AEM V1 vs V2 - FIGHT!

89 UKDM BA4 4WS (resto job!) · Post by **wurlycorner** » Sun Jun 07, 2015 10:32 am

I'm intrigued...
Which do people think is better?

I have discussed with Nafe off-line, but he's failed to satisfy me (not for the first time

) so lets get this out in the open.

I think we've concluded the following so far;

V1 benefits:
Takes feed directly from resonator area, rather than engine bay

V1 dis-benefits:
It is a simple metal tube so would suffer from heat soak in extreme engine bay temperatures

V2 benefits:
Easier to fit (no need to sod about inside the front arch liner, which would put off the 'mass market' buyers)?
We think the bulge bit might be double skin with an air gap, intended to combat heat soak
It comes in a lovely dark metallic grey paint finish, so it looks sexy
It has V2 on it, so must be better...

V2 dis-benefits:
It takes its feed from the engine bay rather than from a 'cold feed' area

That's a little bit sketchy and not necessarily objective tbh

so only one thing for it;

Anyone have any views/facts/knowledge, useful of otherwise that they can share?

Post by **RattyMcClelland** » Sun Jun 07, 2015 10:57 am

V1 for me. Only because I made my own intake and on my supercharger setup my engine felt better with fresh air as opposed to hot wet ass air from the engine bay.

alinton · Post by **alinton** » Sun Jun 07, 2015 11:20 am

I've often wondered about fabricating an intake which takes its feed from the offside nostril, since I don't like the idea of the intake sucking in warm engine bay air.

With battery relocated there would be enough room to fit an enclosed cone air filter there.

Nice fresh, cool air rammed in, are my thoughts.

However, my recently fitted S-Type intake seems to work exceedingly well.

nitin_s1 · Post by **nitin_s1** » Sun Jun 07, 2015 11:49 am

V2 for me.

It has the double pipes so the air won't be that hot.
Makes the best noise compared to any other intake.

And if you are really worried about heat from the engine bay, then you can fabricate a metal shield and put a small flexi pipe (don't know the proper name for it) that directs cool air from let's say your front fogs to the intake.

gb-lude · Post by **gb-lude** » Sun Jun 07, 2015 1:35 pm

Combination of the two would be good!
But I am convinced a cold air from the resonator area is better as the air flow is so high it won't heatsoak.
You can always heatwrap the pipe.

A short ram only, imagine how much air is sucked in per second and how much ram air goes trough the radiator into the engine bay. Especially on oem unvented bonnets the hot air is trapped.
On the first dyno sessions I had back in 2003 I lost hp with my short ram and bonnet closed'

A short ram with cold air feed from headlight of nostrils will be better.

Post by **Doggo** » Sun Jun 07, 2015 1:44 pm

Given the similarity in payload, and the insubstantial difference in range, the cost premium for the V2 over the V1 was never really operationally justified. That said, the technology obviously established a platform for tremendous progress in other respects.

Post by **RattyMcClelland** » Sun Jun 07, 2015 2:02 pm

On a naturally aspirated car there will be negligible difference. However on a heatsoaked supercharger the colder air helps. Massive difference.
I also put a cold air feed from the front bumper behind the right fit light and into the back end of the bumper.

jasonxr2racer · Post by **jasonxr2racer** » Sun Jun 07, 2015 7:33 pm

Got V1 on my racecar with a cold air feed intake in bumper

seems fine to me

89 UKDM BA4 4WS (resto job!) · Post by **wurlycorner** » Sun Jun 07, 2015 9:14 pm

This is going well then in identifying a clear winner...

89 UKDM BA4 4WS (resto job!) · Post by **wurlycorner** » Sun Jun 07, 2015 9:15 pm

Reason I ask, is because I have now picked up both and am not sure which one to stick on the BB4...