msully

But at the end of the day the GMS CAI will increase hp a similiar amount vs the C&L that requires a tune. I have the GMS CAI and 2.5" exhaust and increased my rwhp by 33hp with these mods alone. I now have 283 rwhp on a mustang dyno. I run 87 octane fuel and do not have to have a seperate tune. I know some people want/need the tune but many of us are fine with the simplicity of the of the GMS unit and not requiring a tune to get comparable hp.

It is clear that a few of the folks on this forum have an axe to grind with Granatelli and thats fine but the bottom line is that their product does work and doesn't require the added expense of a seperate tuner or higher octane fuel to make comparable power to the C&L with tuner. Do the test and see for yourself. I will not be sending my unit back for a refund.

eci

33rwhp from a CAI and exhaust? I guess you got some super Mustang or maybe mine is a lemon. I'm making 283RWHP on a Dynojet with C&L CAI, Bamachips tune, Corsa X, and Corsa mufflers. 16 RWHP total gain.

On a Dynojet, you'd be over 300 RWHP msully. I don't see how this is possible with just a CAI and exhaust. Do you have longtubes too?

LBJay

Nope, the pressure drop is a result of restrictions in the volume of the air flow. That pressure drop means less than 100% of maximum theoretical flow at the intake. See here for a much better explantion then I could every do.

Fords4Ever

Ski...My point was that while the science of each and every step of the way from air into the intake thru to the exit at the exhaust tips is interesting, what really matters at the end of the day is which system puts the most power on the ground - period.

I have yet to see a comparison of the GMS CAI anywhere. I have read some shootouts but Granatelli is never included, why?

As a consumer that will probably do a CAI w/out a tune for a little while or even possibly until the warranty is up, I want to know which system will be most beneficial. Having said that, until someone does a heads up comparison on these two units it's all just theory.

Doug@C&L

I have no axe to grind but when I find inaccurate information I like to let everyone know. The information posted by JR about the size and the dimensions of the unit aren't correct and I dont feel it should be said as so.

As for the GMS unit, I am not trying to condemn it. To do so would be to condemn the C&L unit as well. They both flow nearly the same, barely a difference, are sized just the same and when used without the jumper and MAF included with the GMS kit, require the same tune as noted by JR.

Horsepower and Torque on the dyno will be the same, and I'll glady show this come the second weekend in November at the St. Louis dynoday.

Thanks, Doug.

Doug@C&L

This isn't theory, this is scientifically tested, repeatable results. I plan on testing them and then I guess we'll get into the was the engine warm, cold, outside temp questions then?

Silverfox

it would be a nicer test to include a few other popular CAI's..like a WMS that also claims to not need a tune and doesn't supply a jumper.

Doug@C&L

I have dynotested the WMS kits, both 80 and 95mm kits but I was doing it to develope a tune for both. The 80mm kit was able to be used with the stock tuning but the WOT wasn't what I liked and the midrange was a bit off. The biggest problem with testing these two kits though was the modifications that had to be done just to test them. I ended up using a MAFia set to do nothing and I used it to extend the wiring enough to reach the MAF sensor. I then used a bungy cord to hold the coolant tank up and out of the way.

I tried looking for the post but it must have been lost in the last server swap/crash? On a side note it did make good power, right up there with some of the other big name kits, the only downfall was all of the mods to use it. The funny thing, the 95 made the same power as the 80 but required alot more tune adjustment to get it right, of course this was on a stock car and I'm sure it would have done better with more bolt on mods, like the C&L 95mm Racer kit does.

Thanks, Doug.

SilverHorse-----Racing

It's not that people have an axe to grind. It's that although there are only so many ways to do something on a particular car, it is always very easy to duplicate someone else's efforts, normally at a much lower cost than the original, which has development and engineering costs to cover. If you want to buy products made in America, by American workers, you most certainly can. If you are more inclined to always buy the lowest-priced product, or the one with the best marketing program, no matter the origin / source of said product, you are always free to do that as well.

It's also strange that there are so many people that have "an axe to grind" with the same company. I have detractors as well, but I don't have a "following" of detractors that are at every turn.

Additionally, Doug has done no detracting of any kind. He has provided everyone with verifiable, repeatable FACTS, facts that he said to go and check if anyone is in doubt as to their accuracy. This is not someone targeting someone else - this is an independent third party doing their homework and verifying an advertiser's claims.

And normally, if I put a technical specification in one of my posts, it is as close to accurate as is possible, not 10, 20, or 30% off of the true numbers (in the case of performance or suspension parts, this is a big deal) Also, every piece we make is done here in America, and I can take pictures of parts in process (along with the day's copy of the newspaper like in the old days of kidnappings and stuff) to show where they are being made - as can C&L, Steeda, and other reputable names in the business. Not everyone can do this, and there is a reason for it.

I've had a couple of our products compared to cheap knock-offs, and there will always be a market for the knock-off. But the difference in price 9 times out of 10 comes at a difference in quality as well, so it's something to take into account. It also comes at the cost of someone's job here stateside, so next time you complain about the trade deficit being what it is, remember where all your purchases eventually were sourced from.

Again, there is always room to improve a product and make it better than the original - this is innovation, and the way in which our whole society is built - one good idea on top of another. But when one good idea is copied for the sole purpose of profit, and no regard is given to improving the product, but only to improving the profit margin by changing the materials used or the source of labor, well then, that's just not playing fair.

Does it happen? Yes.

Should it happen? No.

Should people support companies that are known in the industry for doing this? I don't. But everyone is free to make their own decision.

For your further reading enjoyment, I offer you:

http://corner-carvers.com/forums/sho...ght=granatelli

It is full of links to other Mustang sites as well, where the discsussions go on pretty much like here whenever that name comes up. Too bad too, because that name used to mean something.

Again, I also don't have any dog in this fight, because none of our products are in question with this company's practices. But there are others out there known for the same thing that we do take issue with, ones that even go as far as to use our photos on their website because they didn't even have real product available yet, but are copying our product exactly.

That's actually our picture that has been photoshopped to remove the black and polished versions from the photo then they conveniently added their watermark to our image. How do I know? The anodizing in that photo has certain flaws in it, and it is a picture of the original prototype door, not our production pieces. I can post the original if you like, since I took the picture... Of course, with a large advertising budget and the ability to low-ball the production, they try to undercut us (a small guy by comparison currently) by a whole 10.00 - I wonder though if they are using stainless hardware, neobydeum magnets that are CAD plated, anodizing the parts, etc... or ??

On second thought, why should I just post something you might not believe - here's the original photo - check out the anodizing marks especially on the outer ring near the top of the part and the shadows, etc... and decide for yourself who is reputable in this business. BTW, this photo was taken Feb 15th of 2006 - the company in question just decided to release "their" fuel door about a month ago.

shatter

Thanks for the post Doug. I appreciate your efforts in this matter.

Fords4Ever

Doug...don't get me wrong I appreciate the work you did collecting the data and if JR is making false statements, knowingly or not, he should be called out on it like you did. Additionally I didn't get the vibe that you are anti-GMS either, it sounded like sound investigation work!

Like I said before, hopefully JR will respond, maybe he just made a mistake, maybe he's just being more salesman then engineer, I don't know. I do find it interesting that there is such a consistent anti-GMS following, again I don't mean you Doug.

I do have a question however based on you refering to outside temp, etc.:

Can't a dyno be performed in a climate controlled environment which eliminates those variables? I'm not talking a Bio-Dome here but rather something indoors with good AC or heat that won't vary greatly between runs?

On a side not if I do ever get a CAI, I probably will end up with a tune eventually because I hear the throttle lag when downshifting is only resolved with a tune. And sounds like you are "the man" for quality tunes.

scramblr

Busted....

metroplex

Granatelli has rebadged a lot of Made in China products in the past and have received some flack in the past for this on other Mustang boards.

Thanks for the informative post Doug! I'll avoid Granatelli's products from now on.

GT John

You can dyno a car wtih a WMS intake with the hood open on a dyno and acheive simular results as you would with a C&L. Been there done that.

But, the only effective and accurate way to test a WMS intake is to drive the car at highway speeds or at the drag strip and datalog the results.

I switched to the WMS because it made more sense to me to have the intake air coming in from the cars front. Like the Corvette and Vipers have theirs arranged. (maybe others, these two come to mind)

Man, I paid a lot of money for my powder coated C&L and even more money for the WMS.

I still have the C&L out in the garage sitting on a shelf. That thing sure is pretty.

If I ever super charge my car I will certainly manufacture ducting from the WMS to the input of the S/C because, IMHO, thats the way it should be.

This sure has been an interesting thread. no finger pointing. just some facts.

Oh yeah. the C&L tune was a 93 octane performance tune from a different tuner, whose name I will not mention here. The tune was excellent. The A/F was at 13.1.

After installing the WMS my engine went lean driving normal street and highway speeds. This indicated to me that the WMS was sucking in more air than the C&L. Thats when I contacted Doug and asked for his help, which he so graciously provided. Been happy ever since.

Unfortunately, I still have this need for more speed. $$$$$$$$$

metroplex

That just means you don't have the correct air transfer function. A dynotune will solve that problem for the high AD counts, and a wideband AF monitor for the low-end/idling.

Is the stock air intake a genuine restriction? I've heard BONE stock 05 GTs running 13.2 in the 1/4 mile. If I ever ran that with a factory stock S197 GT, I'd just pack it up and go home because that's pretty **** good.

SpeedRoush

Doug's Quote:

"Finally I did some datalogging with the GMS supplied jumper harness and got some wierd results. With the"C&L Street" air meter housing in place (with the stock MAF sensor) and NO TUNE, the short term fuel trims went up in the + 20's as expected, in other words it NEEDED a tune to correct this. I then plugged in Granatelli's "MAF Jumper" and the fuel trims immediately went into the - (negative) teens. It ranged anywhere from -4 at cruise to -14 or so at idle, which is barely within CEL specs but on my tunes I like for it to be within Ford specs of +/- 5% of 0."

Doug,
Thanks for the writeup Based on what you said above does this mean it is not safe to run the GMS CAI without a tune...as advertised???

The reason I bought mine as I'm sure others did was because I didn't want to have to flash anything and I wanted some extra juice. But I don't want this at the expense of it causing damage...

As far as the copying issue...Ford advertises their cars as MADE IN THE USA but you look under the hood and it's really mexico and canada...let's not even talk about "American Made" Harley's

oh yeah, so who did come up with the cheeseburger first? McD's or Burger Queen?

GT John

Sorry man. If your talking about driving a new GT from the showroom floor with a full tank of gas and spare in the trunk straight to the drag strip and running 13.2, all I've got to say is...

It cost a lot of money to get the stock GT into the low 13's. I know my GT will run in the high 12's. But thats with very little gas in the tank, no spare tire and some good M/T Drag Tires.

My GT is a daily driver and turning 13.4 in a 1/4 mile with a full tank of gas and all the other crap I've got in the trunk made me feel pretty good.

Doug@C&L

I'm sorry I didn't really make this as clearly as it should be. This test was done using the GMS jumper harness but using the stock MAF sensor, not the GMS sensor. I did this only to see what would happen if I used their jumper with my stock sensor and C&L to see if it would make it where I didn't have to have a tune with my C&L for proper a/f. In short, no it didn't, using the stock meter.

If you use the MAF sensor that was provided with the GMS kit then the A/F should be acceptable within Ford's limits. There again I will test this in more detail when I goto dynotune a car in St. Louis. So you should have nothing to worry about nor those who already have the kits.

If you were to ever get a custom tune/dynotune for the GMS kit though the absolute best thing to do is to return to using your Stock MAF meter because it has the correct range for the GT and doesn't require a jumper to start from. Then have it tuned for the best possible A/F ratio's and you'll do even better.

Thanks, Doug.

SilverHorse-----Racing

But John,

Who has the better burger? The .99 special at Mc-Wen-King, or the one that costs 4.99 at TGIF or Chili's ? Again, the choice is yours as to who to buy from, but the simple fact remains that there is a difference, whether you always see it or not may be another story, but it's there.

As to the made in the USA - The Mustang has always had parts from both our borders to the north and south brought in, along with a bunch of electronics from Germany, Japan, etc.. thrown into the mix for good measure. This is a case of the best source providing the piece to complete the finished product, not shipping the whole car offshore just to save 1.00-2.00 per part in production costs, which is what is happening here (remember the difference between the US and Mexican 302 block? The Mexican block was the one to have for performance use..) Trust me, our parts could be made for a LOT less if I was willing to ship the production overseas to China, Malaysia, Taiwan, etc.. and really, in the short term, who would know or care? But in the long term, when the specified materials aren't used or finished properly, or a customer can't afford to buy our parts because he doesn't have a job because some other guy shipped his job overseas too, who is the real winner?

metroplex

Someone on our Crown Vic boards bought a 2005 GT with the 5-speed manual and ran like 13.6 bone stock right off the showroom floor. After about 10k miles of driving, he ran 13.2 on the 1/4, still bone stock. I suppose he could have ran it with an empty trunk, but knowing this guy, he just ran it like he normally drives his car (half tank or so of gas, trunk full of stuff, stock tires, etc...) He later traded in the car with bald rear tires