Actually on a turbo it is worse than that. In addition to having to go through the perforated metal, the air actually has to make TWO 180 degree direction changes. First one is from the front snorkle, through the perfed metal, down through the hole in the bottom of the air cleaner, then back towards the front of the car. From there it makes a second 180 degree u-turn through the u-shaped plastic piece that goes from the bottom of the air cleaner into the turbo. I don't see how anyone could doubt that a single smooth curve like this intake would improve airflow - at the very least for for situations requiring quick throttle response - and possibly other times too due to the smoother, more laminar flow into the turbo.

No he is comparing his new filter enclosure which hooks up to the original snorkle hose (making it a true cold air intake) to the previous version - which had just an open cone filter tucked into the front corner of the engine bay right behind the passenger side headlight (that could draw at least some warmer underhood air). What he's saying is that there is no appreciable difference between the two - at least not compared to the amount of difference he noticed when comparing his original open element cone filter intake setup to the stock filter setup.

He's also saying that he only built the enclosure for the cone filter in response to you (and others) insistance that his open element cone filter - which isn't a true cold air intake - couldn't be better than the stock cold air intake setup.

How soon we forget...

__________________
1984 300 Coupe TurboDiesel
Silver blue paint over navy blue interior
2nd owner & 2nd engine in an otherwise
99% original unmolested car
~210k miles on the clock

1986 Ford F250 4x4 Supercab
Charcoal & blue two tone paint over burgundy interior
Banks turbo, DRW, ZF-5 & SMF conversion
152k on the clock - actual mileage unknown