[RiXst3r]

Originally Posted by ducati955

thanx!!!!!!! now i have to buy another intake setup!!!! jk, def want to get it, looks better too!

Just let me know, we got plenty

[Former_Boosted_IS]

Originally Posted by aab3218

That was my basic point. That they are too similar for it to matter much one way or the other so choose on price and vendor. For technical sake which do you think would flow better?

I think they will flow identical all else equal. If BMS uses the velocity stack, then the taper occurs in the filter. For Vishnu, the taper occurs in the pipe. There is no difference. Save yourselves the money guys and go BMS.

[Kyosho]

lol im so confused with all the physics.
business major anyone?

[cliverman]

Originally Posted by jcarlucci1

Your posts are useless..and didn't shiv proclaim that there was a 20-25 whp gain from these filters? If true, doesn't sound like a waste to me

20-25 whp gain from filters?

"...when used with the Vishnu PROcede V3 engine computer, increases output by 10-25 horsepower!.."

Not by themselves.

[TiAg335i]

Vishnu's couplers are tapered thereby providing higher velocity airflow. I cannot comment on BMS' design.

[lawdude]

Originally Posted by TiAg335i

Vishnu's couplers are tapered thereby providing higher velocity airflow. I cannot comment on BMS' design.

Sounds reasonable. A tapered turd seems to scoot out quicker.

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by lawdude

Sounds reasonable. A tapered turd seems to scoot out quicker.

[RiXst3r]

Originally Posted by TiAg335i

Vishnu's couplers are tapered thereby providing higher velocity airflow. I cannot comment on BMS' design.

seriously? c'mon... don't be biased. If you wanna play that card, then technically the BMS intake would provide a higher velocity... see below. (and honestly, it doesnt make a bit of freaking difference IMHO)

Just present all the facts next time...

BMS VELOCITY STACK FTMFW... lol...

http://www.e90post.com/forums/showpo...7&postcount=53

Originally Posted by RiXst3r

Sorry to jump in here... but I noticed not all the variables are considered here...

So then using that equation, since BOTH designs end up at 2.25... the larger opening wins... people think the *other* filter has a larger opening, but actually if you consider the smooth rounded velocity stack as part of the opening, bms filters actually START with an opening significatly LARGER than the 3" opening of the *other guys* and then has a smooth transition to 2.25.

Do I really think this matters? Nope... both designs allow more than enough airflow for any power levels we have seen yet... and also, both designs have the same amount of filter surface area, so technically that is where your calculation should start, since that is the actual start of the opening. Same surface area, same 2.25 outlet... you do the math... only thing left is turbulence...

Do I feel the need to defend a product that I sell. Nope.

Do I enjoy technical arguments... Yep... as long as all the facts were presented... which is what I am doing here, since some important things were overlooked(that you assumed both filters had the same velocity stacks)

BMS on top, "tapered turd"(to quote lawdude) on the bottom ... so there's the facts... make your own conclusions.

[marcvtec]

Are you kidding you think the tapered design will give you more power
you got it you will have 361 whp I will have 360 you win lol

[RiXst3r]

Originally Posted by marcvtec

Are you kidding you think the tapered design will give you more power
you got it you will have 361 whp I will have 360 you win lol

+1

Like I said... i doubt it makes a bit of difference... and even if it did, the BMS intake has the better taper and larger opening from the velocity stack... so it was a dumb argument to begin with

[OpenFlash]

So can anyone guess the reason we do most of the pipe reducing as far downstream as possible (ie, as far as possible from the air filter material)?

It would certainly be easier and cheaper to use a filter with a 2.25" inlet and use straight couplers (with no diameter change).

-shiv

[Digital.James]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

So can anyone guess the reason we do most of the pipe reducing as far downstream as possible (ie, as far as possible from the air filter material)?

It would certainly be easier and cheaper to use a filter with a 2.25" inlet and use straight couplers (with no diameter change).

-shiv

Because thats where youre going to be restricted by the stock tubes anyways?

[RiXst3r]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

So can anyone guess the reason we do most of the pipe reducing as far downstream as possible (ie, as far as possible from the air filter material)?

It would certainly be easier and cheaper to use a filter with a 2.25" inlet and use straight couplers (with no diameter change).

-shiv

Actually, it wouldnt be easier to use 2.25 all the way, because 3" inlet filters are easier to find, and 3" to 2.25" muffler cupplers are easily found at any muffler shop... hence the reason all the early DIY guys that actually invented this design used them.

Just don't make crap up to try and take advantage of people... it doesnt make a darn bit of difference and you know it, so just lose the act.

Don't make me quote O-Cha... LOL

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by RiXst3r

Actually, it wouldnt be easier to use 2.25 all the way, because 3" inlet filters are easier to find, and 3" to 2.25" muffler cupplers are easily found at any muffler shop... hence the reason all the early DIY guys that actually invented this design used them.

Just don't make crap up to try and take advantage of people... it doesnt make a darn bit of difference and you know it, so just lose the act.

The world is an easy place when you have virtually no technical knowledge of tuning, intake design, exhaust design, etc,. Man, you can't even make a proper fitting gauge pod for a coupe. So stop typing and read for once.

First of all, those muffler shop made couplers are "made". They aren't just sitting on the shelf at a muffler shop. So, yes, using straight-cut 2.25" pipe would be easier than getting 2.25" and expanding one side to 3". If you believe otherwise, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.

Second, these "early DIY guys" were, well... me. I've been running them and making them for customers for well over a year. In fact, months later, even Terry ended up using one of my early dual intake kits. Of course, he mocked it and, months later, came out with his own single filter design that was not only restrictive, but also fell apart at the seams. I knew it wouldn't be too long before he changed his tune and jumped back on board the dual intake wagon again. They do make the most power after all. And they don't put excessive stress on the rubber flange either.

Third, you mentioned that it is harder to find an intake with a 2.25" inlet. Yes, I suppose it is if one finds catalogs confusing. All those numbers and dimensions and diagrams... phew!

So maybe it is you that should drop the dumb act. Hey, at least I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt here.

Cheers,
shiv

[RiXst3r]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

The world is an easy place when you have virtually no technical knowledge of tuning, intake design, exhaust design, etc,. Man, you can't even make a proper fitting gauge pod for a coupe. So stop typing and read for once.

First of all, those muffler shop made couplers are "made". They aren't just sitting on the shelf at a muffler shop. So, yes, using straight-cut 2.25" pipe would be easier than getting 2.25" and expanding one side to 3". If you believe otherwise, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.

Second, these "early DIY guys" were, well... me. I've been running them and making them for customers for well over a year. In fact, months later, even Terry ended up using one of my early dual intake kits. Of course, he mocked it and, months later, came out with his own single filter design that was not only restrictive, but also fell apart at the seams. I knew it wouldn't be too long before he changed his tune and jumped back on board the dual intake wagon again. They do make the most power after all. And they don't put excessive stress on the rubber flange either.

Third, you mentioned that it is harder to find an intake with a 2.25" inlet. Yes, I suppose it is if one finds catalogs confusing. All those numbers and dimensions and diagrams... phew!

So maybe it is you that should drop the dumb act. Hey, at least I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt here.

Cheers,
shiv

Your gonna bash my POD that I sold to over 100 satisfied customers at basically no profit which I made mostly as a service to this community just because of an argument over intake taper? Thats really freaking rude... seriously.

This isnt even worth it, you just can't stand to not get the last word in, so have at it... throw out your marketing crap... I won't say anything else.

I am going to tuck my 3yr old son into bed, and go watch speed channel in bed with my wife... you can waste your time making up crap and hurling insults at people on the internet... I have better things to do.

I hope all your customers remember this post, and see what jerk you can be.

e90post needs a vendor that will RESPECT its customers, and provide the level of service a BMW driver expects and deserves. Thats what I am here for, and my customers will stand behind me.

[OpenFlash]

Originally Posted by RiXst3r

Your gonna bash my POD that I sold to over 100 satisfied customers at basically no profit which I made mostly as a service to this community just because of an argument over intake taper?

I'm not arguing with you as far as I'm concerned. You tried to spread misinformation with your previous post. And I corrected you. If that hurts your feelings, I'm sorry. I can't do anything about that.

Shiv

[RiXst3r]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

I'm not arguing with you as far as I'm concerned. You tried to spread misinformation with your previous post. And I corrected you. If that hurts your feelings, I'm sorry. I can't do anything about that.

Shiv

If you would have corrected me, that would have been fine... but you didn't. You bashed a past product of mine that doesn't even have anything to do with intakes.

At least if someone had an issue with my pod I offered full no questions asked refunds, immediate response to questions or problems, and re-designed the product to fix those problems at NO EXTRA COST to the customer.

Treat others as you would want them treat you... and the customer is ALWAYS right... thats what is important to me.

g'night.

-Rick

[TheAcAvenger]

Damn, I'm loving V3 but that pod bashing was kind of low. My pod fits pretty well, I'd say.

[lawdude]

Wouldn't have otherwise brought it up, but I could never get my pod never fit quite right. Maybe I just don't know how to hold my jaw just right. Anyway, not complaining, just observing. I'm satisfied with it.

[HP Autosport]

Originally Posted by mistermojorizin

thanks for the post, op, it was very informative. i believe intakes don't get you any power without a tune.

Intakes does add some power, we experienced it first hand on a dyno by lifting the lid off of the factory airbox and bypass all the inlet restrictions, that was worth 9 HP at the wheels on 335i without a tune.

[nj335i]

Originally Posted by HP Autowerks

Intakes does add some power, we experienced it first hand on a dyno by lifting the lid off of the of factory airbox and bypass all the inlet restrictions, that was worth 9 HP at the wheels on 335i without a tune.

My experience was the same.

[aab3218]

Originally Posted by shiv@vishnu

The world is an easy place when you have virtually no technical knowledge of tuning, intake design, exhaust design, etc,. Man, you can't even make a proper fitting gauge pod for a coupe. So stop typing and read for once.

First of all, those muffler shop made couplers are "made". They aren't just sitting on the shelf at a muffler shop. So, yes, using straight-cut 2.25" pipe would be easier than getting 2.25" and expanding one side to 3". If you believe otherwise, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.

With all respect due one has to wonder how much technical knowledge you actually have... your coupler taper is very abrupt and could create a stall point in the intake. It shows that you have a muffler shop make them. The edge of the filter clamp doesn't even line up properly.

The BMS couplers are aluminum which isn't sold at muffler shops. Aluminum is generally regarded as superior for intakes compared to mild steel or aluminized steel. It is less prone to heat soak, lighter, and easier to properly remove the burrs. It's more expensive and harder to source.

If you check the part numbers your S&B filters have a similar retail price so it appears not only is your intake 50% more expensive it is also less expensive to "produce".

Given your track record for tuning, trust me I am intimately familiar with one of your products, one has to wonder why you feel you have the right to pick on another vendor who has a great track record. Do you just hope people will read your posts and believe them without research? Do you think this helps your sales or reputation?