Has anyone tried the ITG cold air induction kit from Nuova ? I fitted a Pipercross induction kit last July but recently took it off since it was due in for a service. I did fit a cold air feed from around the battery down to the passenger front wheel. I noticed the difference when it was taken off and to be honest missed the noise it made. I did research the other systems : GSR (afraid of sucking water in), BMC CDA (bit pricey as with the GSR and heard that it filter blocks up quickly) plus 2 different ways of putting it in. The cold air feed is the one thing that struggled on and I did come across a guy who fitted an ingenious feed on a Panda 100bhp but it involved taking the bumper off with the feed coming in at the vent on the bottom part of the bumper and out into the original hole that used by the standard airbox. I also put some ceramic tape around the manifold to reduce the heat in the engine area (seemed to work a bit). I had a CAI from Jackson Racing for an MX5 in the mid 90s and that worked a treat - the air was forced into the system but was only 'felt' after 70mph acting like a little turbo. Has anyone experimented with the vents on the Trofeo Abart to get this 'forced air effect' ?

multispoke said:

Has anyone tried the ITG cold air induction kit from Nuova ? I fitted a Pipercross induction kit last July but recently took it off since it was due in for a service. I did fit a cold air feed from around the battery down to the passenger front wheel. I noticed the difference when it was taken off and to be honest missed the noise it made. I did research the other systems : GSR (afraid of sucking water in), BMC CDA (bit pricey as with the GSR and heard that it filter blocks up quickly) plus 2 different ways of putting it in. The cold air feed is the one thing that struggled on and I did come across a guy who fitted an ingenious feed on a Panda 100bhp but it involved taking the bumper off with the feed coming in at the vent on the bottom part of the bumper and out into the original hole that used by the standard airbox. I also put some ceramic tape around the manifold to reduce the heat in the engine area (seemed to work a bit). I had a CAI from Jackson Racing for an MX5 in the mid 90s and that worked a treat - the air was forced into the system but was only 'felt' after 70mph acting like a little turbo. Has anyone experimented with the vents on the Trofeo Abart to get this 'forced air effect' ?

Click to expand...

Might be some confusion between more urgent noises and actual increased grunt here, I suspect. So-called cold air feeds are something of a myth on road cars and there's also a fair chance that you'll set up harmonics in the induction tract that will actually decrease power under certain conditions.

babbo_umbro said:

Might be some confusion between more urgent noises and actual increased grunt here, I suspect. So-called cold air feeds are something of a myth on road cars and there's also a fair chance that you'll set up harmonics in the induction tract that will actually decrease power under certain conditions.

Click to expand...

some have proven gains,but that tends to be the ones specifically designed for a model/engine variant

Sorry - I forgot to mention that the model I have is the 1.4 and of course it is a 500. I felt that with with Pipercross CAI, the ceramic tape on the exhaust (reduce the heat build up - didn't wrap it around the cat) and the NGK Iridium spark plugs (probably made no difference) and the 4 inch aluminium feed running down to the passenger wheel (not that happy with the positioning) definitely made a difference. It certainly felt more torquey. I would be curious to see with the 500 now being sold in the USA if Jackson Racing will do something different given their success with the Miata (MX5). They got an extra 18bhp but it may have been down to advancing the timing to 14deg. I would have thought that with a non turbo engine on the 500 (as opposed to the abart) that it would be the best candidate for a 'ram-effect' induction setup.

Are they not ony getting the twin air in America?

RUI said:

Are they not ony getting the twin air in America?

Click to expand...

They have the 1.4 multiair.

i did promise my wife if i purchased a Fiat 500 i wouldn't do any modifications, its a nice little read this thread

i'm new to fiat but experiences with VW i feal are relevant

i agree babbo_umbro with you comments regarding certian kits based on experiences out there especially with remapped turbo cars, i'm not a big fan of open intakes and have seen running issues as a result, i am also aware being close to a number of VW Tuners and Forge that Forge admit there twintake set up works on some cars but on others it doesn't due to turbulent air issues

i know Andy Jackson (onr of their technical gurus) very well at ITG as i was involved with the development of their kit for the VW TSI engines last year (pic below)



the reason why i went to them was filters and intakes is all they do, i've run them for 20K now and really rate their stuff

their stuff does do what it says on the tin

On the little research I that I did ITG seem to come out on top and in the case of panel filters seemed to give the best results - they're more expensive than the BMC equivalents - surprising given that Abart use them on the Esseesse upgrate kit. I did ring up ITG in June 2010 asking them if they planned to do an CAI for the 1.4 - they said that their priority was the Abart and if the CAI was successful on it - they would do one for 'standard' 1.4 model. Looking at the Nuova web site they quote a figure of 108.6 bhp 'on average' for the ITG system whilst the BMC CAI does not quote a figure (even though it is more expensive). On a call with Nuova they recommended the pipercross 'off the record' over the BMC but that was before the ITG came on the market. They felt that the BMC was poor value for money stating that it did not give any more power. They said that the pipercross was a better option giving the bit of noise and extra torque for €100 and did not to be regularly cleaned like the BMC. Does anyone have a picture of the ITG setup on a 500 1.4 ? I would be very interested in if they have found a better air inlet 'point' for the system. The guys on the Panda 100bhp seem to be more inventive as to where you can get better air intakes. https://www.fiatforum.com/cinquecento-seicento/120217-cold-air-feed.html
https://www.fiatforum.com/panda/178924-induction-modifications.html
I cann't find the one of the guy who used a 50mm tubing having removed the front bumper. Forge do the CAI for the Abart at the moment - would there be enough interest from a 1.4 'group' to warrant 'the best you could get'. I would be prepared to accept additional vibrations which would not be acceptable to those who buy the 1.4 for the automatic version.

any actual RR graphs or print out from 0-60 or 1/4 miles tests or is all the above just sales blag off some website?

dave said:

any actual RR graphs or print out from 0-60 or 1/4 miles tests or is all the above just sales blag off some website?

Click to expand...

Good question. And how effective is all that insulation work on the exhaust? Once a road car is moving at more than a few miles an hour I suspect it makes very little difference. How far back along the system do you go? Or does it merely displace the heat radiation from one under-bonnet zone to another? It might reduce the apparent heat build-up when you lift the bonnet and sense how much heat is coming off the engine but that's nothing to do with what's really happening when you're driving the car.

Not at all convinced.

When I put the pipercross induction on the car back in August last year with no cold air feed I felt that the kit made little difference (except for the noise). I then went about seperating the kit from the exhaust area having using refective insulation (used in attics to reduce heat build up) removed the airbox which I felt was of no benefit. To be honest it all looked too much. I felt by reducing the heat build up in the engine was the way to go so took off the manifold cover and applied the ceramic tape down as for as the CAT. I was surprised how close it was to the manifold. I didn't wrap any tape around the CAT in case I thought it would effect the lamba sensor readings. I ended up taking the seperating insulation stuff away putting the airbox back on with the standard air filter. The engine bay area was definitely cooler with the ceramic tape (& with the airbox back on). I felt that you would have to put on a different exhaust manifold and re-position the CAT lower down the exhaust to get any real benefit so that all the exhaust area was taped in the engine bay. So you are probably right - put God (I shouldn't really mention him) loves a trier !

It's all in the mind.

pearce_jj said:

It's all in the mind.

Click to expand...

I hope you don't mind if I have revived this thread - it is more to conclude it. In a PM with TrackDayQueen more in relation to not spending money (!) it was concluding to doing a little bit e.g. adding induction to the 500 1.4 to give it a bit of a 'roar'.
Well I did do that on the 08 1.4 sport and I was trying to do a 'bit more' on the 09 Funk 1.4 lounge but have ended up with different plugs and just an air filter (ITG) as opposed to anything else (for the moment !)
After seeing another thread about an hour or 2 ago
https://www.fiatforum.com/punto/245618-induction-kit-thread.html
it demonstrated that you can get torque as opposed to any real increase in bhp. You just have to look at the graph.
I thought I would post the pics of the car that I sold that had the CAI installed on it - I installed a 4 inch duct that went down to the wheel arch where the 5 o-spoke alloys sat. You can see the ceramic tape on the manifold which would have been more benefical if it was wrapped on a performance manifold to reduce the heat build up in the engine bay. For those sceptics out there it 'felt' a lot faster. It was probably worth the £115 spend plus the ceramic tape (£30 - tricky to put on) and the duct (that was lying around).

is it possible to mess up the MAF sensor with an aftermarket induction kit? some say they can and some say it's irrelevant. i've been in an alfa 147 with one of those and engine sounded awesome without any other modification, i knew what a stock 147 sounded like since we had one. i can say it was so much better and easier to live with compairing to exhaust modifications. i may consider fitting one after my warranty expires.

durukan said:

is it possible to mess up the MAF sensor with an aftermarket induction kit? some say they can and some say it's irrelevant. i've been in an alfa 147 with one of those and engine sounded awesome without any other modification, i knew what a stock 147 sounded like since we had one. i can say it was so much better and easier to live with compairing to exhaust modifications. i may consider fitting one after my warranty expires.

Click to expand...

On the Pipercross CAI the 'dirt' falls off the foam. I have not bought this one again for my new Funk lounge spec - this handbag spec is a bit more sophisticated . A little wipe with the hand plus some dirt resisting spray (not too much !) and keeping the engine bay clean helps. My understanding is that the foam can be washed (but I didn't have it long enough for this to be done). It also helps not to be doing doughnuts on the beach - the sand will cause havoc with the exposed filter. To take the CAI off for a service takes literally 10 minutes but can take a good 30 minutes to put it back on correctly. I have the ITG Filter for the standard air box on order and it is due in this week so it will an interesting to do a 'back to back' comparison - I'm hoping to have a little bit of induction roar back into the 500 .

jnoiles said:

Indeed I do. Well, for the 1.4 at least. This is from last year when I had my 1.4 remapped by Red Dot racing and had the GSR Induction kit fitted.

The graph compares both:

Mine gets a regular run up to 100mph so I'll have a peek at the rpm/vs speed next time I'm out.

cheers
Jason

Click to expand...

https://www.fiatforum.com/500/191637-power-torque-graphs-1-2-1-4-engines.html

jnolies - I hope you don't mind if I robbed your graph from the above thread. Do you still have the 1.4 and has your GSR setup and re-map caused you any problems ?

multispoke said:

https://www.fiatforum.com/500/191637-power-torque-graphs-1-2-1-4-engines.html

jnolies - I hope you don't mind if I robbed your graph from the above thread. Do you still have the 1.4 and has your GSR setup and re-map caused you any problems ?

Click to expand...

I think Jason will be more upset at you calling him jnolies.

I saw that graph before but I now realise that altough power output is greater, peak torque is lower than the factory value of 97 lb·ft, even with the modification. it's 12 lb·ft lower in stock configuration

grimwau said:

I think Jason will be more upset at you calling him jnolies.

Click to expand...

It's good to have a 'handle' that has a ring to it (sorry Jason !). It's ironic that when I picked the name multispokes I had the 5 o-spokes and now with the 'new' car it has multispokes . If I'm fortunate to get that Abarth I'm craving for I'll might have to source esseesse wheels for it .

Standard torque on the rollers was 85, but then this work was done on a relatively fresh engine. Within the first 500 miles I think. After map it rollered at 92. so a bit of an increase over what she had, but more importantly, it's a noticeably better delivery of it.

It's loosened up a bit since that run, it would be interesting to see what it runs now. I should take it to a rolling road, see what it comes up with now.

Only thing I've really noticed that was bad was the MOT. The emissions was, er, well, not standard. Which is a situation you'd find yourself in with the supersprint as well.

When my exhaust back box is finally done my plan is supersprint and a sports cat after it on removable flanges for trackdays. Yes, that's it, only to be removed for track days.

To give you an idea of the conditions she's handling, I do an 80 mile a day commute, I drive her like I stole her and I have a quaife atb diff fitted which affects your economy by about 3mpg. I'm averaging 33.6mpg.