Which CAI is best?
#42
Legacy TMS Member
I can show you the air transfer functions from two different Ford factory 80mm MAFs (98 F-150 and a 03 Marauder, both have the same sample tube size and design) and one will have a resolution suited for a much higher hp application. The airbox and filter assemblies are quite different! These air transfer functions are programmed into the PCMs at the factory, so it was derived from OEM-quality testing and engineering. The moral of the story: the size of the MAF does not matter by itself. The rest of the intake assembly (upstream of the sensing wires) is very important as well. What would be a real eye opener is if we bench flowed ALL of the available 05-up GT CAI kits available and compared the data. This should be a much more controlled test (to see the potential of each CAI kit) than running a vehicle on a chassis dyno subject to a few rwhp variation by itself, not to mention the environmental variables. 1/4 mile ET/trap speeds are also going to vary from test run to test run.
#43
SUPERCHARGED RED ROCKET ------------------Master-Moderator
Well, thats right from the horses mouth. Great post.
Man ya better get your flame suit on. There are a whole lot of guys here that will swear their putting 300+HP to the rear wheels with just a C&L and a tune.and have got the graphs to back it up.
I'm waiting for the new intake from FAST to be tested by Doug at Bamachips hopefully the testing will go good. Should see some info coming at the end of March.
Lee's numbers are right on.
Like some guys say. The dude running the dyno can give you any number you want to see. Especially if they sold you the add-ons.
The real test is at the drag strip. Not strapped down to some rollers.
Man ya better get your flame suit on. There are a whole lot of guys here that will swear their putting 300+HP to the rear wheels with just a C&L and a tune.and have got the graphs to back it up.
I'm waiting for the new intake from FAST to be tested by Doug at Bamachips hopefully the testing will go good. Should see some info coming at the end of March.
Lee's numbers are right on.
Like some guys say. The dude running the dyno can give you any number you want to see. Especially if they sold you the add-ons.
The real test is at the drag strip. Not strapped down to some rollers.
#44
Legacy TMS Member
The main reason for choosing my Steeda intake ? was the fact that Steeda designs the FRPP kit exclusively for Ford racing and designs it according to Ford engineering specifications.. in addition Steeda's also a direct partner in Ford's technology transfer program, so the way I see it is this ? If the Steeda intake is good enough to be included as part of the factory equipped package on both the Shelby GT-H and the all new 2007 Shelby GT ?
The FAST 3V intake does look promising. I heard that it has larger and longer intake runners, which should optimize the torque curve for more low end torque and more mid-high end power. Rumor has it that it deletes the CMCV plates as well, for a combined hp gain of about 40 ponies.
#45
The FAST 3V intake does look promising. I heard that it has larger and longer intake runners, which should optimize the torque curve for more low end torque and more mid-high end power. Rumor has it that it deletes the CMCV plates as well, for a combined hp gain of about 40 ponies.
One thought that I've had is, how restrictive is the OEM air box/MAF tube if Saleen can get close to 400HP using it? Seems to me that if it can support those numbers, a simple 20-30HP increase should be possible?
#46
Shelby is the one making the GT-H and Shelby GT and using the parts that are sold as FRPP power/handling packs. Ford is still using the same OEM airbox on the GT before shipping it out to Shelby in Nevada to be turned into the GT-H or Shelby GT. The OEMs generally do not ever use K&N-style cone filters at the factory backed with a 3/5-year powertrain warranty. The Shelby GT500 uses an airbox and paper panel filter, and that is after a significant amount of testing, research, and engineering at the OEM level. Shelby just slapped together some aftermarket parts with a body kit within a few months without the same level of testing as the OEM (SVT Director Hau Thai Thang even mentioned how Shelby can get it out to market within MONTHS, while it would take years for Ford to do the same). Most people simply do not realize or comprehend the amount of testing that is required before a vehicle ever hits production. The poor quality we are experiencing is the result of the combined efforts of Ford accounting execs who decontent without collaborating with engineers, and with supplier cost-cutting/outsourcing.
The FAST 3V intake does look promising. I heard that it has larger and longer intake runners, which should optimize the torque curve for more low end torque and more mid-high end power. Rumor has it that it deletes the CMCV plates as well, for a combined hp gain of about 40 ponies.
The FAST 3V intake does look promising. I heard that it has larger and longer intake runners, which should optimize the torque curve for more low end torque and more mid-high end power. Rumor has it that it deletes the CMCV plates as well, for a combined hp gain of about 40 ponies.
so do you think cone filters are risky for the life of the motor? are there potential long term issues? i wonder why ford decided not to go with it and shelby just puts in on there...
thanks!
#48
SUPERCHARGED RED ROCKET ------------------Master-Moderator
Shelby is the one making the GT-H and Shelby GT and using the parts that are sold as FRPP power/handling packs. Ford is still using the same OEM airbox on the GT before shipping it out to Shelby in Nevada to be turned into the GT-H or Shelby GT. The OEMs generally do not ever use K&N-style cone filters at the factory backed with a 3/5-year powertrain warranty. The Shelby GT500 uses an airbox and paper panel filter, and that is after a significant amount of testing, research, and engineering at the OEM level. Shelby just slapped together some aftermarket parts with a body kit within a few months without the same level of testing as the OEM (SVT Director Hau Thai Thang even mentioned how Shelby can get it out to market within MONTHS, while it would take years for Ford to do the same). Most people simply do not realize or comprehend the amount of testing that is required before a vehicle ever hits production. The poor quality we are experiencing is the result of the combined efforts of Ford accounting execs who decontent without collaborating with engineers, and with supplier cost-cutting/outsourcing.
The FAST 3V intake does look promising. I heard that it has larger and longer intake runners, which should optimize the torque curve for more low end torque and more mid-high end power. Rumor has it that it deletes the CMCV plates as well, for a combined hp gain of about 40 ponies.
The FAST 3V intake does look promising. I heard that it has larger and longer intake runners, which should optimize the torque curve for more low end torque and more mid-high end power. Rumor has it that it deletes the CMCV plates as well, for a combined hp gain of about 40 ponies.
#49
SUPERCHARGED RED ROCKET ------------------Master-Moderator
Double post due from server connection issue
#51
SUPERCHARGED RED ROCKET ------------------Master-Moderator
YaoNYC ?? do yourself a favor ? if you have any doubts as to whether or not cone filters are risky towards engine life, direct your questions to a professional tuner such as Doug from bamachips.com he'll provide you with the real facts and not somebody's biased opinions which don't provide any real proof whatsoever..The fact is K&N has provided cone filters for over 20 years if not longer and when properly maintained ?? have extended engine lifespan and not the other way around..
#53
SUPERCHARGED RED ROCKET ------------------Master-Moderator
Let's put it this way Pat ? I'am so fed up with this guy's biased opinions towards aftermarket cold air intakes and it's really getting very old and now he's attempting to fill someone's head this BS that cone filters shorten engine life which is complete nonsense..But don't give me all the credit brother ?? I owe much of my feistiness to SKI...BTW correct me if I'm wrong Pat ? but isn't the title of this thread called, which CAI is best ?? and not the stock OEM airbox thread LMAO..or is it just me lol ?
#54
SUPERCHARGED RED ROCKET ------------------Master-Moderator
Dude take a good look around you, anybody that has these cold air intakes will tell you first hand they improve your car's performance and not the other way around..
#55
#56
Super Boss Lawman Member
I think all intake are going to give you pretty much the same amount of power, it's all in the tune where you notice the differences, and I mean power that you can feel not numbers
#57
#58
Legacy TMS Member
I would not be concerned about engine wear for most of your applications (weekend driver, trailer/garage queens,etc...) it is only when your vehicle is operated in an extremely severe environment over a long period of time that the K&N style filters will cause excessive engine wear. A UOA can show if there is excessive Silicon content in your oil, which may or may not represent dirt/grit from the air and sand.
From the 5.0 magazine dyno tests, the CAIs all added about 10 rwhp/rwtq over the K&N panel filter + SCT tune, or about 20-25 rwhp/rwtq over stock which is very nice: 330-335 fwhp.
#59
Bullitt Member
Join Date: May 10, 2006
Location: NOVA
Posts: 408
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Using 265 as a common baseline (didn't establish a baseline on my car before adding the CAI/tune) my dyno runs came up with 281.6 rwhp with the CAI and a tune - almost a 27rwhp gain which tracks with what is expected from those add ons.