If you go to C&L's website, you will not only see that their '05 intakes have patents pending on them, but you will also notice that on the main page there are TWO U.S. patent numbers on their upper intake plenum listed. If you go back to my original post in this thread, you will find an image that shows a BLATANT copy of the C&L plenum (which IS PATENTED) that was released by Granatelli some time last year. The C&L plenum was released in 2003. These are facts I'm trying to show.

thanks, Doug.

 

Oh definitely, for you guys it's 2x what it was for me ( manual ). To argue that a tuner is a waste of money and the GMS gives you the same thing is ludicrous.

 

I suggested another thread for JR specific issues, of course if it's called "I hate JR" he probably wouldn't reply to it.
But seriously, I think someone should put together a rational thread with questions for JR. As a potential CAI purchaser with no bias towards either Doug or JR I would like to know where JR stands in response to the issues others have raised. The problem however is it should be real questions, not this bashing JR becasue he sells MAF spray which these same people think he stole (or copied) from CRC!


Excellent point harleybill. In the begining of this thread I had the feeling that Doug was just trying to do a scientific comparison. That was, of course until I saw the MAF spray post.

Doug, while I agree that customer service is extremely important, most companies advertise and they all make claims based on the best theoretical possibilities. Are all of the JR haters going to start FRPP hating because they sell the Supreme GT axle-backs as FRPP axle-backs? You seem like a smart guy and I was truly surprised that you started to break bad on JR in that manner instead of staying nuetral. As a result, now I have to think twice about your "findings" knowing you are truly biased deep down.

Like I said, now I have to think twice about these "findings". Once you get results that do not match the "claims" that's when you retest on another random unit. That would be much more scientific proof.

This thread has become truly ridiculous but it's like a bad accident, I just can't stop looking. It's full of conspiracy theories, who did JR copy all of his product from? Is SuperMario really someone else, maybe he was on the Grassy Knoll!

SilverHorse...your post was useless IMO, "I'm not a grammar ****, but ..." and then you go on ripping this guy who may or may not be whoever you think he/she really is. What was the point of that?

 

Doug,

Whe are you going to go after BBK?

Don't all of these CAIs look the same?

 

Look - I am not skipping anything and you all know I don't skirt around issues. The Granatelli and C&L parts are not the same. They don't even look the same. I give credit to Lee Bender of C&L as he was smart enough to get Doug at Bamachips to do his dirty work. Doug has now dug himself into a whole. Rather then think for himself, he has turned himself into a mouth piece for C&L. In the past I gave him more credit then this but in the end he has discredited himself by casting aspersions and innuendo that will soon be proven wrong. The fact that he can not figure out how the supplied meter in our kits work is the first indication he is a puppet for C&L, and the chip tuning software he pushes. This is not to say that he can or can not properly tune as I have never seen his work. However, by his own admission he can’t figure out what, where, when or how our supplied Slot in Meter works. He admits to mixing and matching parts and not being able to make them work properly. He insinuates we would copy his tunes and sell them in Fuego which is just a feeble attempt at taking credit for our own hard work. So with that said, shame on you Doug for creating an issue that was a non issue. As for his so called unbiased dyno test, he has already proven to be puppet and mouth piece for C&L so what makes anyone think at this point he would be honest about the results.

As for the comment about how much interest this post has garnered, this seems normal for a GMS thread.

 

eci...I don't think anyone is saying a tune is a waste of money, it's just not for everyone.

You are implying that anyone that doesn't get a tune is an idiot and that's ludicrous! To hear you talk it's like the stock Mustang is a POS, why did you even but one?

Some of us are looking for a modest bump in power and don't want to spend a lot of $$$.

What is wrong with that? I'm not even saying you're wrong about all of the benefit's of a tune and I may go that route eventually but you talk as if it should be all or nothing ASAP. Believe me I wish I had the funds to do so but since I do not, I don't appreciate the attempt to make us out as fools for not doing all of the mods you do.

 

Actually while they may look similar, the Granatelli unit is the only one that has 2 ports for nitrous, BBK and Granatelli use a 1 piece design and only Granatelli supplies the calibration parts necessary to make the product work and make power. Like harleybill said, no one that purchased the Granatelli parts has been unhappy. That speaks volumes as to our customer service and willingness to come here OPENLY (not hiding under an alias). Again an issue is being made from a non issue

 

JR, I'm happy that you're back... What's up with the Fuego?

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fords4Ever

I suggested another thread for JR specific issues, of course if it's called "I hate JR" he probably wouldn't reply to it. ?

I always answer the good and the bad. I was at SEMA so I could not spend a ton of time on this. A few of our customer came to the booth and asked if I read all this nonsense and I said not yet.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fords4Ever

someone should put together a rational thread with questions for JR. As a potential CAI purchaser with no bias towards either Doug or JR I would like to know where JR stands in response to the issues others have raised.

Admittedly I have not read all 15 pages here. I lost interest after they made the childish claims about where the filter was manufactured. We manufacture filters for several of the big players in the industry both automotive and industrial (where the real money is)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fords4Ever

The problem however is it should be real questions, not this bashing JR because he sells MAF spray which these same people think he stole (or copied) from CRC! ?

Our MAF spray came from CRC – it is one in the same – we were working on a private brand program

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fords4Ever

Doug, while I agree that customer service is extremely important, most companies advertise and they all make claims based on the best theoretical possibilities. Are all of the JR haters going to start FRPP hating because they sell the Supreme GT axle-backs as FRPP axle-backs? You seem like a smart guy and I was truly surprised that you started to break bad on JR in that manner instead of staying neutral. As a result, now I have to think twice about your "findings" knowing you are truly biased deep down. ?

 

Fuego is shipping - place your orders

 

It has pretty much been proven that our system will make as much power as a tuned large aftermarket intake. However ECI is correct the tuner allows one to do many other things like gears and tire changes as well as auto trans stuff.

Remember - We mock what we don't understand. Doug can't understand how the meter works so he mocks us

 

Straight hogwash - Doug has turned into a Puppet for C&L. The photo he shows in his first post is not a GMS plenum

 

JR Thanks for your posts and we appreciate your honesty. Can you tell me about the filter. Where is it made and what material is it made from.

Also in another post about your CAI and MAF there has been a question about a 2nd hose 1/4 inch being in the box with the CAI. When mine came in, it had only the breather hose. What is this second hose for?

I agree with most people that has been following this thread. There are the GMS guys that like the product and are happy with the product. Then there are the C&L people that just want to bash JR and his products.

The CRC spray was a prime example, they immediately started bashing JR for stealing their idea and marketing that it gained 4-10HP. Well, CRC had that on their can and nobody bashed CRC for misconduct! Come on guys. Enough is enough.

 

 

The following shows how easy it is for a manufacturer to falsify power gains for its product(s).

First, GMS performed a bogus baseline run on a customer's 2006 Mustang GT on 8/10/06 in graph 1 below by intentionally heat-soaking the engine. This caused the coolant temperature to increase over a specified level, which caused the computer to go into a "protect mode" resulting in the super-rich 9.8:1 air/fuel ratio(Typical WOT A/F ratios for stock S197's normally run in the 11-12 range at WOT), and in turn reduced maximum hp(This can easily be seen by noting how the heatsoaked baseline hp curve in graph 1 suddenly drops off in the upper rpm range, while non-heatsoaked baseline hp curve in graph 2 does not have the same drop off.).
Then, after the baseline run was finished, the vehicle's engine had a chance to cool down during the removal of the stock intake assembly, and the installation of the GMS intake assembly. This prevented the computer from going into the "protect mode" for the modded run, and thus resulted in false power gains for the GMS intake assembly.
Finally, the heatsoaked baseline run from graph 1 was fradulently printed on msully's dyno graph to make it look like his gain was an "unbelieveable" 33 rwhp over "stock".
So not only was msully duped, but so was the owner of the 2006 Mustang GT.



1- Advertised GMS dyno graph(NOTE: Baseline run has the same time and date as the baseline run on msully's graph below, engine heat soaked before baseline run):
2006 Mustang GT
Baseline - 8/10/06
Modded - 8/10/06
http://www.granatellimotorsports.com...yno27small.jpg


2- msully's GMS dyno graph(NOTE: Baseline run has the same time and date as the baseline run on graph 1 above):
2007 Mustang GT
Baseline - 8/10/06
Modded -10/10/06
http://forums.bradbarnett.net/attach...5&d=1162309013


3- Advertised GMS dyno graph(no heat soaking)
2005 Mustang GT
Baseline-7/27/06
Modded-7/27/06
http://www.granatellimotorsports.com...yno28small.jpg


Granatelli stating the 2006 Mustang GT in graph 1 above had a 9.8:1 WOT A/F ratio from 4500 - 6000 rpm:
http://forums.bradbarnett.net/showpo...&postcount=200


msully admitting the engine was heat soaked before his "baseline" run:
http://forums.bradbarnett.net/showpo...&postcount=484


Doug's post regarding msully's dyno graph:
http://forums.bradbarnett.net/showpo...&postcount=104 ("For some reason your engine was pulling timing and it didn't give an accurate number...")

 

All I can say is I have learned quite a bit about tunes and CAI's in this thread

 

Well something good did come out of all this. I did learned a lot too.

 

Highly doubt this would calm things down, heh-heh, but since this seems to be going nowhere, a 3rd party solution may be best. Have the cars dyno'd at a tuner facility both parties in question can agree on and perform the tests with stock baseline runs then "after" runs using several stock vehicles with A/T and M/T with the only difference being the CAI unit/tune (where applicable) installed on said vehicles.
To minimize the chance of "ringers", have the units purchased by an anonymous buyer, who will then send them to the 3rd party for evaluation and testing. Results posted should include HP/TQ and A/F ratio throughout the whole portion of the test. Results should also be shown to be repeatable. Kind of like a "magazine test" without the magazine. Only problem with this is time, $$$, and the likelihood of both camps agreeing. I knew this thread would be interesting, to say the least.

 

You still haven't answered my question, why do you say your intake is never smaller then 90mm when it never is 90mm? Why do you say it flows more then the C&L when it flows just about the same? Dancing around the FACTS in this thread will not get you out of it.

The only way your kit isn't the same as C&L is you cast the MAF housing into the intake pipe, you still copied the same inside dimensions as the C&L. This wouldn't be as bad if you hadnt come on here and claimed it outflowed the C&L, was larger then the C&L, and out performed the C&L.

The reason I'm not including BBK with this thread is because BBK isn't on this forum posting this information.

You say I can't figure out your MAF technology? You say that...

http://forums.bradbarnett.net/showpost.php?p=694782&postcount=10

Do you want me to post the MAF transfer function of the stock meter since you say I can't read it? Maybe show you a picture of it in both SCT software AND Diablo? You say your are scaling the MAF sensors when you are actually using a different sensor and then using a jumper to correct the voltage for it. If you weren't you'd either not need the jumper, as you NEVER show it in your paid advertisements in 5.0 and MM&FF, or you could use the stock MAF and only the jumper.

The reason I didn't show my intial dyno tests with your intake, because the MAF sensor was BAD! I didn't want to post this because I didn't want to have people thinking they may have a bad sensor but this has already happened again..

http://forums.bradbarnett.net/showpo...&postcount=530

As for your claims to the 07's being any different then the 05-06's in the MAF tables, they are not. If anyone would like to see I will gladly post a screen shot of all three MAF transfer functions between the 05.06, and 07's. You also have others with 07's that have the GMS kit without reporting any problems. I tune 07's everyday and using the same MAF adjustments as with the 05-06's.

As for my Unbiased tests, yes, that is one thing that I'm KNOWN for, being TRUTHFUL and UNbiased in all of my testing. I will have many different people there to watch as well as I will bring brand new slide rules to that they can use them to measure the inside diameter of the GMS unit. Also, I have another GMS kit, hopefully with a good MAF this time, so test with too. So we'll see....

Thanks, Doug.

 

Hogwash? Please goto www.CnLperformance.com and read the bottom of each page for the part. Then you will see all patent infromation. You know this already JR, why are you trying to dispell this?

As far as not the same pipe, do you want me to show you the box it come in? How about the second one? They are both in the boxes with GMS tape already on them. Also I didnt buy the second one but it was graciously loaned to me by another TMS member...It's still in the plastic.

Thanks, Doug.