves closer to stock in order to make tuning a little easier. We'll always choose "doing it the right way" over "doing it the cheap way."

 

Been watching this on NASIOC with anticipation on the LGT version. I need this!

 

Glad you're as excited as we are!

 

Interested?

 

Definitely!

 

I love the engineering work that you guys put into your products, and I love that you share data results.

 

Target price?

 

Very interested. Any ETA?

 

super excited about this. I assume you guys already have your guinea pigs for testing? And also wondering about an ETA date and price.

 

I'm willing to bet it will be identical in price as the WRX intake as it's basically identical (except for the maf flange) in all other ways.

 

Interested also. In for price and date of release

 

Thank you very much folks! Price will end up being slightly more than the WRX version, but I'm not yet sure of the exact number. I know that it won't be something that will enrage you though, but in order to keep the lights on, employees paid, and development continuing we can't take a hit on these just to keep the price the same. Yes, it has a different and larger MAF flange, but the pipe also has to be different to account for it. We keep the hole that is laser cut into the pipe almost the same diameter as the hole in the MAF flange, as to not create any disturbances in flow in this critical area. This is why the WRX pipe and LGT pipes are actually different, and is done so we're not making any compromises in order to save a couple bucks. The fact that we can not produce the LGT parts in the same volume as the WRX parts (lots more applicable modified WRXs than LGTs on the road) means that they cost us more money to make.

 

Don't get terrified yet, like I said it will only cost slightly more money, but I'm not sure how much yet. Will keep you updated!

 

Same with the ETA. We're ready to start welding these things together right now, which is great news. We'll be getting them in the schedule soon, and I'll be better equipped to give you an actual answer. I'm hoping these are out in 2-3 months tops, but it could be less.

 

AHH! Finally! Take my money already, ha!

 

My engine bay is all like, "GS, GS, GS, GS..." This will make a nice addition to the team :)

 

Nothing wrong with that! Thanks again for your continued support as well. The parts certainly do look nice when combined together, as they have a cohesive design. ;)

 

Just searched for this yesterday to see how far development has gotten. I was pleasantly surprised.

 

Outstanding, we're well on our way!

 

The more i click the more i read the more i want this

 

We definitely appreciate that. We put a ton into designs and features, so much so that people who actually do take the time to read can see things like this aren't "just a metal pipe with a filter," as so many people say about intakes.

 

Might be a nice replacement for my KSTech CAI

 

Could be! It might be a quieter alternative, which is always nice. Definitely a sexier one :p

 

When it's ready, let me in on the group buy. I'm very interested.

 

When it is ready we'll post up the link to the groupbuy, and you can sign on up!

 

Im all for new products and appreciate the development but your dyno plots are misleading.

 

The only two plots that should be up there are the ones that have no map alterations except for scaling for BOTH intakes. Maybe the stock intake could benefit from an increased % across the board on scaling?

 

If we then compare the two dyno plots that are most closely related (ots tunes with no wgdc added) we see a 22hp and 14tq gain. I have a feeling these gains would be slightly minimized if the stock maf was scaled properly.

 

I would have to say that our dyno plots are the LEAST misleading in the industry. Not only are they 100% explained in terms of procedure, equipped parts, and changes, but they are also performed on a low reading dyno. How often do you see dynos that are completely unexplained, before and after runs performed on different dates (or worse, different cars), or dynos comparing a stock vehicle to one with a modified part like an intake and a glory-run protune. I could have posted a plot showing a 286wtq/261whp protuned run vs the stock 212wtq/201whp which a lot of companies do. However, the question would then be "How much of those gains come from protuning, and how much from the intake?" So instead, we developed a procedure and test plan to show real apples to apples comparison of hardware changes instead of tuning changes.

 

http://www.grimmspeed.com/content/images/2012_wrx_intake_dynochart_8315_1.jpg

 

How about that! First plot is what the car was like when i drove to the dyno, second plot is what it was like when I left. Only changes were intake and protuning :p This is exactly what other companies do, and no one ever bats an eye. Gains of 70whp in places, and excess of 80ftlbs! And measured on a dyno dynamics dyno (which hurts numbers a lot compared to a dynojet like most companies use).

 

But there is a reason we've never posted that chart before right now, we believe it is deceptive marketing at best, even though these are real non-manipulated dyno results, conducted by a 3rd party. But they don't show what percentage of these gains is from the hardware itself. This is why we've come up with the testing strategy we have with the OTS maps (which means that you yourself can test these theories). I'd be interested to see any other companies that have done the same as we've done here, posting results not only over stock, but over stock tuned, and against other intakes with their own OTS map. This is why our testing and reporting is truly above and beyond, compared to the "Stock vs GS +Intake tuned" dyno plot, which is the industry standard. I challenge you to find another company that is willing to test their products like this, as I've never even see someone else do a test of a stock intake with an OTS map vs their own.

 

But you want to see a more "apples to apples comparison," which I also just prepared for today. You said: "The only two plots that should be up there are the ones that have no map alterations except for scaling for BOTH intakes. Maybe the stock intake could benefit from an increased % across the board on scaling?"

 

Well, our tuner never performed testing of that map and stock airbox with MAF scaling. But wouldn't it also be equally relevant to show one with no map alterations and without MAF scaling? Same map, different intake, and performed only 20 minutes later:

 

http://www.grimmspeed.com/content/images/2012_wrx_intake_dynochart_8315.jpg

 

Just as I mentioned before, the ONLY reason we did the MAF scale is because it was so lean that it was knocking bad enough that the dyno operator wouldn't finish the pulls (at about 12.3:1). However, with no map alterations at all, and changing only the intake the gains are still nearly the same as the MAF scaled run. This is why we say that there are clear gains over the stock airbox when using our intake. Then you're supposed to say "well that's because you leaned the mixture out, of course there are gains!" Then that's when we say: "But then we applied a quick and easy global MAF scale, then made the same exact gains, except at a safe AFR, without knocking, and within half a point of the stock AFRs. So the gains can not be from a lean mixture, and are truly from a hardware change." It is very important to remember that we're just using a stock airbox OTS map, one that is designed to perform with the stock airbox, and that our intake is still a strong performer with it despite the fact that it is not using a map designed for it.

 

And to address: "If we then compare the two dyno plots that are most closely related (ots tunes with no wgdc added) we see a 22hp and 14tq gain. I have a feeling these gains would be slightly minimized if the stock maf was scaled properly." I'd say that a 22hp and 14wtq gain on top of 19whp and 26wtq gain is pretty impressive on a non optimized tune. We could certainly have spent a little time to scale the MAF for the stock airbox to raise the AFRs half a point, but based on the testing we've seen with leaning and richening the mixture I would honestly expect to see no substantial power differences. But more importantly, if we were going to take the time to do a proper MAF scale on the stock airbox and tune, then after we took the time to do the same proper scale and tuning for the GrimmSpeed intake I think the gains would be even HIGHER. But the point of this testing was to show if this intake could be used with an OTS map, and if not what would need to be done to get it working safely.

 

I hope all of this makes sense. If it doesn't please ask me more, as I most likely have the info you want. I just want to drive home again that our dynos are some of the least misleading and deceptive, as I hope you now see. I appreciate you asking the tough questions so I can give you the tough answers!

 

Chase

Engineering

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was super excited about this until I remembered my piping as well. My typhoon is an extremely snug fit and sits on the pipe. I'm wondering if this is smaller?

 

Any pictures you have of fitment will help me assess if this will be possible. We try to be compatible with as much as we possibly can, but obviously that is not always possible. We also don't buy up all the aftermarket parts out on the market and test fit them in different combinations, and instead rely on the people who have the parts to help participate with testing. Depending on if we believe the parts will fit we will usually have programs to test them that involve free shipping back and forth if it doesnt fit and other incentives, etc. Help me with some pictures if you have some or know where they can be found, and that'll help me make a guess to see if a trial program like that is worth it.

 

It won't fit with a FMIC.

 

Nice piece tho, Grimmspeed is never a disappointment.

 

It might! We'll see... Thank you very much, we aim to please

 

Chase

Engineering

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use