Group buy - GSR Induction Kit

[Dangerousfish]

Guys who do we contact for faults with the kit?

I've had mine on for several months now and just noticed whilst replacing a bulb that my bracket by the cone filter has sheared in half?

Surely they should last longer than this...?

Hi Callum,

If you can drop me a PM with a picture of the broken part I can get this over to the manufacturer and arrange for a replacement. Sorry to hear you've had issues with this.

Cheers,

Liam

[Torque7]

Write directly to me - info@torque7.co
I have received a number of complaints for these brackets, therefore about 3 months ago they have been upgraded to thick aluminium ones. If anyone else had this issue - please contact me on the above mentioned email and I will replace them free of charge

[RoyalGuard]

Not trying to be buzzkillington but this kit is an awful design in my opinion and looks very amateurish, just get a performance panel filter

[Torque7]

Dear RoyalGuard, in your opinion, what design would be better for these cars then?

[monkeynuts]

Dear RoyalGuard, in your opinion, what design would be better for these cars then?

I have given this set up a lot of thought and other than people buying it for the noise I cannot believe you get any gains in performance from this.

The filter is tucked up behind the engine sucking in hot air unless I am missing a cold air feed pipe from the low pressure area at the front of the engine bay .

Is the filter you add to the Silicone piping a K&N type ?

At the end of the day are people just fitting this for the Barp .................Looks ................Or BHP gains

[drpouch95]

Write directly to me - info@torque7.co
I have received a number of complaints for these brackets, therefore about 3 months ago they have been upgraded to thick aluminium ones. If anyone else had this issue - please contact me on the above mentioned email and I will replace them free of charge

HI Torque7,

I have emailed you directly.

Thanks

[Broda]

*Popcorn*

[RoyalGuard]

Dear RoyalGuard, in your opinion, what design would be better for these cars then?

@Torque7

I'm not doing your job for you, but I would use a closed box system or CAI with a seal against the bonnet with a ram air intake from the grille, high quality plastic tubing located towards the front of the car, the ram would stagnate in the box, build up pressure which is very useful of guided correctly, gradual changes in direction and diameter to provide a smooth flow path for the air, also including aspiration ports to allow for freer airflow for high tuned cars, with this kind of a design you may be able to see a Volumetric Efficiency over 1

Firstly it's in a high pressure zone, sucking in hot air from radiator wash and engine and turbo heat, lack of sufficient cool air, I have seen one of your kits tubing which in my opinion was poor quality and less smooth than a stock OEM plastic tubing, the velocity stack looks poorly designed, 90 degree bends, What you dont want to do, it looks like it forces the air to have to change direction so fast, that you lose either velocity, or pressure, perhaps both (going against Bernoulli's principle) these abrupt changes in direction causes total pressure reduction, lost with momentum loss, The static pressure component of total pressure is lost with frictional losses,

What I refer to as Velocity is actually ( dynamic pressure loss) don't want to confuse people
Are there tests for MAF frequencies, air flow maximum capacity, airflow resistance, turbulence graphs,

I could go on and on, I tried to keep it simple and short as possible otherwise I would be writing a physics dissertation however this is only my opinion

[Torque7]

And a very good opinion, I might add! Some of your principals were taken into account when making the petrol C2 intake. But there are a few stated things, I would not agree with:
1) You mentioned that our filter sits in the high pressure zone (“sucking in hot air from radiator wash and engine and turbo heat, lack of sufficient cool air”) – I’m sure it was a typing error of yours and you must have meant “low pressure” Warm, less dense air forms low pressure, and we all intake manufacturers are after building up initial charge pressure and chasing for cold dense air which is in fact high pressure Other than that, if you own a HDI you most likely noticed that all the heat is generated in front of the engine – by the already mentioned hot turbo, exhaust manifold and the heat off the radiator. At the back you don’t have any real heat sources. Now if you think outside the box, the engine bay is designed to have air circulation all around it. It’s not a closed compartment now is it? Therefore when in motion, we get the ventilation and enough cool air.
2) “I have seen one of your kits tubing which in my opinion was poor quality and less smooth than a stock OEM plastic tubing” – The OEM pipe is corrugated, our is smooth. You know well that corrugation causes huge turbulence which kills air velocity. So no way the stock pipe can already be better.
3) “the velocity stack looks poorly designed, 90 degree bends, What you dont want to do, it looks like it forces the air to have to change direction so fast, that you lose either velocity, or pressure, perhaps both (going against Bernoulli's principle) these abrupt changes in direction causes total pressure reduction, lost with momentum loss, The static pressure component of total pressure is lost with frictional losses” – You keep forgetting that it has got a MAF. Again, you should know that the MAF cannot be moved out of it’s original location because the ECU has a pre-set value range for it. If you move it elsewhere (say to a colder location) you’ll get in trouble because it will think that you have got more cold, dense air flowing into the engine and it will adjust the fuelling accordingly to a situation that you actually don’t have. Now because of that, we have an extremely restricted design template. The shape of the pipe from the turbo to MAF can not be changed, so we can only eliminate the corrugation that the OEM pipe had. We did that. Next we have only the system from the MAF onwards left to play with. Upon further investigation we again can notice that we are restricted because of the fact that the engine is a forced induction type. You may already know that all the velocity, density, pressure etc principals work the best on N/A type engines, while on the turbo applications it’s a bit different. The turbo sucks the air in at a greater force than the atmospheric pressure, so ideally we would have the filter sitting directly on the turbo intake side for minimum restrictions. Everything else simply restricts the air flow for it’s sucking power. A general rule for turbo intakes – the longer the pipe the more power loss it will create (of course there is more than just that to it, but you get the picture). Because we already have a restrictive above mentioned MAF that just has to be in it’s place, we need to have the shortest possible hose before it and a least restrictive filter. Ideally the filter could just be bolted to the MAF, but there is no space for a twin cone (which flows better than a narrow single cone type), so the next best thing is to position the twin cone as close as possible to the MAF, by means of a around 70 degree angled hose. The transition from 76mm to 64mm is as smooth as possible in a given short distance.
Oh yes, you mentioned Bernoulli’s principle – it basic terms it means “what goes in – has to go out”. Again you tried to quote it but not entirely correct. Let me explain why – you said that there are 90 degree bends (according to this it’s plural…) that “it looks like it forces the air to have to change direction so fast, that you lose either velocity, or pressure, perhaps both” – if you change the direction of the fluid/gas – it does not loose it’s pressure. Pressure is only lost when you downsize the pipe diameter. But that results in increased velocity, what again we would like to have. I’m sure you meant that this design restricts velocity, which in a way it does, when compared to what it could be if we wouldn’t have the MAF…
“these abrupt changes in direction causes total pressure reduction, lost with momentum loss, The static pressure component of total pressure is lost with frictional losses” – there is hope! Fortunately for us, the turbo sucks in everything at a much higher rate and pressure that the losses are, so we’re ok. It would be catastrophic on N/A cars, yes…
4) Now a bit more about your design: “I would use a closed box system or CAI with a seal against the bonnet with a ram air intake from the grille, high quality plastic tubing located towards the front of the car, the ram would stagnate in the box, build up pressure which is very useful of guided correctly, gradual changes in direction and diameter to provide a smooth flow path for the air, also including aspiration ports to allow for freer airflow for high tuned cars,”
A closed type air box system would not give you any benefits over an open type cone in these low power diesels unless you feed the air from a ram intake hole in the bonnet. If you run the cold air intake pipe all the way from the front of the engine to the back (we can’t position it otherwise - MAF, remember?) the plastic pipe would get heated up and would heat the air inside it as well, plus you’d get a really long intake path that would go all the way around the engine and into the turbo so you would have a lot of restrictions on your turbo which would increase the sucking pressure at the turbo side and would result in direct turbo lag…
“with this kind of a design you may be able to see a Volumetric Efficiency over 1” – these cars already have the VE over 100%, they’re turbo So any air charge effects can not be seen because of the forced induction force.

No Physics dissertations here, only simple facts

[monkeynuts]

And a very good opinion, I might add! Some of your principals were taken into account when making the petrol C2 intake. But there are a few stated things, I would not agree with:
1) You mentioned that our filter sits in the high pressure zone (“sucking in hot air from radiator wash and engine and turbo heat, lack of sufficient cool air”) – I’m sure it was a typing error of yours and you must have meant “low pressure” Warm, less dense air forms low pressure, and we all intake manufacturers are after building up initial charge pressure and chasing for cold dense air which is in fact high pressure Other than that, if you own a HDI you most likely noticed that all the heat is generated in front of the engine – by the already mentioned hot turbo, exhaust manifold and the heat off the radiator. At the back you don’t have any real heat sources. Now if you think outside the box, the engine bay is designed to have air circulation all around it. It’s not a closed compartment now is it? Therefore when in motion, we get the ventilation and enough cool air.
2) “I have seen one of your kits tubing which in my opinion was poor quality and less smooth than a stock OEM plastic tubing” – The OEM pipe is corrugated, our is smooth. You know well that corrugation causes huge turbulence which kills air velocity. So no way the stock pipe can already be better.
3) “the velocity stack looks poorly designed, 90 degree bends, What you dont want to do, it looks like it forces the air to have to change direction so fast, that you lose either velocity, or pressure, perhaps both (going against Bernoulli's principle) these abrupt changes in direction causes total pressure reduction, lost with momentum loss, The static pressure component of total pressure is lost with frictional losses” – You keep forgetting that it has got a MAF. Again, you should know that the MAF cannot be moved out of it’s original location because the ECU has a pre-set value range for it. If you move it elsewhere (say to a colder location) you’ll get in trouble because it will think that you have got more cold, dense air flowing into the engine and it will adjust the fuelling accordingly to a situation that you actually don’t have. Now because of that, we have an extremely restricted design template. The shape of the pipe from the turbo to MAF can not be changed, so we can only eliminate the corrugation that the OEM pipe had. We did that. Next we have only the system from the MAF onwards left to play with. Upon further investigation we again can notice that we are restricted because of the fact that the engine is a forced induction type. You may already know that all the velocity, density, pressure etc principals work the best on N/A type engines, while on the turbo applications it’s a bit different. The turbo sucks the air in at a greater force than the atmospheric pressure, so ideally we would have the filter sitting directly on the turbo intake side for minimum restrictions. Everything else simply restricts the air flow for it’s sucking power. A general rule for turbo intakes – the longer the pipe the more power loss it will create (of course there is more than just that to it, but you get the picture). Because we already have a restrictive above mentioned MAF that just has to be in it’s place, we need to have the shortest possible hose before it and a least restrictive filter. Ideally the filter could just be bolted to the MAF, but there is no space for a twin cone (which flows better than a narrow single cone type), so the next best thing is to position the twin cone as close as possible to the MAF, by means of a around 70 degree angled hose. The transition from 76mm to 64mm is as smooth as possible in a given short distance.
Oh yes, you mentioned Bernoulli’s principle – it basic terms it means “what goes in – has to go out”. Again you tried to quote it but not entirely correct. Let me explain why – you said that there are 90 degree bends (according to this it’s plural…) that “it looks like it forces the air to have to change direction so fast, that you lose either velocity, or pressure, perhaps both” – if you change the direction of the fluid/gas – it does not loose it’s pressure. Pressure is only lost when you downsize the pipe diameter. But that results in increased velocity, what again we would like to have. I’m sure you meant that this design restricts velocity, which in a way it does, when compared to what it could be if we wouldn’t have the MAF…
“these abrupt changes in direction causes total pressure reduction, lost with momentum loss, The static pressure component of total pressure is lost with frictional losses” – there is hope! Fortunately for us, the turbo sucks in everything at a much higher rate and pressure that the losses are, so we’re ok. It would be catastrophic on N/A cars, yes…
4) Now a bit more about your design: “I would use a closed box system or CAI with a seal against the bonnet with a ram air intake from the grille, high quality plastic tubing located towards the front of the car, the ram would stagnate in the box, build up pressure which is very useful of guided correctly, gradual changes in direction and diameter to provide a smooth flow path for the air, also including aspiration ports to allow for freer airflow for high tuned cars,”
A closed type air box system would not give you any benefits over an open type cone in these low power diesels unless you feed the air from a ram intake hole in the bonnet. If you run the cold air intake pipe all the way from the front of the engine to the back (we can’t position it otherwise - MAF, remember?) the plastic pipe would get heated up and would heat the air inside it as well, plus you’d get a really long intake path that would go all the way around the engine and into the turbo so you would have a lot of restrictions on your turbo which would increase the sucking pressure at the turbo side and would result in direct turbo lag…
“with this kind of a design you may be able to see a Volumetric Efficiency over 1” – these cars already have the VE over 100%, they’re turbo So any air charge effects can not be seen because of the forced induction force.

No Physics dissertations here, only simple facts

It looks nice but looking at the RR print out not 1bhp for £180 nice .

I am in no way knocking the product but its not a performance bit of kit no matter how many words and flash facts you use

Sorry

[MARK.A]

It looks nice but looking at the RR print out not 1bhp for £180 nice .

I am in no way knocking the product but its not a performance bit of kit no matter how many words and flash facts you use

Sorry

No matter what you do to it it's due to the very tiny turbo no matter what's done your going to get not a lot in return

[monkeynuts]

No matter what you do to it it's due to the very tiny turbo no matter what's done your going to get not a lot in return

Agreed Mark

So unless you want this just to be different from the rest its ok but as a performance enhancement I would just by a High Flow panel filter and save money

That is only my opinion

[lfcrule1972]

Thanks for the interesting read all I like (trying) to learn new stuff....