89Trooper

YES, it does. Have you ever driven a Mustang with a shaker? Before and after? When I accelerate onto the FL Turnpike every night on the way home from work, I can feel the difference the shaker makes by how hard it pulls in 3rd gear. Now it pulls just as hard in 3rd as it does in 2nd. Probably because I'm approaching 70-80 MPH and start to get cold air forced into the shaker scoop. I do this nightly... before the shaker, and after the shaker. There is a difference. There is an increase in performance.

I'm glad I don't believe everything I read on the internet.

That is true, I forgot about that! That block-off plate forced (pun intended) the engine to only get it's air from the shaker scoop through the twists and turns of the shaker tube. THIS is what caused the decrease of HP, and only this - it wasn't getting enough air. They no longer include that block off plate in the kit.

Now there is an additional 3" hole in the stock air box (if being used like I do).

The engine is now going to pull air from the fenderwell and through the additional 3" hole going to the shaker scoop (as proven in the video).

Please... please... anybody... prove to me that this will decrease HP.

Cleveland

want another sugar pill? I have quite a few I could sell you...



-Dan

Mxyzptlk

LOL! -- you guess are great. Just wish I could afford one to test this discussion. It makes since to me that on a dyno you'll lose some #s but who cares. I want to see how it affect 1/4 mile times. Thats the real measurement. BTW, how does the Shaker avoid sucking water?

TacoBill

Yes, I forgot about that block off plate they used to include.

I also saw an early Shaker design where the cold air duct was routed to the top of the factory airbox cover (as in 'after' the filter )


I don't think the water can 'flow' from the Shaker scoop all the way to where it enters the airbox like air can, there's simply too many curves and bends. If any water does make it that far, it'll just puddle at the bottom of the airbox, not even close to the air filter.
There's several guys here with Shakers that have driven in some torrent rainstorms with no ill effects at all.

89Trooper

Please explain how "this makes sense to you". I have an additional source of cold air for the engine to get air from. I fail to see how I would lose HP #s on a dyno. I'm not saying I'll see more, but I would love to know how I would get less.

I have driven through quite a few HUGE rain storms and never had a single problem. Engine never skipped a beat.

On CDC's site:

Q: Is water or inclement weather driving a concern with the ‘05+ Shaker?
A: No. The system was designed with water management as a top priority. The Engine cover includes four drain holes with attached high-temp rubber tubing to direct water away from the engine. Further, water escape holes have been designed in the ductwork, allowing any water to escape prior to reaching the factory air box. If water does make it to the air box it will drain out the bottom.

How much? I'm starting to fall asleep here at work.

Fords4Ever

Are you talking about your gigantic hood or your flamed cam covers?

Stangers

...more salt please

All the guy threadstarter said was....see it does suck air.....reminds of that game when you whisper somthing in somebodys ear and it turns out to be a whole new story by the 10th person lololo?

Cleveland

and that makes sense how? They are cosmetic mods, just like the Shaker.

I guess your ignorance allows you to speak out of place.

Again, the Shaker looks great but if you think a hood is getting you down the road faster you should get a lifted shovel scoop instead. Ram Air, what a laugh that is on "street cars".

Go buy yourselves a clue and speak to people that have tested a thing or two on this current platform.

-Dan

89Trooper

Test it without the block-off plate and I'm sure it won't be any different than stock on a dyno - no more, no less.

I have tested it on the street and I feel a difference like I stated at the top of this page - post #41.

Cleveland

You should do a better test. Disconnect the tubing and try it and take it out for a drive, reconnect the tubing and repeat. Tell me after that if you can "feel" a difference.

-Dan

89Trooper

Wouldn't removing the tubing be the way I drove it when stock? I tested it that way for 3 months before getting the shaker.

Seriously, though, the only point of this thread was to prove that air does make it from the entrance of the scoop all the way to the throttle body. Whether it be forced, sucked, or a combination of both. Although, I believe it is the latter (at least when moving).

Even at slower speeds, the scoop is filled with colder-than-engine-compartment air. This is the air that the engine is sucking - that's why I say it's a combination of both. Cold air is forced into the scoop, and sucked the rest of the way. This is really just common sense. I never claimed air is forced, or rammed, all the way through the bends to the throttle body.

With that blocking-plate on, the cars did bog during acceleration, so I can see where it is still believed that the shakers decrease HP, but I think CDC even told people that bought earlier kits to remove that blocking-plate.

Fords4Ever

Well since you asked, you said:

...and you implied by saying "sugar pill" that the Shaker setup is a placebo, in effect making him feel like he is getting some performance benefit. I responded by indicating that your gigantic hood is your sugar pill. Obviously your hood is not functional since you have it listed as a "visual mod" on your webpage. But it makes you feel better somehow (like a placebo might) otherwise you wouldn't have spent the money on it.

The point here really is that you are giving this guy a hard time and all he did was claim that his Shaker actually draws air "in" which he proved in the video. He also claims that the car pulls harder than without it.

You claim on the other hand that the Shaker setup actually causes a loss in power but have failed to offer any proof. So explain to me how your input has been constructive in any way?

OKCMustangGT

+1 My first post on this issue stressed just that. Tom proved a point and apparently Cleveland took offense to that, why I am not sure.

tom281

If you haven't noticed, Dan is in another forum-bashing mood right now- not only in this thread (post#29), but also see post #23 here: http://forums.bradbarnett.net/showth...t=56002&page=2

34124231user

I'm not knockin the shaker- I love the shaker! But-

A while back, one of you engineers posted a really great piece on ram air effect, with published references to back it up- anybody remember where that post is? He basically disproved the notion that any gains could be had from ram air on a car driven at street speeds up to something well over 100 mph. It was an excellent write-up.

89Trooper

I really wasn't setting out to prove or disprove anything about ram air.

But can we agree that air is forced, or rammed, into the scoop (just the scoop)? And said air is then sucked into the air box? That's really all I was showing.

Stoenr

Agreed, end of thread!!

89Trooper

End of thread? That's no fun...

89Trooper

TacoBill

Well, if you insist on keeping this thread alive...

I recently conducted my own experiment of how much suction my Shaker has under various RPMs and using different test mediums.

Keep in mind, I'm no longer using the factory airbox. I have the K&N CAI with the Shaker duct attaching to the heatshield.

I concluded that with my intake set-up, little to no suction exists while the car is stationary. At highway speeds, I can maybe see the Shaker providing cold air directly to the filter, but then again, there's already a whirlwind of cool air rushing in from the front end.

Performance aside, it looks cool as heck!