The Reason

I picked one of these up with the hopes that it would be easier to install and remove than the RS4 accordion hose that I had been using for a while.  It was a touch easier to connect to the RS4 y-pipe.

The other thought with using this silicone MAF hose was that the smoother interior surface would present less resistance to airflow.  034 states that it “Features a larger inside diameter and smoother surface for better flow, and stiffer construction to prevent collapsing.”

I wanted to put it to the test against the RS4 accordion hose and see how they compared.

The setup

To perform the comparison I attached one side of each hose to an 85mm EPL MAF housing with the Hitachi MAF sensor installed, and attached the other end to an RS4 Y-pipe.

034 Silicone MAF Hose shown above and RS4 Accordion MAF Hose shown below.

The Articles

Below is a side by side comparison of the interior of each MAF hose.

MAF Hose Comparison

The Results

Each hose was placed on the flow bench and run up to a test depression of 10″ of H2O.  The results are shown on the chart below:

The RS4 accordion flowed 490 CFM and the 034 Silicone MAF Hose flowed 495 CFM.

Conclusion:

As far as the performance difference goes there is not much between the OEM RS4 accordion hose and the 034 Silicone MAF Hose, only 1% that I measured, which is probably within the margin or error for this test setup.

I still like the 034 Silicone MAF Hose.  It’s nice quality, fits well, and performs as well as the main alternative.