Switched CAI out and redynoed
2/20/05, 06:57 AM
#41
GT Member
Join Date: May 1, 2004
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by vld+February 19, 2005, 8:43 AM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(vld @ February 19, 2005, 8:43 AM)</div><div class='quotemain'>
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:
Originally posted by The Boss Hog@February 18, 2005, 1:08 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-2k5pony
<!--QuoteBegin-2k5pony
@February 18, 2005, 2:23 PM
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)
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)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:
wouldnt the rich factory tune account for the loss of power at the top end?
[/b][/quote]
never mind, didnt see that he had the sct tune
2/20/05, 08:36 AM
#42
Originally posted by GOFISCH@February 19, 2005, 4:48 PM
I have a question and an observation. Why do you guys call this a CAI, its not, its a Short Ram Intake(SRI). A Cold Air Intake(CAI) takes air from outside the engine compartment. Also these gains(with either intake) are a little misleading since you still have to spend the money >$400 for a tune to even make the intakes perform correctly.
I have a question and an observation. Why do you guys call this a CAI, its not, its a Short Ram Intake(SRI). A Cold Air Intake(CAI) takes air from outside the engine compartment. Also these gains(with either intake) are a little misleading since you still have to spend the money >$400 for a tune to even make the intakes perform correctly.
If we agree to call it the same thing, knowing very well it's not a "true" cold air everyone will know waht were talking about.
2/20/05, 11:16 AM
#45
Cobra Member
Join Date: December 18, 2004
Posts: 1,415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by GOFISCH@February 20, 2005, 9:45 AM
For a bunch of people you are **** about descriptions and correct nomenclature. I'm surprised y'all let this slide. And I meant the above in only the most postive application. LOL
For a bunch of people you are **** about descriptions and correct nomenclature. I'm surprised y'all let this slide. And I meant the above in only the most postive application. LOL
2/20/05, 11:24 AM
#46
I don't know the exact gains, but running gas lower then 93 will not net near as high of gains.
These cars are very heat and octane sencitive. As soon as the knock sensors see detenation they pull major timing.
I will discuss with the tuner about a 87 and a 93 tune.
Black magic: I welcome any 3rd party testing. All I ask is you do it in a fair and unbiased way. You should do 2 -3 base line runs (allowing adaquite cool down in between) Get a good avarage. Then after another adaquite cool down (20min at least) Install the JLT and the JLT/DTP tune and make a couple more runs. The best way to keep it fair is to data log with the SCT and keep IAT and coolant temps as close as can be. This is what I do on all my tests. This way there is no foul play, all conditions are equal.
And BTW, Aluminum may not be the "fastest" to absorb heat, but it's one of the fastest. Fast enough for me not to use it on a "cold" air induction.
Thanks
Jay
These cars are very heat and octane sencitive. As soon as the knock sensors see detenation they pull major timing.
I will discuss with the tuner about a 87 and a 93 tune.
Black magic: I welcome any 3rd party testing. All I ask is you do it in a fair and unbiased way. You should do 2 -3 base line runs (allowing adaquite cool down in between) Get a good avarage. Then after another adaquite cool down (20min at least) Install the JLT and the JLT/DTP tune and make a couple more runs. The best way to keep it fair is to data log with the SCT and keep IAT and coolant temps as close as can be. This is what I do on all my tests. This way there is no foul play, all conditions are equal.
And BTW, Aluminum may not be the "fastest" to absorb heat, but it's one of the fastest. Fast enough for me not to use it on a "cold" air induction.
Thanks
Jay
2/20/05, 05:13 PM
#47
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by HOTLAP+February 20, 2005, 1:19 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(HOTLAP @ February 20, 2005, 1:19 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-GOFISCH@February 20, 2005, 9:45 AM
For a bunch of people you are **** about descriptions and correct nomenclature. I'm surprised y'all let this slide. And I meant the above in only the most postive application. LOL
For a bunch of people you are **** about descriptions and correct nomenclature. I'm surprised y'all let this slide. And I meant the above in only the most postive application. LOL
[/b][/quote]
No
2/21/05, 12:36 PM
#48
Cobra Member
Join Date: November 27, 2004
Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico
Posts: 1,303
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
I'm surprised at all the folks that are willing to just overlook the thermal properties of aluminum out right. JLT is onto something very important: aluminum conducts a LOT of heat in very short order.
Did you ever wonder why most heat sinks are made of aluminum? Light weight and high thermal conductivity! It comes it at around 136 Btu /(hr-ft-F). Iron is only 46! There are only a few metals that have higher conductivities than aluminum: Au (aka: Gold) at 183, Cu (Copper) at 231 and Ag (Silver) at 247. So to answer a few of the obvious questions: gold and silver are not used for heat sinks for the obvious cost reasons! Plus, silver would oxidise too quickly. Copper is heavier than aluminum, plus it will oxidise quicker than aluminum (and the oxides are NOT good thermal conductors).
Aluminum can dump a LOT of heat into the air very quickly. There are only a few metals that will conduct heat quicker than aluminum. And yes, that does mean that air flowing through a hot aluminum tube will be hotter coming out than air flowing through a plastic tube of the same size and at the same temperature. That DOES impact hp.
Now if we could just get JLT to run a test for us: Make a straight aluminum tube the same size as the CAI tubs and about the same length as standard CAI intakes. Do the same for the plastic they use. Place both pipes in an "oven" that can keep the tubes at around 150F. Have the inlet and the outlet outside of the oven (through the wall). Flow room temperature air through each tube at the same flow rate (say around 600 cfm or so) and measure the air temperature of the air coming out of each tube. Then, you could SEE what kind of different air temperature rises we get out of aluminum and plastic. No more guessing.
Did you ever wonder why most heat sinks are made of aluminum? Light weight and high thermal conductivity! It comes it at around 136 Btu /(hr-ft-F). Iron is only 46! There are only a few metals that have higher conductivities than aluminum: Au (aka: Gold) at 183, Cu (Copper) at 231 and Ag (Silver) at 247. So to answer a few of the obvious questions: gold and silver are not used for heat sinks for the obvious cost reasons! Plus, silver would oxidise too quickly. Copper is heavier than aluminum, plus it will oxidise quicker than aluminum (and the oxides are NOT good thermal conductors).
Aluminum can dump a LOT of heat into the air very quickly. There are only a few metals that will conduct heat quicker than aluminum. And yes, that does mean that air flowing through a hot aluminum tube will be hotter coming out than air flowing through a plastic tube of the same size and at the same temperature. That DOES impact hp.
Now if we could just get JLT to run a test for us: Make a straight aluminum tube the same size as the CAI tubs and about the same length as standard CAI intakes. Do the same for the plastic they use. Place both pipes in an "oven" that can keep the tubes at around 150F. Have the inlet and the outlet outside of the oven (through the wall). Flow room temperature air through each tube at the same flow rate (say around 600 cfm or so) and measure the air temperature of the air coming out of each tube. Then, you could SEE what kind of different air temperature rises we get out of aluminum and plastic. No more guessing.
2/21/05, 04:21 PM
#49
Here is a test that a customer did and sent me the results. Aluminum isn't on here, but knowing it's worse then the materials in the test we can see why it's not a good idea for a "cold" AI.
I did some recent tests using a Raytek AutoPro pyrometer and hair dryer to determine the heat dissipation and absorption properties of certain materials. I have tried just about all of these materials as cold air systems at one point or another and was shocked at some of the results I found, but not all.
Taking a 3.5" diameter pipe of different materials and positioning a hot blowing hair dryer 2 inches in front of the outside of the pipe for 2 minutes. Then using the AutoPro take temperature readings on the outside of pipe where the heat was directly pointed at, then immediately take the same temperature readings on the inside of the pipe directly opposite where the hair dryer was blowing on the outside. I wanted to see which material would be best to use in a cold air system application and keep the air inside cool as it flowed, would absorb the least amount of heat and prevent heat saturation.
Material
Difference between outside and inside
Chrome exhaust pipe
8 degrees F
Original WMS Velocity Tube
10 degrees F
Stock Ford plastic airbox
12 degrees F
Volant airbox
40 degrees F
PVC pipe (white)
100 degrees F
PVC pipe (white) wrapped with heat reduction blanket
117 degrees F
Now I didn't do this test, but it makes since!
I did some recent tests using a Raytek AutoPro pyrometer and hair dryer to determine the heat dissipation and absorption properties of certain materials. I have tried just about all of these materials as cold air systems at one point or another and was shocked at some of the results I found, but not all.
Taking a 3.5" diameter pipe of different materials and positioning a hot blowing hair dryer 2 inches in front of the outside of the pipe for 2 minutes. Then using the AutoPro take temperature readings on the outside of pipe where the heat was directly pointed at, then immediately take the same temperature readings on the inside of the pipe directly opposite where the hair dryer was blowing on the outside. I wanted to see which material would be best to use in a cold air system application and keep the air inside cool as it flowed, would absorb the least amount of heat and prevent heat saturation.
Material
Difference between outside and inside
Chrome exhaust pipe
8 degrees F
Original WMS Velocity Tube
10 degrees F
Stock Ford plastic airbox
12 degrees F
Volant airbox
40 degrees F
PVC pipe (white)
100 degrees F
PVC pipe (white) wrapped with heat reduction blanket
117 degrees F
Now I didn't do this test, but it makes since!
2/21/05, 04:40 PM
#51
That's what I would say. The JLT is MUCH bigger then the stock pipe and the C&L, it's a true 4" id. Plus it's much smoother inside.
The added air needs more fuel and results in more power.
Thanks
Jay
The added air needs more fuel and results in more power.
Thanks
Jay
2/23/05, 06:46 AM
#56
V6 Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: January 10, 2005
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by 2005RedGT@February 23, 2005, 5:40 AM
I will order now if you are ready
I am excited to see the comparision.
-Bryan
I will order now if you are ready
I am excited to see the comparision. -Bryan
Finally, we have a believer...
2/23/05, 06:52 AM
#57
Cobra Member
Join Date: November 13, 2004
Posts: 1,431
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would not say I am a believer but I believe in giving the benefit of the doubt and at least trying. If it does not do what it says, well I will let others know. I have been very honest on the board about what I have done and tried to help others.
Now, i HOPE i become a believer I hope i get some nice gains. If it was to gain 8+ rwhp and / or torque over the MMR I woudl call it a great prodcut and VERY sucessfull. If I get gains in the 8rwhp + 20rwtq then I will sing the praise of JLT . If it only gets a small upgrade, well it will be worth it.
Dyno testing will tell us. I am hoping to order it today have it overnighted and Dynoed this Saturday.
-Bryan
Now, i HOPE i become a believer
I hope i get some nice gains. If it was to gain 8+ rwhp and / or torque over the MMR I woudl call it a great prodcut and VERY sucessfull. If I get gains in the 8rwhp + 20rwtq then I will sing the praise of JLT . If it only gets a small upgrade, well it will be worth it.Dyno testing will tell us.
I am hoping to order it today have it overnighted and Dynoed this Saturday.-Bryan
