Ramair panel filter

[martziniuk]

Has anyone tried the Ramair panel filter in the octy Vrs and are they any good?

They seem quite cheap and iirc Subaru used them in the wrc.

[greg123]

What can you possibly gain? How can you measure the filtration quality, so how can you tell they are good?

A while ago I had an argument about this, I asked a) for the filtration specs vs stock for the performance filters and before and after rolling roads showing any significant increase in power. No response on either count.

Sometimes the sellers have a 'machine' claiming to show vastly increased flow but this is not real world situation and ignors many other factors. Additionaly it cannot measure the nominal or absolute filtration micron levels, which are part of the filters performance.

Greg.

Edited 24 September, 2008 by greg123

[martziniuk]

Well, i had a CAI on before now and vag-com logs actually showed a tiny loss in air flow past the MAF. So I am with you about there being no power gains and i would have thought that the oe filter will have the best or certainly be high up on the filtration levels, due to it paper construction.

There is just a nagging feeling that i'm missing out on something by having the standard filter. I know remapping companies recommend performance filters before mapping, also if remapped would the standard jobbie be up to the extra airflow.... decisions.

[Bodge]

my personal beliefs are that the standard airbox and intake piping are optimised already and shouldn't be touched, but the standard air filter is used due to its very low cost to keep servicing costs down, and could be better.

another good point made by martin there, is that with a remapped car you could run the risk of 'humping' up (only word i could think of to explain it!) the standard air filter causing all sorts of problems, due to its lack of strength.

Personally I use a K&N panel, mainly because I like them and it's something I've always done to my cars.

I'm pretty sure my average fuel economy popped up by 1 or 2mpg after fitting the K&N to the vRS, but I can't really prove this!

If i ever get a go on Janspeeds rolling road I'll try the 2 filters, and see if it makes any difference to outputs.

Maybe someone at Awesome GTi could run a little test for us to end this argument.......... comon Sarah, come to our rescue!

[Bodge]

found some useful info on this site, obviously a bit biased, but the facts are still there:

K&N Air Filter Facts You Should Know

[Blanchie]

Has anyone tried the Ramair panel filter in the octy Vrs and are they any good?

They seem quite cheap and iirc Subaru used them in the wrc.

yep I'm running one in my 4x4, good well made filter compared to the other drop in ones i've seen and far cheaper (~£20 from P-torque:thumbup:)

Concerning foamys/Cai's etc VS standad box you'll find the stnada box can be quiet restrictive due to the manufactures being bound by driveby noise regs we're as aftermarket peeps arnt.

A few years back i was involved in the development of a ITG Maxagen for the VX220 and compared to the standad box we got 12 bhp and a good shove of torque just from changing it. More power was possible but at the sacrifice of torque, foam filters do work well and better than the standad kit but it does depend on the type

:cheers:

Blanchie

[martziniuk]

This make interesting reading http://www.mkiv.com/techarticles/filters_test/2/

[AwesomeSarah]

K&N Air Filter Facts You Should Know

This will be a good read if you want some information

But the idea of the CAI is that the air that comes in is cooler , which equals denser air

That in return means that more air is going through

So fuelling is adjusted with the lambda probe , but will equate a better burn , so fuel economy will not get worse

Also with more air going in , that equates to better throttle response

Air flow on the panel filter is alter as the panel filter wether it be K&N , Pipercross or Green etc does flow quicker

We did have a machine in the showroom that proved this , but I dont know where that has gone to now

But I think on the rolling road day that is coming up , we will dig it out so anyone around can have a play to determin

Because gains are usually down to a percentage really , a mapped car will pick up on the gains more , apposed to the standard car

Me personally , I had the Pipercross filter on my car.The main gains I found on this was the MPG , 4 MPG gains was found on my car

As I do high mileage and do 148 miles per day to get to work and back , I see the MPG as importance and the main reason I chose a diesel car and a little one like the Fabia

But I noticed that the fuel economy went up , and to be fair has still not gone down

This morning I got 65.2 as I pulled up at work

I did notice a slight noise when this was fitted , to the point I thought I had a slight noise on the exhaust but then realised this was with the filter

So does this noise mean that there is increased air flow?

Throttle response did seem to be a tad better too , but then my right foot can be heavy at times

I did try an induction kit on my car , again the Pipercross ones

This was tested on the rolling road and found to give an extra 4BHP more over the panel

But the noise....... :( it drowned out Take That on the CD , so I chose to take it off so I could sing "Relight my fire" again

I think with all that in mind , some panel filters and also some CAI`s will benifit some cars and drivers depending on what they want (sound or response or even MPG ) and how they drive

TThe best thing about tuning is , it is your car and you can do what you want

If you like it , can it be wrong?

Blimey need a cuppa now

Sarah

[KenONeill]

I'd agree with Blanchie re standard airboxes; they're often designed as silencers rather than for peak flow.

Greg, back when (K&N) cotton gauze and (Pipercross) foam filters were new on the market, Dave Vizard did a comparitive test of them vs OEM paper, Fram aftermarket and a wire gauze pancake filter. Interestingly from your PoV he tried to test them "new" and "clogged" by dumping a known quantity of dust into the flowbench rig, and taking before and after figures, and trying to weigh how much dust got through the filter.

I can't remember all the details but he found that there was little difference between any of the filters "new" except that the wire gauze was comparitively restrictive, and basically didn't actually filter either.

What he did find was that the foam filter was both the best at filtering, and achieved the best "used" flowrate.

[greg123]

I really don't know where to begin on this. I don't think we will ever see eye to eye on these filters. :(

From an engineering point of view....

1) throttle response is dictated electronically via the ecu on a pre-programmed map. A small difference in air flow makes no difference to throttle response on a tdi/pd.

2) noise does not relate to airflow. This is why speakers do no dry your hair, even if you turn the volume up. You can remove a manifold and the engine will be more noisy, but flow less due to to lack of ram air effect from induction tracts etc.

3) You do NOT have more air going in! Even IF (and that's a big IF) you get more flow from a performance air filter, at any point the engine requests a certain amount of air flow. The vanes on the VNT are then set via the actuator and N75 to deliver exactly the right amount of air. If you have drastically less resistance from the filter/intake, the ECU will 'throttle' the VNT back a bit to reduce airflow back to what it should be. If you have a clogged up intake, it will 'throttle' up the VNT to boost up airflow to what it should be. Any way you look at it, unless you are running a cusom map where the engine is incapable of pulling enough air to meet the map on full throttle (where you will need more than a CAI to fix that, typically a whole new intake, FMIC, larger turbo etc) or your air filter is SO clogged you can't get enough air in (where a new stock filter would fix it also) there is no more airflow with a performance filter.

4) On a diesel unless you have gone past the point where black smoke is tipping out the exhaust, you do not get more power from more air. Diesels run 'lean' so as not to smoke, in an excess of air - from stock. Adding more air to an excess, with the same amount of fuel, does nothing. The amount of fuel is governed by the ECU map and unless you have it chipped (nothing to do with the filter) to alter the injected quantity and requrested mass air flow, among other things, you don't get more power. If you can demonstrate you can get extra power, with no extra fuel, congratulations on breaking the laws of physics.....

5) I still haven't seen hard data on any of the performance filters matching the spec of VAG paper for filtration. A large essay from a mfr of performance filters on how good they are is to be expected, but thin on actual figures/facts. Can the 'machine' determine filtration and is it matching the typical flow rates that a filter sees in service? Because an easy way to make a filter look bad is put it in a situation where it's having more air drawn than designed for. Then a less restrictive filter will 'appear' to flow much better. But in reality at the flow rates that the filter is used for, both the stock one and the less restrictive one would produce similar flow and drag, at that requested air flow level. What is the air flow in the machine and how does that compared to a typical mass air flow through the filter on say a 130pd?

I don't even know where to begin on more mpg. The only thing that can cause that is drastically less pumping losses. To achieve those levels there would need to be a LOT of restriction in the airbox after the stock filter. If you (I have) use a vacuum gauge after the air filter you find that there is very little vacuum pulled and therefore very little restriction. Diesels, as I'm sure everyone knows, don't have a throttle and run with very little pumping losses compared to a petrol.

Oh yes, all VW's come with a CAI from the factory. The stock airbox is CAI....

Anyhow, I know some people like them and guys I hope you all enjoy what you drive.

I guess I'm just a die hard utilitarian and can only think from an engineering point of view. When something doesn't add up, it nags me :eek:

K&N Air Filter Facts You Should Know

This will be a good read if you want some information

But the idea of the CAI is that the air that comes in is cooler , which equals denser air

That in return means that more air is going through

So fuelling is adjusted with the lambda probe , but will equate a better burn , so fuel economy will not get worse

Also with more air going in , that equates to better throttle response

Air flow on the panel filter is alter as the panel filter wether it be K&N , Pipercross or Green etc does flow quicker

We did have a machine in the showroom that proved this , but I dont know where that has gone to now

But I think on the rolling road day that is coming up , we will dig it out so anyone around can have a play to determin

Because gains are usually down to a percentage really , a mapped car will pick up on the gains more , apposed to the standard car

Me personally , I had the Pipercross filter on my car.The main gains I found on this was the MPG , 4 MPG gains was found on my car

As I do high mileage and do 148 miles per day to get to work and back , I see the MPG as importance and the main reason I chose a diesel car and a little one like the Fabia

But I noticed that the fuel economy went up , and to be fair has still not gone down

This morning I got 65.2 as I pulled up at work

I did notice a slight noise when this was fitted , to the point I thought I had a slight noise on the exhaust but then realised this was with the filter

So does this noise mean that there is increased air flow?

Throttle response did seem to be a tad better too , but then my right foot can be heavy at times

I did try an induction kit on my car , again the Pipercross ones

This was tested on the rolling road and found to give an extra 4BHP more over the panel

But the noise....... :( it drowned out Take That on the CD , so I chose to take it off so I could sing "Relight my fire" again

I think with all that in mind , some panel filters and also some CAI`s will benifit some cars and drivers depending on what they want (sound or response or even MPG ) and how they drive

TThe best thing about tuning is , it is your car and you can do what you want

If you like it , can it be wrong?

Blimey need a cuppa now

Sarah

[martziniuk]

I think i'm gonna stick with standard, at least for now.

I aren't too impressed with Ramair's website, its always under maintenance or 404 error pops up.

I am not convinced either by the bhp claims by the performance filter manufacturers, also iam not convinced that the filtration level is as good as the Vag one, better safe than sorry is the best bet.

Thanks Greg, thats basically what i thought about the performance filters.

Change the standard filter regularly and the engine will run clean and efficiently.

[cheezemonkhai]

I just change the paper OEM ones every 10k and it's all good so far

[martziniuk]

A very interesting video which shows no power gains...hmm

Also a very intersting read Air Filtration Test

Standard filter comes out well in flow and filtration test.

Edited 26 September, 2008 by martziniuk

[greg123]

It's funny you should say that, becasue a lot of mfr's use foam filters from stock, particularly in dusty environments....

But in western road use, they always favour paper. Remember paper has come a long way now too, it's pretty high tech and not actually 'paper', it just looks like it.

I have noticed a big difference, on a 10k service on mk5's and the like, the air filter doesn't even look particularly dirty. Go back a few years and a 6k service the air filter was black. Probably something to do with the design of the pickup in 'clean air' and airbox too, but all in all they are pretty impressive. I have seem some dirty looking paper elements under a microscope too and actually there was very little restriction.

I think it's fantastic these filters can go 20k with virtually no measurable loss of restriction, best on market filtration and then cost you £5 trade to pop a new one it.

Greg.

I'd agree with Blanchie re standard airboxes; they're often designed as silencers rather than for peak flow.

Greg, back when (K&N) cotton gauze and (Pipercross) foam filters were new on the market, Dave Vizard did a comparitive test of them vs OEM paper, Fram aftermarket and a wire gauze pancake filter. Interestingly from your PoV he tried to test them "new" and "clogged" by dumping a known quantity of dust into the flowbench rig, and taking before and after figures, and trying to weigh how much dust got through the filter.

I can't remember all the details but he found that there was little difference between any of the filters "new" except that the wire gauze was comparitively restrictive, and basically didn't actually filter either.

What he did find was that the foam filter was both the best at filtering, and achieved the best "used" flowrate.

[KenONeill]

2) noise does not relate to airflow. This is why speakers do no dry your hair, even if you turn the volume up.

Which is comparing oranges and potatoes!

Speakers don't cause air to flow, just to vibrate. If you're an engineer, I hope you knew that!!

[KenONeill]

It's funny you should say that, becasue a lot of mfr's use foam filters from stock, particularly in dusty environments....

But in western road use, they always favour paper. Remember paper has come a long way now too, it's pretty high tech and not actually 'paper', it just looks like it.

I have noticed a big difference, on a 10k service on mk5's and the like, the air filter doesn't even look particularly dirty. Go back a few years and a 6k service the air filter was black. Probably something to do with the design of the pickup in 'clean air' and airbox too, but all in all they are pretty impressive. I have seem some dirty looking paper elements under a microscope too and actually there was very little restriction.

I think it's fantastic these filters can go 20k with virtually no measurable loss of restriction, best on market filtration and then cost you £5 trade to pop a new one it.

Greg.

I think this may be down to the increased use of panels or deep cartridges over the pancakes typically found in 1970s OEM filter boxes, and to the use of much larger and longer intake ducts, which tend to dump air speed and increase the height dust has to climb to even reach the engine.

[greg123]

That's what I said. I'm confused, I wrote what you are also saying. The original post made reference to more noise equating to more flow, which isn't so. It's not as simple as that. Which is why I said you can't dry your hair with speakers, noise does not = flow, you agree with me....

Which is comparing oranges and potatoes!

Speakers don't cause air to flow, just to vibrate. If you're an engineer, I hope you knew that!!

[KenONeill]

That's what I said. I'm confused, I wrote what you are also saying. The original post made reference to more noise equating to more flow, which isn't so. It's not as simple as that. Which is why I said you can't dry your hair with speakers, noise does not = flow, you agree with me....

I think you've misunderstood me, and I've misunderstood you. I was saying that sound volume from speakers and volume flow rate in a pipe aren't analogous.

With flow in a pipe, the fact of getting flow causes noise, which is how brass and woodwind instruments work. Assuming you have the puff to get a noise from it at all (let's use brass, since everyone knows a clarinet is an ill woodwind that nobody blows good), the harder you blow, the more noise you get, and the faster you get out of puff because the volume flow rate is higher, up to the point where the instrument throttles, and can't flow more air through its most constricted point, just build pressure before it! OEM car intakes work the same sort of way, but are normally designed to silence the intake, hence throttling earlier than some aftermarket replacements.

I'm not saying you're wrong in practice, but suspect that if you're right it's for the wrong reasons!

[lordrobs]

I just change the paper OEM ones every 10k and it's all good so far

This is my plan too. My average Joe on the street theory being that a paper filters performance may drop off as it starts to get blocked... so don't let it get blocked by halving the interval that its changed

[greg123]

Sound and flow can have a relationship. Just like speed and fuel consumption can. I'm saying one doesn't equal the other. EG a motorcycle going fast, and an HGV going slow. In that case, more fuel = slower speed, so it would be untrue to make a rule that more fuel = more speed.

Correct for a trumpet, more flow means more sound. Now compare the end of your vacuum (which is pretty quiet, the racket is the motor) and a trumpet by your ear. The trumpet will blow your ear off with volume, but the vacuum has a hugely higher flow rate.

I have already cited the example of a car running without it's inlet (or exhaust) manifold. Presuming the manifold is a good ram air/extractor design, it will follow that no manifold = increase in noise and decrease in flow. So to say more noise from the intake = more flow isn't correct. It can do, but it can not either. I prefer when looking at flow to do just that, and not get confused by sucking sounds which boy racers too often pecieve as flow.

I'm pretty sure we are saying the same things and there is not actually any argument here?

Greg.

I think you've misunderstood me, and I've misunderstood you. I was saying that sound volume from speakers and volume flow rate in a pipe aren't analogous.

With flow in a pipe, the fact of getting flow causes noise, which is how brass and woodwind instruments work. Assuming you have the puff to get a noise from it at all (let's use brass, since everyone knows a clarinet is an ill woodwind that nobody blows good), the harder you blow, the more noise you get, and the faster you get out of puff because the volume flow rate is higher, up to the point where the instrument throttles, and can't flow more air through its most constricted point, just build pressure before it! OEM car intakes work the same sort of way, but are normally designed to silence the intake, hence throttling earlier than some aftermarket replacements.

I'm not saying you're wrong in practice, but suspect that if you're right it's for the wrong reasons!