Upgrading intake path - Page 5 - Ford Mustang Forum
Like Tree17Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Apprentice
 
Michaelanthony2's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2018
Location: North Louisiana
Posts: 195
 
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beechkid View Post
It's the law of physics.....an engines air intake is directly related to how much air it can physically suck into each cylinder....nothing more, nothing less. The only thing that changes the rules is if you significantly increase the RPM or install a blower/supercharger...… because you are now force feeding the air above atmospheric pressure

I understand what you are saying since its in every single CAI intake thread ever made.



I do have an Airiade intake. if I put the stock back on you are telling me I wont tell a difference?



I have a LITO tune and I am fairly sure when I changed from Steeda CAI he had to make changes . so he is making changes based on the MAF readings.



Has anyone actually tested before and after and lost power?



it seems to me from another poster on here the real difference is in the readings from the MAF after the change in the intake. the MAF is the same but the readings are not. even though the airflow in the stock panel is enough.



im going to ask LITO since he looked at all my data when tuning.



I mean ill gladly put the stock back in if it makes car run better. i KNOW it ran like a dog when I got it stock


im almost positive my Toyota RAv4 v6 was faster

Michaelanthony2 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
BOSS Member
 
Beechkid's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2013
Location: SoCal
Posts: 4,421
           
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michaelanthony2 View Post
I


Has anyone actually tested before and after and lost power?


&


I mean ill gladly put the stock back in if it makes car run better. i KNOW it ran like a dog when I got it stock


im almost positive my Toyota RAv4 v6 was faster


In short- yes, a massive aftermarket air filter test was conducted at a certified ISO test facility...… and Chief engineers from Ford have publicly stated "unless you do significant upgrades to increase RPM or CID there are no gains"...


so, if your RAV4 was faster, then you had a significant component related problem....nothing more nothing less.....


To quote (Arlen) SPICER,

“Now that I am not doing the tests and my objectivity is not necessary, letme explain my motivation. The reason I started this crusade was that I wasseeing people spend a lot of money on aftermarket filters based on the word ofa salesperson or based on the misleading, incomplete or outright deceivinginformation printed on boxes and in sales literature. Gentlemen and Ladies,Marketing and the lure of profit is VERY POWERFUL! It is amazing how manypeople believe that better airflow = more power! Unless you have modificationsout the wazoo, a more porous filter will just dirty your oil! Some will say" I have used aftermarket brand X for XXX # years with no problems. ThePROBLEM is you spent a chunk of ching on a product that not only DID NOTincrease your horsepower, but also let in a lot of dirt while doing it! Now howmuch is a lot? ANY MORE THAN NECESSARY is TOO MUCH!

Others are persuaded by the claims of aftermarket manufacturers that theirfilters filter dirt "better than any other filter on the market."Sounds very enticing. To small timers like you and me, spending $1500 to test afilter sounds like a lot. But if you were a filter manufacturer and youbelieved your filter could filter dirt better than any other media on themarket, wouldn't you want to prove it? Guess what. Test your filter vs. the OEpaper. It will cost you $3000 and for that price you will have the data thatyou can use in your advertisements. Your investment will be returned a thousandfold! EASIER than shooting fish in a barrel! So why don't these manufacturersdo this? Hmmm? Probably not because they would feel guilty about taking moremarket share.

Now I am not saying that ALL aftermarket filters are useless. A paper filterdoes not do well if directly wetted or muddy. It may collapse. This is why manyoff-road filters are foam. It is a compromise between filtering efficiency andprotection from a collapsed filter. Now how many of our trucks collapse theirfilters from mud and water? However, if a filter is using "betterairflow" as their marketing tool, remember this....Does it flow better? Atvery high airflow volumes, probably. BUT, Our trucks CAN'T flow that much airunless super-modified, so what is the point? The stock filter will flow MORETHAN ENOUGH AIR to give you ALL THE HORSEPOWER the engine has to give. And thisremains true until the filter is dirty enough to trip the air filter lifeindicator. At that point performance will decline somewhat. Replace the filterand get on with it.




:hello:
Member: Never trust a person over 40 who drives a Chevy club
Flatheads ain't so bad!
Certified backyard mechanic I & II
Beechkid is offline  
Apprentice
 
Michaelanthony2's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2018
Location: North Louisiana
Posts: 195
 
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beechkid View Post
In short- yes, a massive aftermarket air filter test was conducted at a certified ISO test facility...… and Chief engineers from Ford have publicly stated "unless you do significant upgrades to increase RPM or CID there are no gains"...


so, if your RAV4 was faster, then you had a significant component related problem....nothing more nothing less.....


its possible my bad cats made it run badly but the throttle response on the car before the tune just flat out sucked. now I get better miles per gallon and better performance.



Hmmm.. you didnt adress the MAF issue that I mentioned and the other poster said was proven on the dyno.
Michaelanthony2 is offline  
 
BOSS Member
 
Beechkid's Avatar
 
Joined: Apr 2013
Location: SoCal
Posts: 4,421
           
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michaelanthony2 View Post
its possible my bad cats made it run badly but the throttle response on the car before the tune just flat out sucked. now I get better miles per gallon and better performance.
Hmmm.. you didnt adress the MAF issue that I mentioned and the other poster said was proven on the dyno.

As far as throttle response, ALL TPS software has by design a slight delay to create smoother take-offs and increase MPG for EPA testing sake...… aftermarket programmers reduce/eliminate this delay.....


and as I mentioned in my initial posting....


5% is a standard deviation even amongst mfgdynos (meaning if you take the enact same engine/car and place it on the exact same but different dyno on the same day at the same time you can/will get up to a 5% variance on readinings…..and any gain less than 5% should not be considered a gain- per every dyno mfg) and...…………. if you go to this linkhttp://www.fordracingparts.com/downl...ceTechTips.pdf the engineers at Fordracing have a article on just exactly how these “tuners” play games with thehp/tq ratings, how calibration can cause misleading dyno results, & some ofthe “tricks” that are used to gain supposed power increases when in fact,mis-managing your engine.....and the most important item is……these "mailorder tuners' are not regulated like any other auto repair shop in the US...soif they "damage" your car...gee, sorry...sue me!




:hello:
Member: Never trust a person over 40 who drives a Chevy club
Flatheads ain't so bad!
Certified backyard mechanic I & II
Beechkid is offline  
SHELBY GT 350 Member
4.6L Member
S197 Member
 
JBert's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Location: Central Massachusetts
Posts: 9,108
           
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michaelanthony2 View Post
I have a LITO tune and I am fairly sure when I changed from Steeda CAI he had to make changes . so he is making changes based on the MAF readings.

Has anyone actually tested before and after and lost power?
the tune MUST be corrected when you change the diameter of the MAF metering section or the readings will be wrong and the A/F ratio will be wrong as a result . . . but that has nothing to do with whether the intake is flowing more air or not

there are tons of before and after dyno tests on S197 Mustangs that do show gains for aftermarket intakes, with and without tunes . . . less gains on later years because the factory intakes and factory tunes got better

flow is not just about CFM (flow rate), it is also about the pressure drop associated with that flow rate . . . read my posts earlier in this thread if you are interested, but maybe we should not go there again, LOL
Beechkid and jlee910 like this.

| 2010 GT coupe | Daily Driver with some Steeda and GT500 take-off stuff for the occasional track day
JBert is offline  
Apprentice
 
Michaelanthony2's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2018
Location: North Louisiana
Posts: 195
 
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beechkid View Post
As far as throttle response, ALL TPS software has by design a slight delay to create smoother take-offs and increase MPG for EPA testing sake...… aftermarket programmers reduce/eliminate this delay.....


and as I mentioned in my initial posting....


5% is a standard deviation even amongst mfgdynos (meaning if you take the enact same engine/car and place it on the exact same but different dyno on the same day at the same time you can/will get up to a 5% variance on readinings…..and any gain less than 5% should not be considered a gain- per every dyno mfg) and...…………. if you go to this linkhttp://www.fordracingparts.com/downl...ceTechTips.pdf the engineers at Fordracing have a article on just exactly how these “tuners” play games with thehp/tq ratings, how calibration can cause misleading dyno results, & some ofthe “tricks” that are used to gain supposed power increases when in fact,mis-managing your engine.....and the most important item is……these "mailorder tuners' are not regulated like any other auto repair shop in the US...soif they "damage" your car...gee, sorry...sue me!




so Ford said they didnt do any good. so why did they sell and still sell the same stuff with the same claims? they sell all kinds of performance aftermarket stuff.



the early 05-08 GT had worse performing intake than say the bullit or the Boss.



just for kicks , I have asked my tuner who looked at my datalogs when making my tune...just like he does all of them and I am going to see if he has any insight.



While I have understood the entire time that the panel filter is sufficient in area I still do not see where it is the only factor in this equation.



if my tuner tells me I can run stock box with cotton panel filter and not lose any HP or performance I will gladly sell the Airaid intake.
Michaelanthony2 is offline  
Apprentice
 
Michaelanthony2's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2018
Location: North Louisiana
Posts: 195
 
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBert View Post
the tune MUST be corrected when you change the diameter of the MAF metering section or the readings will be wrong and the A/F ratio will be wrong as a result . . . but that has nothing to do with whether the intake is flowing more air or not

there are tons of before and after dyno tests on S197 Mustangs that do show gains for aftermarket intakes, with and without tunes . . . less gains on later years because the factory intakes and factory tunes got better

flow is not just about CFM (flow rate), it is also about the pressure drop associated with that flow rate . . . read my posts earlier in this thread if you are interested, but maybe we should not go there again, LOL

I have read your posts and I know about the first part.



And you say plenty of before and after dyno tests proving to a certain point gains...


But I am trying to understand how other guy always says " stock filter is able to flow X amount so no gain with anything else"



because the fuel/air adjustments cause an effect on power I dont understand how he says aftermarket stuff doesnt work.
Michaelanthony2 is offline  
SHELBY GT 350 Member
4.6L Member
S197 Member
 
JBert's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Location: Central Massachusetts
Posts: 9,108
           
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michaelanthony2 View Post
. . . I am trying to understand how other guy always says " stock filter is able to flow X amount so no gain with anything else"
that's his opinion; in my opinion it is an oversimplification

I think it is largely based on that article that he posted -- the issues I see with that article are:
> it is based on the 2012 Boss 302 and the 2011+ Coyote intake; earlier models were not as good as those from the factory
> it is written mostly by a Ford engineer -- of course they are going to say that their stuff is the best; they want to sell cars and they don't want to open themselves up for liability by endorsing aftermarket products that could do damage if not used correctly

Many intake products are rated by CFM, for example cylinder heads and carburetors are commonly rated by CFM (cubic feet per minute, flow rate). But that is also an oversimplification. Those flow rates are based on a standard test, which uses a standard pressure drop or "suck amount" for the test. If you reduce the pressure drop (suck amount) they will flow less; if you increase the pressure drop (or suck amount) they will flow more; and the point of an intake modification is to reduce that pressure drop, so more air will flow in. If you have a filter that will flow more than you need at a certain pressure drop, if will have less pressure drop for the flow that you need, which is what you want.

In the end, you should take all of this with a grain of salt; these products rarely deliver what their marketers claim, but they are still fun; if you really want to know how much you gained, the only way to do it is to run a before and after dyno test.

| 2010 GT coupe | Daily Driver with some Steeda and GT500 take-off stuff for the occasional track day
JBert is offline  
Apprentice
 
Michaelanthony2's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2018
Location: North Louisiana
Posts: 195
 
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBert View Post
that's his opinion; in my opinion it is an oversimplification I think it is largely based on that article that he posted -- the issues I see with that article are: > it is based on the 2012 Boss 302 and the 2011+ Coyote intake; earlier models were not as good as those from the factory > it is written mostly by a Ford engineer -- of course they are going to say that their stuff is the best; they want to sell cars and they don't want to open themselves up for liability by endorsing aftermarket products that could do damage if not used correctly Many intake products are rated by CFM, for example cylinder heads and carburetors are commonly rated by CFM (cubic feet per minute, flow rate). But that is also an oversimplification. Those flow rates are based on a standard test, which uses a standard pressure drop or "suck amount" for the test. If you reduce the pressure drop (suck amount) they will flow less; if you increase the pressure drop (or suck amount) they will flow more; and the point of an intake modification is to reduce that pressure drop, so more air will flow in. If you have a filter that will flow more than you need at a certain pressure drop, if will have less pressure drop for the flow that you need, which is what you want. In the end, you should take all of this with a grain of salt; these products rarely deliver what their marketers claim, but they are still fun; if you really want to know how much you gained, the only way to do it is to run a before and after dyno test.
I tend to agree with you on all of this. I see the other view on every single post ever having to do with CAI's . I understand his point but I dont think its as simple as that and there are other factors . I dont beleive my tuner is taking me for a ride either. I change from my steeda to his and I can tell the differences in the two tunes. I myself am not arguing the panel filter isnt on paper good enough but I dont think its that simple when you add MAF calibrations and other things. the "airflow" might be efficient but the unit on my 05 as a whole cant be as good as my airaid..imo. problem is he makes a point to tell everyone that "stock is good and aftermarket gains are zero" which is a pretty bold statment. if my tuner told me he can make me same power with factory junk then I will sell my airaid today.
Michaelanthony2 is offline  
MACH I Member
5.0L Member
 
Bullitt95's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Location: Cyprus
Posts: 3,413
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JBert View Post
if you really want to know how much you gained, the only way to do it is to run a before and after dyno test.
Even that can be fudged to exaggerate the HP/TQ gains but if you use the same dyno on the same day, and have an honest dyno operator who uses the same correction factors for both sets of runs, the average of three runs before and three runs after would be valid scientifically.


2006 GT Deluxe - 5MT - 12.50 @ 109.61
314rwhp 330rwtq with basic bolt-ons
Bullitt95 is offline  
Apprentice
 
Michaelanthony2's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2018
Location: North Louisiana
Posts: 195
 
Garage
I really dont think that many people are out there tossing away money if no results are to be had. even the changes in throttle mapping are much needed compared to stock. if I wanted a grand marquis I would have bought one of those.



I think there are mistakes to be made and claims to be exagerated but I am pretty confident that most who do the things correctly and have tuners who do the tunes correctly have positive results.



I dont know what my numbers are but I know my power is up and my miles per gallon are also. I also know Ford has made millions peddling performance parts for there cars for decades because the factory doesnt push them out to their full potential. more like middle ground.
Michaelanthony2 is offline  
MACH I Member
 
pikapp's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,683
 
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michaelanthony2 View Post
I really dont think that many people are out there tossing away money if no results are to be had. even the changes in throttle mapping are much needed compared to stock. if I wanted a grand marquis I would have bought one of those. I think there are mistakes to be made and claims to be exagerated but I am pretty confident that most who do the things correctly and have tuners who do the tunes correctly have positive results.
In the early days of the S197, there was a lot of money being thrown away, by many of us, in hopes of improving a crappy 300 BHP mustang GT. They were dogs and as a result, hundreds if not thousands of Mustang Mod Shops opened up and offered up everything under the sun to make your mustang better and faster....even if it was just by a hp or two. Many shops were in the business just to make money and really didn't care about the customer, others to make money but offer good customer service as well. This is where word of mouth played an important role in who to go to and who to stay away from. This included all the products that were being bought and what did they do exactly for my mustang...if anything. It took a few years but by around 2008, the mustang owners began to become more knowledgeable about their cars and what products were beneficial and which ones we're snake oil. That's why you won't find as many Mustang Mod shops now as you did in the earlier years. The ones still in existence, are the reputable ones that took care of the customer as well as the car. The shop I have now I trust without question because of the honesty and trust that's been established, over the past 8 years. I know nothing will ever go on my car if its not proven to make it better and will benefit what I do with it. Just my 2 cents.
jlee910 likes this.

IF MY CAR WENT AS FAST AS THE MONEY I SPEND ON IT, I'D WIN EVERY RACE
pikapp is offline  
Apprentice
 
Michaelanthony2's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2018
Location: North Louisiana
Posts: 195
 
Garage
Quote:
Originally Posted by pikapp View Post
In the early days of the S197, there was a lot of money being thrown away, by many of us, in hopes of improving a crappy 300 BHP mustang GT. They were dogs and as a result, hundreds if not thousands of Mustang Mod Shops opened up and offered up everything under the sun to make your mustang better and faster....even if it was just by a hp or two. Many shops were in the business just to make money and really didn't care about the customer, others to make money but offer good customer service as well. This is where word of mouth played an important role in who to go to and who to stay away from. This included all the products that were being bought and what did they do exactly for my mustang...if anything. It took a few years but by around 2008, the mustang owners began to become more knowledgeable about their cars and what products were beneficial and which ones we're snake oil. That's why you won't find as many Mustang Mod shops now as you did in the earlier years. The ones still in existence, are the reputable ones that took care of the customer as well as the car. The shop I have now I trust without question because of the honesty and trust that's been established, over the past 8 years. I know nothing will ever go on my car if its not proven to make it better and will benefit what I do with it. Just my 2 cents.

so whats on it? lol
Michaelanthony2 is offline  
MACH I Member
5.0L Member
 
Bullitt95's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2007
Location: Cyprus
Posts: 3,413
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michaelanthony2 View Post
whats on it? lol
It's probably bone stock ha ha. 😉


2006 GT Deluxe - 5MT - 12.50 @ 109.61
314rwhp 330rwtq with basic bolt-ons
Bullitt95 is offline  
SHELBY GT 350 Member
4.6L Member
S197 Member
 
JBert's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2011
Location: Central Massachusetts
Posts: 9,108
           
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michaelanthony2 View Post
so whats on it? lol

pikapp can elaborate a bit more, but since I've been chatting back and forth with him on here for years -- his Mustang is a road track race car; started out as a Roush supercharged car and has quite a bit of track oriented mods since then

jlee910 likes this.

| 2010 GT coupe | Daily Driver with some Steeda and GT500 take-off stuff for the occasional track day
JBert is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Ford Mustang Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a VALID email address for yourself, otherwise you will not receive the necessary confirmation email needed to confirm, validate and activate your new AFM member account.

Failure to provide a VALID email address, will result in the cancellation of your new AFM member account registration.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
General SN-95 info. burninrock24 4.6L Talk 19 07-16-2013 09:44 PM
1999 Mustang cobra cams question red1999cobra SVT Cobra Tech 25 03-17-2011 01:08 PM
Aftermarket Intake Manifold details joeyboots281 4.6L Tech 2 03-06-2010 08:29 AM
1993 Mustang Cobra cam shaft info BCMC 03 5.0L Talk 15 11-05-2009 03:06 PM
C&L Intake Manifold Info cvarley 2005-2010 Mustang Talk 2 11-03-2009 06:32 PM

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome
 


Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.1