View Poll Results: Which intake would you prefer if cost weren't an issue?
Voters: 105. You may not vote on this poll
AEM vs. K&N vs. REVi
09-21-2005, 05:47 AM
#1
!!Speed Racer!! VrOoM
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Union city cali
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AEM vs. K&N vs. REVi
Just wanted to know what all you geniuses think. Which intake would you prefer, performance wise of course. I can deal with a rough idle or something, just looking for the most gains/best sound.
09-21-2005, 11:43 AM
#2
Riot Controller
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 2,142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
REVi...idle is even smoother (i seriously thought my engine had stalled at idle the other day, it's that smooth), the sound is incredible with my HKS exhaust, and the fit and finish by far exceeds anyone selling a pipe with a cone filter clamped to the end.
09-21-2005, 11:21 PM
#8
Armaan
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Virginia
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
9 hp from the revi and duct? I put mine on and noticed a difference when i took a s2000 opposed to lagging slightly behind one...but i also put a cz in so i thought that might have accounted for some of it
09-22-2005, 09:17 AM
#11
New K&N here /w RB Air Duct.
Hmm, I cant tell how many hp increase but.
the new K&N definetily better than the old K&N ( I got it b4, and its quite horrible )
Not as much stupid noise, much better airflow (You can tell from the sound) and I think its a little more hp than the old one.
and now with the RB air duct, I feel even better now.
Hmm, I cant tell how many hp increase but.
the new K&N definetily better than the old K&N ( I got it b4, and its quite horrible )
Not as much stupid noise, much better airflow (You can tell from the sound) and I think its a little more hp than the old one.
and now with the RB air duct, I feel even better now.
09-23-2005, 12:24 AM
#15
t
The car was dyno'd left straped in on the same place on the dyno rollers, intake was installed by me in about an hour, then the car was dyno'd again a few times each produced a gain this was the best of those, all had a similar hump at 6550.
Because when looking at a dyno, the peek number is the maximum horsepower a car makes but you have to look at the "area" under the curve to see where the increase was. I had 9hp increase at 6550 but only a 3hp increase (kinda questionalble because of the wheelspeed and spikeyness of the graph) at peek RPM
Originally Posted by DARKMAZ8
what time line was this dyno done?
Originally Posted by Tamas
Polak, why is it that the graph shows different numbers than the legend? According to the legend, there is only a 3 HP / 3 lb/ft difference, but the graph shows 9 HP 
Last edited by PoLaK; 09-23-2005 at 12:29 AM.
09-23-2005, 12:45 AM
#17
Originally Posted by DARKMAZ8
why is there a nose dive right after?
Some people would say that it could be the knock sensor kicking in to retard timing but the AFR graphy doesn't show that and it was repeatable.
Even still everwhere else before that you see a HP gain of 3-5hp and the AFR leaner almost everwhere.
09-25-2005, 10:52 AM
#18
www.evoperform.com
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: tax free delaware
Posts: 2,010
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by kw1k
AEM dyno anyone?
https://www.rx8club.com/showpost.php...&postcount=111
10-13-2005, 01:01 AM
#21
Originally Posted by PoLaK
t The car was dyno'd left straped in on the same place on the dyno rollers, intake was installed by me in about an hour, then the car was dyno'd again a few times each produced a gain this was the best of those, all had a similar hump at 6550.
Because when looking at a dyno, the peek number is the maximum horsepower a car makes but you have to look at the "area" under the curve to see where the increase was. I had 9hp increase at 6550 but only a 3hp increase (kinda questionalble because of the wheelspeed and spikeyness of the graph) at peek RPM
Because when looking at a dyno, the peek number is the maximum horsepower a car makes but you have to look at the "area" under the curve to see where the increase was. I had 9hp increase at 6550 but only a 3hp increase (kinda questionalble because of the wheelspeed and spikeyness of the graph) at peek RPM
It really smooths out the acceleration
btw I have the Revi Intake and Air Ram
10-13-2005, 08:03 AM
#22
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Odd that Racing BEat did not get so much of a gain: This is Racing Beats official guidance on the Revi Intake....average gain of 1.95HP...as follows:
http://www.racingbeat.com/FRmazda4.htm
Stock vs Racing Beat
REVi Intake Adds An Average 1.95 HP Over The Stock System - 2000-8900 RPM Range
Peak RPM Gains Over Stock - 3.5 HP @ 8300 RPM
Maximum Power Gain Over Stock - 5.8 HP @ 8900 RPM
http://www.racingbeat.com/FRmazda4.htm
Stock vs Racing Beat
REVi Intake Adds An Average 1.95 HP Over The Stock System - 2000-8900 RPM Range
Peak RPM Gains Over Stock - 3.5 HP @ 8300 RPM
Maximum Power Gain Over Stock - 5.8 HP @ 8900 RPM
10-14-2005, 12:19 AM
#23
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: cali baby
Posts: 660
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by lurch519
thats pretty damn good
10-14-2005, 01:37 AM
#24
Registered
Remember with the ram air duct you can't measure the nicest gains on a dyno. You have to be moving. Many people actually report better mileage with the REVi and ram air duct combo. The physics behind the ram air duct design would also support this.
