# Panel filter vs Air Filter?



## MO-TT (Feb 20, 2014)

Bought a pipercross Panel filter the other day.

Want my TT to sound a bit better, will a panel filter make it sound better or do I need a air filter?

Can you fit both or is it one or the other?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Lamb's TT (Apr 3, 2013)

MO6542 said:


> Bought a pipercross Panel filter the other day.
> 
> Want my TT to sound a bit better, will a panel filter make it sound better or do I need a air filter?
> 
> ...


It's a personal choice really mate 
But no one or the other


----------



## MO-TT (Feb 20, 2014)

Thanks, will a pipercross panel filter make much difference?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Black_TT (Mar 22, 2014)

You'll barely be able to feel the difference but some can increase by 10bhp supposedly.


----------



## MO-TT (Feb 20, 2014)

Thanks how about sound difference?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## barb (Jul 1, 2013)

A cone filter will always make more power. But it's a love or hate sound hence why a lot go for the more restrictive standard air box

Sent from my HTC One using Tapatalk


----------



## YELLOW_TT (Feb 25, 2004)

If it's a better sound you want fit the panel filter and do the Wak box mod 
http://wak-tt.com/mods/ramair/cheapinduction.htm


----------



## t'mill (Jul 31, 2012)

If you want noise then fit a cone filter. I've got a Pipercross panel filter in a drilled (Wak)box, and the only difference in noise over the oem set-up is a rumble at low revs.


----------



## lotuselanplus2s (Jun 18, 2012)

There's an awful lot of b******s written about air filters vs panel filters.

If it's sound you care about then a WAK box is the cheap easy option otherwise go for a cone.

If it's actually power then you need to understand that an air filter can't give you extra power, all it can do is restrict power if to little air flows through it to satisfy the engine. You just need to ensure that enough air flows through it to comfortably exceed the maximum requirement thus ensuring that the ultimate limit to engine power is something else. The same holds true for the exhaust system

Unless you've done some radical work to your engine (big turbo etc) then the existing airbox + a good panel filter is easily fine. A good, free flowing air filter is equally as good, however it's not uncommon for people to fit an air filter and actually reduce the power because it's too restrictive.

However there is an awful lot of b******s written about them - get yourself a lucky rabbit's foot & some heather, they'll add at least 20bhp for some dreamers.

Rant over.
Happy mothers day.


----------



## TomQS (Aug 2, 2013)

I have two setups. A standard air box and k&n panel filter and also a S2000 cone. With back to back testing I saw an extra 10 g/s on the open cone. That's a big difference


----------



## Wak (May 6, 2002)

lotuselanplus2s said:


> Unless you've done some radical work to your engine (big turbo etc) then the existing airbox + a good panel filter is easily fine. A good, free flowing air filter is equally as good, however it's not uncommon for people to fit an air filter and actually reduce the power because it's too restrictive.
> .


So what if the restriction to flow was the actual airbox inlet? Would a panel filter make a difference?


----------



## spaceplace (Mar 10, 2013)

does a s2000 filter fit straight on to the 3.2?


----------



## RollingThunder (Mar 10, 2014)

It's to my understanding that cone filters suffer heat saturation which is where you are drawing hot air from the engine bay resulting in a power loss, a quick explanation is the cooler the air the more dense it is - the leaner the burn, hot air is less dense so you're basically effecting your air fuel ratio negatively in this case, but having said that, that's more the case with a n/a engine like the 3.2 where heat saturation is a negative factor, but in turbocharged cars it's about sheer air intake volume, the more volume the better irrespective of charge temperature, I mean lets face it, once it's been round the compressor it's going to be a little bit hot isn't it.

So to answer the question Panel filter over Cone filter...

If it's an n/a get an uprated panel filter if you're interested in preserving your cars power and possibly making it slightly more responsive at low revs with a slight sound improvement.

If it's a turbo then yes get a cone filter on, it'll sound great but it won't make much more power than stock unless you get it in for a remap where it will be utilised to it's full potential and a power gain will be seen.


----------



## John-H (Jul 13, 2005)

It's for sound mostly. You'll get a rumble with holes drilled in the air box. A cotton panel filter will introduce a tiny bit of hiss but more so with holes in the box to compliment the rumble. Take away the box and go for cone and you'll get lots of hiss and you might think you are running on compressed air - annoying to some.

Heat soak can be a factor but more so for a mapped engine. Reducing air flow restriction can add power but again you need a remap to see it. The standard map calls up 225 bhp and will ignore improvements you make in airflow. Improvements will only provide a bigger margin within which the standard map will operate. Restricting airflow (perhaps due to your filter clogging up or small leaks etc.) eats into that margin but as long as it's not too bad you'll still get 225 bhp. That's how Audi provide consistent performance as the conditions; fuel, temperature, climate, air pressure, engine condition etc. change.

A remap with greater boost also frees up the safety margin to provide more power on demand. Now you can see that changes you make to filters etc. are more likely to have a noticeable effect by changing that now critical margin. That's why remapped cars often produce much less than hoped on rolling roads due to heat soak and the puny fan used to blow at the car. Standard cars just give 225 bhp and the owners chuckle at the red faces of the embarrassed remapped guys. Different story on an open road on a cold morning though. :wink:


----------



## lotuselanplus2s (Jun 18, 2012)

Wak said:


> lotuselanplus2s said:
> 
> 
> > Unless you've done some radical work to your engine (big turbo etc) then the existing airbox + a good panel filter is easily fine. A good, free flowing air filter is equally as good, however it's not uncommon for people to fit an air filter and actually reduce the power because it's too restrictive.
> ...


Hi Wak, of course you're right that the airbox itself could be the restriction (I wouldn't dare disagree with your huge knowledge). Personally I think the best course of action, if one can, is to put the car on a RR with the filter / airbox lid etc all removed then run it with the filter etc back on. That way you can definitively tell if the air intake side is the restriction to power.
However you then hit the problem of cold air intake etc - if you can get the air without any engine bay heat then that would be better still. So maybe the best option would be one of those 'Dukes of Hazard' style air intakes poking out of the top of the bonnet, or better still a 1970's Formula 1 style air intake above the roof to get really cold air + a bit of Ram effect :lol: :lol: :lol:

Maybe the best option of the lot is to have a big turbo etc etc so that frankly you don't care if it's 400 or 450 bhp & where the restriction is coming from becomes immaterial. As far as you the driver is concerned it's got enough power to scare you s***less & anymore isn't going to be of use as you're already scared.


----------



## Wak (May 6, 2002)

So the AMM is a hot wire device ,

Let create an exaggerated example to try to explain....
lets say it runs at 25 degrees. ( I dont know just a baseline to consider, its probably a lot warmer)

If with an air box it pulls enough air at 20 degrees inlet to cool it by 5 degrees it gives a certain G/S value. 50g/s for example!

If with a Cone it pulls in air at 25 degrees ( engine bay heat) i.e. but same temp as it runs at and it doesnt cool the hot wire at all then in theory its 0g/s because its not cooled the hot wire device by any amount to give a reading.

So if you have a panel that generates 200g/s and a cone filter that generates 220g/s with more heat in the engine bay

The cone filter must have allowed more air to have cooled the hot wire device MORE than the standard airbox to generate a higher MAF value than it did before.

The basics of more Air in plus more fuel should equal more power! 
----------------------------------------------------------------------

The point I am making is that If heat soak were an issue then the maf g/s would be the same or worse than a panel in an airbox by the fact that the warmer air should have cooled the hot wire device by a lesser amount.

Irrespective of the above theory, the logs give some foundation to the real behavior.


----------

