Is a BOSS 302 INTAKE MANIFOLD worthwhile on a 13 GT 6sp?
#21
Bullitt Member
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
Join Date: March 19, 2012
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My AFR stays right at 11.7-11.8 (which is calibrated based off E10) based on the wideband at WOT... Not going up or down by .5... That's why I was saying that...
And of course it looks stronger than mine lol. I had an intake and 92 octane mail order tune. He has an intake, boss mani, cat deletes, and 93 octane dyno tune. I hope it looks stronger than mine. I have to say, his numbers are a little high though for the setup. Most are around 430 with his mods.
And of course it looks stronger than mine lol. I had an intake and 92 octane mail order tune. He has an intake, boss mani, cat deletes, and 93 octane dyno tune. I hope it looks stronger than mine. I have to say, his numbers are a little high though for the setup. Most are around 430 with his mods.
#22
Bullitt Member
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
Join Date: August 27, 2012
Location: VA
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You say AFR is inconsistent but look how smooth his power band is, yours is very erratic. Also you say that the numbers seem high but he's got the time slip to prove it. Maybe he has a very intelligent tuner that knows his stuff when it comes to mustangs. Just because it seems unbelievable doesn't mean it's not true. Call it what you want and refute all the evidence I give you. Doesn't make a difference to me.
And his powerband is smooth because of the boss 302 intake manifold... Something I don't have... And I was just saying his number seem high. Not calling bs, just saying they seem high. Could you post the timeslip? I'd be interested in seeing it.
And the tuner is making much more power with this car than very reputable shops make with cars with similar setups with long tubes. That's one hell of an intelligent tuner...
Last edited by RCE EATR; 12/22/12 at 08:45 PM.
#23
Mach 1 Member
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
Join Date: August 3, 2011
Location: East Haven, Connecticut
Posts: 700
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
3 Posts
![Bs](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/smilies/bs.gif)
#24
Bullitt Member
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
Join Date: March 19, 2012
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do know that he does not have the relocation brackets like you do, he is running on stock tires. Were you also on street tires? How much do you weigh? Like I said he is at least 300, wouldn't be surprised if be was pushing 400 tbh. I'm not trying to be mean about the guy, he's really cool, but honestly he's just a big dude
#25
Bullitt Member
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
Join Date: March 19, 2012
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm gonna try to get that timeslip today too
#26
A Man Just Needs Some....
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
My point: If you want a really fun ride, go for the engine mods and the dyno hp. If you want a quarter mile killer, get the chassis set up for it first. You guys would be surprised how well a stock hp GT will do when set up right.
#27
Mach 1 Member
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
Join Date: August 3, 2011
Location: East Haven, Connecticut
Posts: 700
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
3 Posts
I do know that he does not have the relocation brackets like you do, he is running on stock tires. Were you also on street tires? How much do you weigh? Like I said he is at least 300, wouldn't be surprised if be was pushing 400 tbh. I'm not trying to be mean about the guy, he's really cool, but honestly he's just a big dude
![Stick Out Tongue](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/smilies/tongue.gif)
As far as car weight I have a premium automatic so I weight as much as he does in the car. The relocation brackets just fix the geometry of the lower control arms when lowering your car. If he's lowered then he would absolutely need them to correct his angle of the lowers. My best time was on beat up drag radials. Bigs and littles will be on the car come Spring and then I'm hoping to see a significant improvement.
We're getting off track here. For one to see the benefits of a Boss intake (and unless you get a tune from Performance Evolution) you have to be willing to set your shift points at minimum 7600. That's were all the big name tuners are going about their tunes. Whether the intake is worth it or not it will be different for everyone. There's no right or wrong answer.
#28
Im almost stock (Borla axlebacks) so no experience w/ the Boss IM but have been reading everything I can find (along with the Cobrajet). Im thinking that an IM will be a great match for my 3.73s as Im lacking tq in 6th but have plenty in low gears. I understand that 6th is essentially od but Im kinda bogging if I shift below 80mph and Id like to be able to use 6th more. Guessing a tune will help that, even if just from more HPs, but a flatter tq curve would be nice too. I thought I read that a tb will help with that. Am I getting all this right? Are there any gains below 7k? Some are saying above 4.5k. Will be tracking a few times a year but it is a dd.
Last edited by wheelman; 12/23/12 at 07:02 AM.
#29
Mach 1 Member
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
Join Date: August 3, 2011
Location: East Haven, Connecticut
Posts: 700
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
3 Posts
Im almost stock (Borla axlebacks) so no experience w/ the Boss IM but have been reading everything I can find (along with the Cobrajet). Im thinking that an IM will be a great match for my 3.73s as Im lacking tq in 6th but have plenty in low gears. I understand that 6th is essentially od but Im kinda bogging if I shift below 80mph and Id like to be able to use 6th more. Guessing a tune will help that, even if just from more HPs, but a flatter tq curve would be nice too. I thought I read that a tb will help with that. Am I getting all this right? Will be tracking a few times a year but it is a dd.
#30
![Smile](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif)
#31
Bullitt Member
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
Join Date: August 27, 2012
Location: VA
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Im almost stock (Borla axlebacks) so no experience w/ the Boss IM but have been reading everything I can find (along with the Cobrajet). Im thinking that an IM will be a great match for my 3.73s as Im lacking tq in 6th but have plenty in low gears. I understand that 6th is essentially od but Im kinda bogging if I shift below 80mph and Id like to be able to use 6th more. Guessing a tune will help that, even if just from more HPs, but a flatter tq curve would be nice too. I thought I read that a tb will help with that. Am I getting all this right? Are there any gains below 7k? Some are saying above 4.5k. Will be tracking a few times a year but it is a dd.
![Smile](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif)
#32
Bullitt Member
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
Join Date: November 1, 2010
Location: Slower Lower Delaware
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You say AFR is inconsistent but look how smooth his power band is, yours is very erratic. Also you say that the numbers seem high but he's got the time slip to prove it. Maybe he has a very intelligent tuner that knows his stuff when it comes to mustangs. Just because it seems unbelievable doesn't mean it's not true. Call it what you want and refute all the evidence I give you. Doesn't make a difference to me.
So his weight, not a good driver blah blah blah are all excusses he can come up with for defending a crap tune!
#33
Bullitt Member
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
Join Date: March 19, 2012
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know the tuner verry well and he did a complete build for me years ago! I do know that that graph and that dyno tune are crap! it is minipulated a lot! Matt is good on 2v,3v,and maybe gt500's but the copperhead is not his strong suit. Not one he has tuned runs the number nor traps what the Graph or owner is minipulated into thinking he has. I know this from exp from this shop and dyno! And a small town guy ( my town) is all of a sudden making more power than anyother shop with the same mods? not happening
So his weight, not a good driver blah blah blah are all excusses he can come up with for defending a crap tune!
#34
Bullitt Member
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
Join Date: August 27, 2012
Location: VA
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#35
Bullitt Member
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
Join Date: March 19, 2012
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 456
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#36
Bullitt Member
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
Join Date: August 27, 2012
Location: VA
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Haha no way should it be 120. More like 116 or so, stock GT500's don't even do 120. I've got his timeslip here
Attachment 126538
Attachment 126538
With 393whp I ran 12.39 @ 114.7mph with the same 1.89 60' time. Yeah I'm probably 100lbs lighter than him, but that doesn't mean I should be faster than a car with over 50 more whp than me...
Last edited by RCE EATR; 12/23/12 at 08:28 PM.
#37
Bullitt Member
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
Join Date: November 1, 2010
Location: Slower Lower Delaware
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Haha no way should it be 120. More like 116 or so, stock GT500's don't even do 120. I've got his timeslip here
Attachment 126538
Attachment 126538
know wtf your talking about before you type ... a 450 whp 5.0 should and will trap in the 120-125 mph range.. A dyno is a tuning tool and all maters what it runs and traps, and his does not back up the numbers with et's or mph, he runs at the same track and I am telling you from knowing the Car, the Shop the Tuner it is a hey "look what I made" dyno sheet!
to give you an example multiple friends, forum members and people with less mods run harder and faster at the same track same prep and same day! and 3 of them including mine are 418-430 rwhp range and mine being the least power 418 rwhp traps in the 118 consitiantly, with the other 2011-2012 trapping 122-125.. so again like I said get off the guys nuts.. Car is what it is and I have called him out to run and he has declined a few times!
Last edited by stang8psi; 12/23/12 at 09:21 PM.
#38
Shelby GT500 Member
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
Join Date: March 3, 2004
Location: Richmond VA
Posts: 2,633
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Never had mine dynoed.
Here is my buddies dyno graph.
Attachment 126417
He has boss intake, c&l CAI, cat deletes, and 93 octane dyno tune from performance evolution in Delaware
Here is my buddies dyno graph.
Attachment 126417
He has boss intake, c&l CAI, cat deletes, and 93 octane dyno tune from performance evolution in Delaware
#39
GT Member
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
Join Date: October 8, 2012
Location: Bolingbrook
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok not to be a jerk, but the dyno guy must be fudging his numbers... There's NO WAY is he making 450whp and running that slow lol... Guys trap around 117-118 making around 420whp that's why I said around 120 at 450whp.
With 393whp I ran 12.39 @ 114.7mph with the same 1.89 60' time. Yeah I'm probably 100lbs lighter than him, but that doesn't mean I should be faster than a car with over 50 more whp than me...
With 393whp I ran 12.39 @ 114.7mph with the same 1.89 60' time. Yeah I'm probably 100lbs lighter than him, but that doesn't mean I should be faster than a car with over 50 more whp than me...
Different dynes will make numbers seem high. This was a big issue when I was in the Subaru world. If he is on a dynojet Dyno, the numbers of let's say 450/420 would be pretty comparable to like 415/390 on a mustang Dyno. A Dyno is just a tuning tool, and a tuner should always show a before and after curve to see the difference. Numbers don't mean ****. Times do. So with that being said I agree with you RCE EATR
#40
Bullitt Member
![](https://themustangsource.com/forums/images/rank.gif)
Join Date: August 27, 2012
Location: VA
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Different dynes will make numbers seem high. This was a big issue when I was in the Subaru world. If he is on a dynojet Dyno, the numbers of let's say 450/420 would be pretty comparable to like 415/390 on a mustang Dyno. A Dyno is just a tuning tool, and a tuner should always show a before and after curve to see the difference. Numbers don't mean ****. Times do. So with that being said I agree with you RCE EATR
And you're right, times mean something. The fact I run faster than him making supposedly over 50whp less is your proof right there...