When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Lots of great discussions here regarding the 2GR-FSE intake system. Sorry that I'm late to reply back with any updates as I was out of the country this past week on a vacation trip to Cabo San Lucas, Mexico.
When I returned back from the trip, the 3IS350 F-Sport intake pipe was waiting for me in the mailbox. When comparing the new pipe to the 2IS JoeZ intake pipe, there is quite a difference in the overall diameter of the two pipes:
For an OEM part, the design of the 3IS F-Sport intake pipe is very impressive from the factory with its smooth internal surface, minimal bends, larger diameter and the added sound generator. I can see why tuners like RR Racing and OVTune have stated that they were unable to extract additional horsepower from testing different intake setups over the factory F-Sport setup. Based on the OEM design of this pipe as well as previous testimony from these two tuners, I probably will not look into spending another $150 to get the 3.5" HPS intake pipe if there are no potential gains to be had over the 3" OEM 3IS FSport intake pipe.
The new pipe looks very at home in the engine bay and though subtle (mostly in part to my louder header/exhaust setup), the sound generator adds even more of an acoustic soundtrack to the overall package. Previously, the header/exhaust combo would drown out any intake noise coming from up front but now I am able to hear the 2GR-FSE roar from a 360-degree perspective. It's quite an enjoyable experience when daily driving. Thanks for the idea MikeFig82!
My next objective is to do several WOT pulls to see if the 3IS F-Sport Intake has any noticeable impact to the MAF g/s readings via Torque Pro. Previously with the JoeZ intake pipe, my MAF g/s would on average be at 242-244 g/s and a peak of 247 g/s. With the new 3IS F-Sport intake pipe, I was only able to do one WOT pull at 3rd gear and the datalog showed a peak of 235 g/s. The big disclaimer was that the intake air temps were at triple digits during the day so it's not an apple to apple comparison to when I did previous tests at 70-90 degrees IAT. I plan on documenting some runs late in the evening when temps cool down to see what the MAF g/s will show for the new intake pipe. Hopefully it will be around the same #s as my previous setup.
Originally Posted by DickH
Red, I was wondering if you could test something for me. Could you try a few 30-60 pulls and see what torque reports for ? One set rolling out from first and the other starting in second.
I can certainly do that when I get a chance to record the MAF g/s in the evening as noted above. For the range that you requested, I believe Torque Pro can only record a 40-60 run so if that range is okay, I can try to do a few pulls from 1-2 gear starting at 30mph to see what the 40-60 time shows and then do a 2nd gear pull starting at 30mph to see what the time delta would be.
I can certainly do that when I get a chance to record the MAF g/s in the evening as noted above. For the range that you requested, I believe Torque Pro can only record a 40-60 run so if that range is okay, I can try to do a few pulls from 1-2 gear starting at 30mph to see what the 40-60 time shows and then do a 2nd gear pull starting at 30mph to see what the time delta would be.
Yeah, that is what I meant, recording 40-60 times starting from 30.
That 3is intake should be sufficient, the HPS intake is a lot of money for nearly nothing in return. I have a 3.5" intake, at best it is negligibly better than the 3" I had. Our maf is still smaller and the throttle body and intake manifold are small enough that I don't think gains would be noticed. You have me curious about the sound, I might have to look into finding myself one and modifying my intake to accommodate it.
So the 3IS F sport intake will fit on our 2IS cars?? I'm not sure how big the 2IS F sport tube is because thats what I'm using currently. Would the 3IS F sport intake tube be better?
So the 3IS F sport intake will fit on our 2IS cars?? I'm not sure how big the 2IS F sport tube is because thats what I'm using currently. Would the 3IS F sport intake tube be better?
Does it perform better then a 2IS Fsport intake? Or is that what your experimenting with?
That's what I'm currently experimenting with. I tried doing some datalogging today to compare MAF g/s readings with the new 3IS pipe but with intake air temps once again hovering at 115-120, I'm still getting an average of 235 g/s compared to the mid 240s I was getting with the 2IS JoeZ pipe (with IATs between 70-90 degrees).
Once I find some time late at night or early morning to do some WOT pulls with cooler temps, I'll have a more accurate comparison to see if the new 3IS F-Sport pipe at least matches the old intake setup. 0
In the meantime, I am enjoying the addition of the sound generator. It has the same engine burble sound like this Lexus GS350 video:
Quick update: I was able to take advantage of a slightly cooler morning and I did a quick 3rd gear WOT pull to see how the 3IS F-Sport pipe would fare.
At an IAT of 88 degrees, the recorded MAF rate was 242 g/s. This mostly aligns with some of the previous WOT pulls I did when I was using the 2IS JoeZ pipe (242-244 g/s with slightly warmer IAT temps of 93-95 degrees).
As I noticed from my collection of datalogs that IAT strongly correlates with potential MAF g/s rates (as my peak of 235 g/s with IATs of 115+ degrees would suggest), I'll need to do a few more sample WOT pulls to determine if the 3IS F-Sport pipe is better/same/worse than the 2IS JoeZ pipe performance-wise. One noticeable performance benefit I am noticing with the 3IS F-Sport pipe is the improved throttle responsiveness. My edumacated guess is because of the larger diameter pipe, more air molecules are able to linger closer to the throttle body when the car is coasting and any sudden increase in throttle position will have those air molecules utilized sooner.
Originally Posted by DickH
Red, I was wondering if you could test something for me. Could you try a few 30-60 pulls and see what torque reports for ? One set rolling out from first and the other starting in second.
I haven't had a chance to do a full back-to-back test but during one of my random pulls from 2nd gear (starting from approx. 25-30mph), the Torque App recorded a 1.8 from 40-60.
Data data and more data...I'm adding to the thread with some additional datalogs collected this morning as I had a great opportunity to do multiple 3rd gear WOT pulls to test out the 3IS F-Sport intake and its impact to the MAF rate g/s. With a steady IAT of 86 degrees, the MAF g/s was surprisingly consistent at 243.4 on all three pulls and essentially matches my MAF rates of 242-244 g/s from the 2IS JoeZ intake @ 93 IAT (https://www.clublexus.com/forums/bui...l#post10251054).
Is it better or worse than the 2IS JoeZ intake pipe? I'm not yet certain due to the minor IAT differences (86deg vs 93deg) which will impact peak MAF g/s. My current impression is that both are comparable with one another but I haven't narrowed down which is the better performer of the two. If there's an opportunity this weekend, I'll do a back-to-back datalog session and will switch out the pipes while the outside evening or morning conditions remain consistent. Hopefully I'll have a final verdict on this soon.
As my rear Michelin PSS tires are inching closer to needing to be replaced, I've begun my research on suitable replacements that won't break the wallet (as Michelin Pilot Sport tires tend to do).
With regards to performance tires (particularly in the UHP category), I've been reading a lot about a new bargain high-performance tire called the G-Max RS that had recently released by General Tires (part of Continental) that may give other UHP low-cost tires (like the current champ Firestone Firehawk Indy 500s) a run for their money.
From what I've been reading, these tires offer similar dry-grip performance as the Firehawk Indy 500s and significantly more wet-grip which would be useful for locations that tend to rain a lot (e.g. Florida). These tires are also 2-3 pounds lighter per tire than the equivalent Indy 500/Michelin PSS tire size as well as offering a higher speed rating (Indy 500) and tread life. Might be something for you guys to consider in the future like I am.
Here are some online reviews of the G-Max RS tires:
Have you've done any with the stock intake boot? Isn't it 3" all the way down to the throttle body? Also do you have the charcoal filter in place on the air box lid? I took mine out may times, and I find it does best with the stock pipe.
Because the area of the hole where the maf is located and the TB where the air enters are unchanged throughout testing it seems it really comes down to the engines demand and ability to pull a vacuum. That said the smaller pipe (less volume) will have a slightly higher velocity and although not evident, the reduced volume means that when heat soaked it will be replaced sooner than the larger one.
Oh to have solid works and model something simple like this in 3D....
As for tires, I didn't look up the prices for those you propose but will say the BF Goodrich G-Force Comp 2 A/S have incredible grip, good response and seem to be wearing well. I'm at 15k mi on them and love them. Their grip is scary tho as I fear when they do let go in the corner I'll be needing a new car! That and the 350 can't spin them like it smoked up the Nittos.... they has grip! Lots!
Have you've done any with the stock intake boot? Isn't it 3" all the way down to the throttle body? Also do you have the charcoal filter in place on the air box lid? I took mine out may times, and I find it does best with the stock pipe.
The 3IS pipe appears to be 3" from end to end but I haven't measured it in detail. When I do the JoeZ pipe swap to compare MAF g/s readings during the same span of time, I'll try to remeasure the new pipe.
I still have the original charcoal filter on the air box (I don't believe these are required to be changed out). From what I read on historical CL threads, it appeared that it would be best to keep the charcoal filter on the airbox rather than remove it. Someone did a dyno comparison and measured a 1rwhp loss when the charcoal filter was removed (though that rwhp loss could simply be a minor fluctuation from the dyno).
Originally Posted by 2013FSport
Because the area of the hole where the maf is located and the TB where the air enters are unchanged throughout testing it seems it really comes down to the engines demand and ability to pull a vacuum. That said the smaller pipe (less volume) will have a slightly higher velocity and although not evident, the reduced volume means that when heat soaked it will be replaced sooner than the larger one.
I popped open my hood earlier today after shutting off the car and the 3IS pipe was cool to the touch. That was pretty much an impossibility when I had the JoeZ pipe on.
Anyhow, I can say firsthand I love my Firestone Indy's. In mild wet traction when worn, they're still fine; but in SC/FL afternoon thunderstorm rains, it'll put you on alert with the amount of standing water. For the money though, best max summer tire for the money!
Because the area of the hole where the maf is located and the TB where the air enters are unchanged throughout testing it seems it really comes down to the engines demand and ability to pull a vacuum. That said the smaller pipe (less volume) will have a slightly higher velocity and although not evident, the reduced volume means that when heat soaked it will be replaced sooner than the larger one.
Oh to have solid works and model something simple like this in 3D....
You want velocity in your exhaust and intake runners, not the intake track itself. Ideally you want the plenum and intake track be at atmospheric pressure when the throttle body is wide open. Too small of an intake will make less, too big will just take up space. This is part of why itb manifolds are so great, you don't have pumping losses because you are drawing straight from the atmosphere instead of through the rest of the intake.
Looks like I'm scheduled to take the IS350 into the Lexus service center this Friday in order for the techs to perform the new JLF fuel delivery pipe recall. Not sure how long the procedure is supposed to take but my plans for further datalog comparisons between the 3IS F-Sport intake pipe and the 2IS JoeZ intake pipe will be on hold until this recall is complete.
Does anyone know what areas of the vehicle the techs will have to gain access to in order to replace the fuel pulsation dampers and/or fuel lines with this recall? I always like to do a before and after inspection to make sure everything looks right after the work is performed (just in case a future problem develops which could have been attributed to the maintenance procedures of this recall).
08-18-18, 03:28 PM
