2k5pony

Wow...I couldn't believe it. My tuner had me come out to his shop this morning to see the difference in numbers between my C&L CAI and a JLT with my mods. Needless to say what a difference. It has a slighter larger conical filter with a more mild bend coming off the throttle body. It actually flows about 15% better than my C&L did. As you can see my numbers jumped to 342 RWTQ at 310.1 RWHP. Guess what stayed on my car and what ended up in my trunk. Because I let them use it on my car I got the new intake for practically nothing. I am real happy!!! The CAI is the same one gunk mudder posted and we actually had our cars tuned at the same dyno. The JLT sells for 150.00 and C&L for 389.00 so you guys do the math B)

max2000jp

Wow that is impressive. I can't believe that the JLT intake flows that much better than the C&L intake. The JLT intake is a great bang for the buck mod.

DrunkenDragon713

website??

2k5pony

http://www.jlttruecoldair.com/

The Boss Hog

OK, call me a pessimist, but something doesn't sound right. First, if you look at the dyno curve, the "improvement" is in the low and mid-range and it dies out completely by red-line. If the JLT really does flow "15% better" than the C&L, the gain should up at the high end where the C&L's inferior (supposedly) flow capability would have an effect. Look at all the other dyno comparisons we have seen comparing the particular companies CAI to the stock setup. They all show maximum gains at the high end. Secondly, if you look at the shape of the horsepower curve for the JLT it looks like most others (peak at ~5300rpm then relatively flat). But the horsepower curve for the C&L shows its peak at redline. No other '05 N/A curve that I have seen has that characteristic. Finally, look at the last note at the bottom of the dyno sheet: "SAME TUNED USED FOR BOTH PULLS WITH SOME MODIFICATION TO THE MRF CURVE". Because of the differences in the mass air meters, you can't use the same tune on both. Rather, each should have had a tune specifically optimized for the particular system on that day, on that dyno. Also, what was the modification done to the MRF curve?

I'm not saying it can't be true and if you are satisfied then thats great. But for me, I'm saying I'm not convinced it was apples-to-apples.

The Boss Hog . . . . . . :notnice:

peet

Dude someone (you/tuner) really screwed up on this dyno pull. The graph states: "JLT red line" and "C&L purple" ... the purple line is the one with the higher gains! if that's the case - why are you saying the JLT did better? Makes no sense!

Also I have to go with the Boss on this observation, no way the gains are all from 0 to mid. That too makes absolutely no sense. It's like someone let go of the throttle at around 5200.

ZwerRacing

Yaa I too must agree this does not seem right. Something is wrong what it is I dont know but something has to be.

2k5pony

OK, call me a pessimist, but something doesn't sound right. First, if you look at the dyno curve, the "improvement" is in the low and mid-range and it dies out completely by red-line. If the JLT really does flow "15% better" than the C&L, the gain should up at the high end where the C&L's inferior (supposedly) flow capability would have an effect. Look at all the other dyno comparisons we have seen comparing the particular companies CAI to the stock setup. They all show maximum gains at the high end. Secondly, if you look at the shape of the horsepower curve for the JLT it looks like most others (peak at ~5300rpm then relatively flat). But the horsepower curve for the C&L shows its peak at redline. No other '05 N/A curve that I have seen has that characteristic. Finally, look at the last note at the bottom of the dyno sheet: "SAME TUNED USED FOR BOTH PULLS WITH SOME MODIFICATION TO THE MRF CURVE". Because of the differences in the mass air meters, you can't use the same tune on both. Rather, each should have had a tune specifically optimized for the particular system on that day, on that dyno. Also, what was the modification done to the MRF curve?

I'm not saying it can't be true and if you are satisfied then thats great. But for me, I'm saying I'm not convinced it was apples-to-apples.

The Boss Hog . . . . . . :notnice:
[/b][/quote]



Let me start by saying that yes he did mix the color code up...JLT is purple and C&L is red. As for as same day same temperature these pulls were done wihtin the time it took to take the intakes on and off so it is exactly apples to apples. Of course the tune is slightly different b/c each CAI has a different MAF setup. This has to be adjusted for each specific application. Nothing else about the tune was changed. If you look at the dyno sheet the numbers were achieved w/in 3 pulls of each other. Same car,same mods, different CAIs...C&L was 302.8hp@ 322 TQ JLT was 310.1hp@ 342 TQ. The proof is in the pudding, pessimist or not it is black and white.

DTPRACING

Hey Guys,
We made a mistake on the graph when we were typing info, the red line is the C&L cold air and the purple line is the JLT cold air kit.

The car was dynod again this moring with the C&L which is actually run #.006 and then we put on the JLT kit and reworked the MAF curve for the JLT kit. the final result was run #.008, if you look in the box on the graph you can see that we used run.005 because that was the highest run for the C&L.

By the way, if you have more air flow at 1500 rpm and up you CAN & WILL make more power as is shown on the graph.

Have any of the na-sayers tuned on an 05 yet and know anything about "knock retard"? On the run .008 what you are seeing at 6000 is a result of knock retard kicking in.

subzero05

Yes, I just noticed the same thing PEET posted about..The indicator at the bottom of the graph clearly states C&L intake in purple, which shows the higher figures...What up?

DTPRACING

Hey Subzero,
look at the 2 posts right above yours!!!

169stang

Someone is going to have a heck of a time convincing people that they made a typo when specifying whose color was who's on the dyno graph. When you're promoting a product, you can't afford to make a boo boo like this one which shows the competitors product out-performing your own. I see an edit to that post before long. I don't like how that curve really drops off after 4800 rpm. I don't quite understand why, but when I've been to the track, I've been getting my best times shifting at 6000 rpm. How does a dyno actually work? What gear are these dynoed at? Can one intake be dynoed in 3rd gear and another in 4th gear or are they all dynoed going thru all the gears?
If those dyno numbers are truely accurate, I would buy one for $150-today. If and when I get charge motion plates, I better see 300+ hp at the rw.

2k5pony

If anyone thinks these numbers are bs, PM me and I'll give you a good deal on my C&L w/free s/h ...Just trying to help people out that are still wondering what works and what dosen't. The car has responded to my mods more so than originally expected so I am very happy with the results.

169stang

NO one said they were bs, I simply said it'll be difficult due to the error/typo.

The Boss Hog

Your comment about an increase in airflow at 1500 rpm "CAN & WILL" result in more power is obvious. The question is AT 1500 RPM does the engine demand (assuming 100% volumetric efficiency) more cfm than the C&L can deliver? If so, then the C&L had darn well better be choking the heck out of the engine at 6000 rpm. Instead, it looks like you cut off the graph at 6000 rpm just as the C&L was catching up to the other one.

Yours may very well be the better CAI, but that graph and the use of buss words doesn't prove it to me.

The Boss Hog

2k5pony

Once the dyno runs the numbers and computes the graphs, the tuner can type whatever they want on the sheet. Just a simple oversight, that's all. Don't get me wrong I really liked the C&L and think cosmetically it looks great. But of course I'm not bolting parts on for looks, I want to drag my bumber

2k5pony

Your comment about an increase in airflow at 1500 rpm "CAN & WILL" result in more power is obvious. The question is AT 1500 RPM does the engine demand (assuming 100% volumetric efficiency) more cfm than the C&L can deliver? If so, then the C&L had darn well better be choking the heck out of the engine at 6000 rpm. Instead, it looks like you cut off the graph at 6000 rpm just as the C&L was catching up to the other one.

Yours may very well be the better CAI, but that graph and the use of buss words doesn't prove it to me.

The Boss Hog
[/b][/quote]


It is not even their product!! The JLT is a guy who has been doing CAIs for awhile...look at the previous post for his website. Let me reiterate, the JLT CAI and my dynoshop are not affiliated. They are just showing results from two different products that I wanted tested with my setup.

169stang

Just have JLT send me their CAI and I'll have my car dynoed before and after installation. I'll let you know what the gains are!
What's $150 for JLT to prove their product. Look at my posts about Steeda Lower control arms. If it works for me, I let just about everyone and their sister's know about it. This is just what you see on this site too.

DTPRACING

If you put the JLT cold air on a stock car it will need to be tuned to get the A/F's correct.
The first car we did made 253 rwhp and 280 rwtq baseline. We installed the JLT kit and the A/F's were 16.2. We tuned the car via an SCT Xcalibrator and the car made 288 rwhp and 320 rwtq with no other mods.

Not sure why JLT has to give away another CAI to prove what has already been proven.

nicksolheim

With all the performance numbers between the two CAI's aside. The price gap alone is probably enough to persway ( bad speller ) most people to go with the JLT CAI.

Good info, though.

I would be lost without threads like these.

thanks!