Cold Air Intake Debate
7/6/12, 11:09 AM
#61
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: January 10, 2011
Location: Houston
Posts: 561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I ordered the Steeda Instake and SCT Tuner from AM. I have not installed it on my car yet and Ive had it for 2 weeks now. This heat is just making me want to stay indoors all day. Hell I cant even enjoy the pool since it reads 92 degrees.
Maybe if the weather breaks on Sunday I will get my chance to install it and feel the differance for myself.
Maybe if the weather breaks on Sunday I will get my chance to install it and feel the differance for myself.
7/6/12, 05:36 PM
#62
GT Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: November 6, 2007
Location: Peotone, Illinois
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
7/6/12, 11:02 PM
#65
Tasca Super Boss 429 Member
Join Date: November 14, 2007
Location: Pacific NW USA
Posts: 3,652
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
6 Posts
Last edited by Five Oh Brian; 7/6/12 at 11:06 PM.
7/25/12, 07:31 AM
#66
Bullitt Member
Join Date: August 2, 2006
Location: Central Jerseee
Posts: 355
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On the Ford website it says CAI is standard on 2013 models and has a picture of the Cold Air Induction box. However on my V6 I don't see that, does it still have CAI standard too?
http://www.ford.com/cars/mustang/
http://www.ford.com/cars/mustang/
7/25/12, 08:05 AM
#67
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: January 10, 2011
Location: Houston
Posts: 561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 2011+ GT's have "Cold Air Induction" but it's still a drop in filter opposed to a cone style filter. It's much less restrictive than the intake from previous mustangs, but still not as efficient as aftermarket CAI's.
7/25/12, 08:45 AM
#68
Bullitt Member
Join Date: January 5, 2012
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 339
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I found this on another forums:
I find all the hype surrounding K&N air filters very misleading at best, fraudulent at worst, for the most part. An oiled gauze filter is nothing new. When I had a BSA motorcycle dealership back in the late 60’s, the (British) bikes came with oiled gauze filters. Their construction was virtually identical to today’s K&N filters. At that time, most owners changed to “Filtron” filters, a green oiled foam type filter. It was universally recognized the oiled gauze filters were woefully inefficient.
.
Fast foreword to the current filter market. The oiled gauze filters are back! Many tests have proven the K&N filters to be a VERY POOR choice. The Honda Ridgeline club (most recently) performed tests comparing a Delco pleated paper filter to a K&N. The paper filter allowed .4 grams of silicate material (to wit: dirt) to pass through. The K&N allowed a WHOPPING 7.0 grams. In addition, the paper filter was capable of retaining 573.9 grams of silicate (dirt), the K&N was limited to retaining 122.6 grams.
.
This post is in response to the “Tips to Increase Engine Life” subject. The common consensus it that a K&N filter can increase engine wear 10% over that of a quality pleated paper filter. I expect to be inundated by K&N filter aficionados arguing in support of their screed-door / cotton filters. Facts are facts. K&N defends the fact a person may view openings right through a K&N filter media with their “micronic invisible oily hairs” nonsense. Bottom line, maximum engine life is achieved with a good pleated paper air filter.
.
The claim by K&N that their filters become more efficient as they collect debris is quite telling. Of course, as soon as the 10 to 20 micron holes get plugged, there are increasingly smaller holes remaining. As a K&N filter nears complete blockage, it approached the efficiency of the OEM paper filters. By that time the engine is struggling for air.
.
I can’t argue with the profound popularity and seeming legitimacy of K&N filters. I also remember the “mothballs in the gas tank”, “magnets on the gas line”, and now the HHO nonsense. Popularity and widespread use of a product may be generated by massive and continuous advertising, in spite of its legitimate merits.
.
Fast foreword to the current filter market. The oiled gauze filters are back! Many tests have proven the K&N filters to be a VERY POOR choice. The Honda Ridgeline club (most recently) performed tests comparing a Delco pleated paper filter to a K&N. The paper filter allowed .4 grams of silicate material (to wit: dirt) to pass through. The K&N allowed a WHOPPING 7.0 grams. In addition, the paper filter was capable of retaining 573.9 grams of silicate (dirt), the K&N was limited to retaining 122.6 grams.
.
This post is in response to the “Tips to Increase Engine Life” subject. The common consensus it that a K&N filter can increase engine wear 10% over that of a quality pleated paper filter. I expect to be inundated by K&N filter aficionados arguing in support of their screed-door / cotton filters. Facts are facts. K&N defends the fact a person may view openings right through a K&N filter media with their “micronic invisible oily hairs” nonsense. Bottom line, maximum engine life is achieved with a good pleated paper air filter.
.
The claim by K&N that their filters become more efficient as they collect debris is quite telling. Of course, as soon as the 10 to 20 micron holes get plugged, there are increasingly smaller holes remaining. As a K&N filter nears complete blockage, it approached the efficiency of the OEM paper filters. By that time the engine is struggling for air.
.
I can’t argue with the profound popularity and seeming legitimacy of K&N filters. I also remember the “mothballs in the gas tank”, “magnets on the gas line”, and now the HHO nonsense. Popularity and widespread use of a product may be generated by massive and continuous advertising, in spite of its legitimate merits.
7/25/12, 10:10 AM
#69
Mach 1 Member
Join Date: January 10, 2011
Location: Houston
Posts: 561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^ We aren't talking about engine life... we are talking about horsepower. Of course the K&N is going to let more debris through, but that's also the reason why it lets more air through. Either way, we aren't even talking about K&N Filters either... 
Last edited by G Wrecks; 7/25/12 at 10:13 AM.
7/25/12, 04:43 PM
#70
Legacy TMS Member
Join Date: July 28, 2004
Posts: 848
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From our testing, we have found that the factory air intake assembly for the 2011-13 GT flows 748.7 cfm
Our C&L " No tuning Required" intake assembly flows 1096 cfm 45% more and the " Tune required" flows 1111 cfm 47% more.
Without tuning in a 11-13 GT we gain 11-13hp over stock. With tuning it's a solid 28-30hp over stock.
Our " No-tune kit" is very simple to upgrade as you just remove the insert from the MAF and you have the tune required.
On a Boss Mustang our kit really shines with the higher flow capacity of both the engine and the intake manifold. In a " No tune required" configuration it makes a solid 15-18hp above the 5000 rpm range.
We don't have the " snowflake" on our kit as we believe in additional power rather then marketing hype.
Just let me know if you have any questions about this!
Thanks, Doug
Our C&L " No tuning Required" intake assembly flows 1096 cfm 45% more and the " Tune required" flows 1111 cfm 47% more.
Without tuning in a 11-13 GT we gain 11-13hp over stock. With tuning it's a solid 28-30hp over stock.
Our " No-tune kit" is very simple to upgrade as you just remove the insert from the MAF and you have the tune required.
On a Boss Mustang our kit really shines with the higher flow capacity of both the engine and the intake manifold. In a " No tune required" configuration it makes a solid 15-18hp above the 5000 rpm range.
We don't have the " snowflake" on our kit as we believe in additional power rather then marketing hype.
Just let me know if you have any questions about this!
Thanks, Doug
Last edited by Doug@C&L; 7/25/12 at 04:53 PM.
7/26/12, 11:56 AM
#73
GT Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: November 6, 2007
Location: Peotone, Illinois
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can say I love the sound of the intake when I get on it. I have not had any issues with it at all. It has a firm shift and it will lay rubber down if you lay into the gas from a start.
On the way home from work lastnight I filled it up with 93 octane and will install the 93 tune, I cant wait to see what that is like.
Greeat product Steeda, and great tune from Bama!!
7/26/12, 11:59 AM
#74
Sorry it took so long to get back to this post but I installed it 2 weeks ago and installed the 87 tune to make sure I didnt throw any codes and note any drivability issues.
I can say I love the sound of the intake when I get on it. I have not had any issues with it at all. It has a firm shift and it will lay rubber down if you lay into the gas from a start.
On the way home from work lastnight I filled it up with 93 octane and will install the 93 tune, I cant wait to see what that is like.
Greeat product Steeda, and great tune from Bama!!
I can say I love the sound of the intake when I get on it. I have not had any issues with it at all. It has a firm shift and it will lay rubber down if you lay into the gas from a start.
On the way home from work lastnight I filled it up with 93 octane and will install the 93 tune, I cant wait to see what that is like.
Greeat product Steeda, and great tune from Bama!!
7/26/12, 03:02 PM
#76
Legacy TMS Member
Join Date: July 28, 2004
Posts: 848
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The dyno graph that is posted was on an a stock Boss, which I am sure was running premium fuel, it was done at Lamotta Performance to give a independant test for our kit.
Below is a test on an ALL stock 2011 GT using 87 octane fuel and NO TUNING, at the time of this test tuning wasn't available for these car s.
How much did the tune on it's own add without the intake?
Thanks, Doug
Last edited by Doug@C&L; 7/26/12 at 03:03 PM.
2/19/13, 07:08 AM
#77
Mach 1 Member
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post