Awesome. Is this intake something you are willing to share? Does it retain the MAF in the stock location? It's not unknown that alterations to the flow or position of the MAF can cause the car to lean out and produce more power as opposed to the gains being from the intake itself.
GR86 Is the GR86 Downrated or quoted lower figures?
- Thread starter Chrisnufc
- Start date
Sure, What do you need shared ?
Getting the MAF placement and size wrong seems to be what people are talking about on this platform which causes engine lights and adaption codes.
Not really seen any evidence of power gained for a start apart from one or two designs and when it has, the afr is around the same.
A high flow intake will alter the flow which will be picked up by the MAF which is its function.
The diameter and placement of the MAF within an aftermarket tube is critical as this determines the calculation to be correct. A company would have to get it very wrong to create a big change in AFR which subsequently gives a large increase in power.
The placement of the MAF in where it sits from the throttle body is not going to cause any issues and on this platform it doesn’t cause an issue.
Getting the MAF placement and size wrong seems to be what people are talking about on this platform which causes engine lights and adaption codes.
Not really seen any evidence of power gained for a start apart from one or two designs and when it has, the afr is around the same.
A high flow intake will alter the flow which will be picked up by the MAF which is its function.
The diameter and placement of the MAF within an aftermarket tube is critical as this determines the calculation to be correct. A company would have to get it very wrong to create a big change in AFR which subsequently gives a large increase in power.
The placement of the MAF in where it sits from the throttle body is not going to cause any issues and on this platform it doesn’t cause an issue.
Some intakes designs on the previous generation benefited from new MAF scale, not an earth shattering problem but no good unless you have had the car mapped or willing to have it done. Anyway that's by the by. Is the intake a personal project or is this something you are intending to sell?
Bathroom_Security
Obsessed member
When can we expect to see a release do you know?
KobayashiMaru86
Totally Hooked
I'd be interested in one.
I've never increased bhp on a car before, so I don't know what counts as decent with intake mods etc, but this example is only 10 bhp when at 7,000 revs. When under 5,000 rpm it's less than 5 bhp.
Would the intention be to do this in combination with other mods to get a better overall boost?
There’s not much more to gain with NA tuning. Exhaust mods might help take out the torque dip between 3.5-4.5k rpm but otherwise the torque curve is nice and flat and holds strong up to redline.
Bolting on a turbo/supercharger is the easier way to more power from this point.
AdamST205
Dedicated member
- Jun 26, 2023
- 117
- 123
Whilst that is true in general a lot of these modern naturally aspirated engines are governed by their emissions equipment. A decent intake, manifold and exhaust system with a map you should easily see low 260's compared to stock.
100 BHP/litre isn't really anything special. Honda B series were doing that 30 years ago but tech has moved on a lot since then whilst also emissions equipment has been bringing it back into check.
What the FA24 has on its side is displacement compared to the old motor so to get to 260 you only need 108bhp per litre.
Is anyone working on something like that?
GRistopher
Totally Hooked
- Oct 23, 2023
- 697
- 1,097
It depends on whether you want to keep a catalytic converter and GPF, and whether you want UEL or EL manifold.
For starters, UEL manifolds typically see more mid range improvement (and sound a lot better) whereas EL are apparently better for top end, but there's some youtube dyno data that suggests theyre quite similar top end.
You can get catless manifolds of both types quite easily, EL are available from Fensport with cats but as far as i can tell. the only high flow catted UEL manifold sized for the 2.4l engine is from JDL in the states.
the next section is the overpipe. no emmissions equipment here but there are better flowing options available.
Then you come to the front exhaust section where it gets a bit tricky. In the UK and EU, this section contains a GPF and resonator. The resonator only controls sound but the GPF is emmissions equipment. the only high flowing option i've been able to find is this mountune unit, which would have to be fabbed into a custom centre section. Custom exhaust places might be able to source them too but i haven't enquired. You're still removing factory fitted emmission equipment but mountune claim "This product has been designed and is intended for UK markets and complies with UK MOT tailpipe emissions regulations". i think you'd need a right stiff of a MOT guy to fail you for it.
Most tuning seems to be done through ECUTEK, you can buy the unit and liscense, then tuning companies can sell you their maps, or you can take your car to them and have them do it. you can also do things like disable the cold start.
Needless to say that you are likely to void your warrenty with a lot of this stuff. Installing catless manifolds and removing the GPF will throw up a CEL without a remap, and you're rolling the dice with the high flow versions but it does make your car sound cool
The limit here is not bhp/litre or emissions equipment, it’s lbft/litre.
The FA24 is making 183 lbft from 2387cc =76.7 lbft/Litre. This is pretty good going for an NA engine, achieved with some clever design.
In comparison, as Hondas were mentioned;
Honda b16a3=111/1.595= 69.6
Honda K20=149/1.998=74.6
So the torque output of the FA24 is high for the capacity and has a nice flat curve.
Increasing peak torque is unlikely, regardless of mapping, exhausts etc. The only way to get low 260’s is to rev the engine higher, like the Hondas.
The issue here is that the torque curve is falling rapidly before the current limiter.
New camshafts with bigger lift/duration would enable the torque to be held longer but at the expense of low down torque and may need supporting mods (head, pistons, inlet, throttle, crank, exhaust, injectors etc) to make it all work at higher rpm.
Which is a lot of effort for not much gain. Hence previous conclusion that there’s not much more without forced induction.
The FA24 is making 183 lbft from 2387cc =76.7 lbft/Litre. This is pretty good going for an NA engine, achieved with some clever design.
In comparison, as Hondas were mentioned;
Honda b16a3=111/1.595= 69.6
Honda K20=149/1.998=74.6
So the torque output of the FA24 is high for the capacity and has a nice flat curve.
Increasing peak torque is unlikely, regardless of mapping, exhausts etc. The only way to get low 260’s is to rev the engine higher, like the Hondas.
The issue here is that the torque curve is falling rapidly before the current limiter.
New camshafts with bigger lift/duration would enable the torque to be held longer but at the expense of low down torque and may need supporting mods (head, pistons, inlet, throttle, crank, exhaust, injectors etc) to make it all work at higher rpm.
Which is a lot of effort for not much gain. Hence previous conclusion that there’s not much more without forced induction.
Last edited:
AdamST205
Dedicated member
- Jun 26, 2023
- 117
- 123
There are plenty of people getting low 260's with bolt ons though.
Around 6 weeks
