Agency Power intake for 986? Anyone? - 986 Forum - The Community for Porsche Boxster & Cayman Owners

sd_boxster · 03-02-2009, 05:31 PM

Has anyone fitted the Agency Power cold-air intake on their Boxster? I see lots of mention of the evoms intake, but a search for the Agency Power intake came up empty.

Just curious if anyone has tried this intake and if so, how it fared for them...

Thanks in advance!

eightsandaces · 03-03-2009, 08:16 AM

Hello SD, newbies unite....You got me curious, I found this

http://www.vividracing.com/blog/announcing-new-products-specials-and-info/2008-subaru-wrx-agency-power-intake-test/

Perhaps some other members can comment on whether they think you would feel these numeric improvements...what's the $$ for this modest gain??

FYI this test wasn't on a Boxster but a wrx, I think that car is turbocharged which skews the results in terms of applying the same gains to a Pcar..

23109VC · 03-03-2009, 08:31 AM

turbocharged cars are notorious for getting LARGE power gains from simple intake/ehxaust mods.

I have no idea what real gain you would get from this intake on a boxster - i'll let someone else comment on that - but I do know that you CANNOT make any conclusions about what WE would gain based on what a turbo WRX gained..

apples and oranges

ChrisZang · 03-03-2009, 09:00 AM

I wouldn't see why you would get a different result (or lack thereof) with this intake as you would get from the Evo intake.

They all have the same principle:
* Pull out the old air box (which by the way already IS a cold air intake),
* replace it with a new housing,
* put a cone air filter in and
* replace the tubing between the air box and the throttle body with a bit more streamlined tubing.
I don't think that there is much difference in who makes these intakes

So read up on the Evo intake and form your opinion.
I did that and decided that the few HP that you *might* gain are not worth the pain in the butt removal of the OEM airbox and the danger of fouling up the MAF with the oil from the K&N filter ....

sd_boxster · 03-03-2009, 10:11 AM

I appreciate the comments. While I agree that the concept behind the intakes is the same, the materials (Agency Power is powdercoated steel, evoms is plastic/abs) differ, and I was hoping for comments about fitment for one over the other.

Personally, the performance "gain" is moot - if there is a 2HP +/- fluctuation, it won't change performance significantly. However, I love the sound that a cone-filter intake adds to a N/A car - that's why I want to add the CAI.

Thanks for the comments so far!

eightsandaces · 03-03-2009, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sd_boxster

I appreciate the comments. While I agree that the concept behind the intakes is the same, the materials (Agency Power is powdercoated steel, evoms is plastic/abs) differ, and I was hoping for comments about fitment for one over the other.

Personally, the performance "gain" is moot - if there is a 2HP +/- fluctuation, it won't change performance significantly. However, I love the sound that a cone-filter intake adds to a N/A car - that's why I want to add the CAI.

Thanks for the comments so far!

If the only goal is "playing cards in the spokes" then try de snorkeling first. It's free and reversible if you do it carefully.

ChrisZang · 03-03-2009, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sd_boxster

I appreciate the comments. While I agree that the concept behind the intakes is the same, the materials (Agency Power is powdercoated steel, evoms is plastic/abs) differ, and I was hoping for comments about fitment for one over the other.

Personally, the performance "gain" is moot - if there is a 2HP +/- fluctuation, it won't change performance significantly. However, I love the sound that a cone-filter intake adds to a N/A car - that's why I want to add the CAI.

Thanks for the comments so far!

not sure if it helps but sometime ago I replaced the OEM air filter with a K&N (oiled) air filter, difference in sound: almost zero, but it set me back by $225 for a new MAF

Then I tried de-snorkeling and this has a much bigger effect
I am also a sound junkie, here's a list of my "sound mods" on a scale of 1 (least effect to 5 most effect)

GHL exhaust: 5 (I took it off after 1 year as I couldn't stand the drone anymore) and went with the next line item:
"gutted" exhaust: 4 (open the exhaust, take the baffling out, close it)
de-snorkeled: 3
Secondary cat bypass pipes: 3
K&N air filter: 1

oh, yes I forgot one:
driving with open pipes: 100 (on a scale from 1 to 5)

tommy986 · 03-03-2009, 11:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChrisZang

"gutted" exhaust: 4 (open the exhaust, take the baffling out, close it)

Chris,

Do you have any before and after pictures of your "gutted" muffler, before you closed it up?

If not, could you edit this picture and indicate what you removed?

jmatta · 03-03-2009, 01:42 PM

I have an Evo Hi-Flo intake on my '02 Box S. Air box is molded plastic, but the intake pipe was powder coated metal of nice quality. Intake sound is considerably louder with this mod and no check engine lights after three years of use. Problems arise when owners douse the filter with oil and don't properly remove the excess.

I desnorkeled my car first, then did the intake mod and the intake howl is night and day compared to stock. I doubt it does much for HP in itself, but the sound is worth the price of admission.

FWIW, my car also has Fabspeed secondary cat bypass pipes and a sport muffler. Throttle response is far better than stock with little or no hesitation on throttle blips.

yellowboxster01 · 03-03-2009, 01:52 PM

I had planned several years ago to get an aftermarket intake for the Box but, after examining the stock unit...it's a cold air intake stock. At $300 for the Evo, my desnorkeled stocker is fine. I understand you get a throaty sound but, I'm confident it's not $300 worth of cool. Especially since there's no real numbers on hp gains, yeah sure they claim 10-12hp gain but, lets be realistic. A reprogram of the ECU would be something I'd rather invest in.

This is just my two cents.

ChrisZang · 03-03-2009, 04:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tommy986

Chris,
Do you have any before and after pictures of your "gutted" muffler, before you closed it up?
If not, could you edit this picture and indicate what you removed?

Unfortunately I had the work done at a shop. So I've never seen it open.
HOWEVER the designer of the "hack", Docdanracy is and avid poster here and at the babblers, maybe he can give you the details.

Jaxonalden · 03-03-2009, 05:34 PM

I've also got an EVO intake. Reading the negative responses; I feel the stock intake "box" is extremely restrictive. As far as a nice smooth airflow, the stock box is appalling . The air travels through it and makes no less the 3-90 degree turns as well as going through the filter before it makes one last 90 degree turn into the intake tube.

Also, I can't do the math but the cubic feet of air a 3.2 draws in at 6,000 rpm I'm sure is substantial. Now take that air and flow it through a stock air-box and then through a EVO intake and I would bet the EVO will flow better. The easier the engine can draw air in the more it will draw in. That efficient breathing will cause a lean condition that will be compensated by the ECU with more fuel and to me that equals power, though it may be small.