REAL Cold Air Intake Replacement - Mustang Evolution

Go Back   Mustang Evolution > 1979-2015 Mustang GT || Tech and Talk > 2011-2014 Mustang GT



Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about them here!
Old 04-29-2016, 01:31 PM   #1
Registered Member
Regular
 
TRMN8ER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: San Diego
Region: California
Posts: 176
REAL Cold Air Intake Replacement

Everything I have found online and digging through Google, only yields upgrades of the intake tubing and air box. What I am looking for, is the replacement of the entire air intake system, more specifically the portion of the air box that goes down into the wheel well. Some of you may have noticed, that many aftermarket cold air intakes have a small rectangular opening at the bottom of their air box / heat shield, which actually allows the cold air into the air box / heat shield area. That rectangular intake hole is so damn small that it dwarfs the whole idea of upgrading your intake tubing and filter to begin with - it's like you are only being sold half of the solution.

On Kenne Bell's website Kenne Bell Homepage about 1/3 down, they clearly show that they replace the ENTIRE air intake system by running the intake tube all the way from the throttle body into the wheel well. This is exactly what I am looking for, for my N/A 2013 GT, but I have yet to find anything even close to it. I am not looking to fabricate my own solution; I want to buy a legit aftermarket product which will accomplish what I am looking for.

Thanks in advance for any replies.
TRMN8ER is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 04-29-2016, 03:21 PM   #2
Registered Member
Regular
 
Grabber Blue5.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: East Haven
Region: Connecticut
Posts: 3,510
The stock CAI is as legitate as it gets. Years ago I and a few others did some testing at the track on a number of the aftermarket CAI and the stock one came out on top due to the lowest iat's.

This has been covered hundreds of times already here.
__________________
2017 Dodge Challenger T/A Redline Tri-Coat
2015 Dodge Challenger Scat Pack Jazz Blue Pearl Sold
2015 GT Premium 401A Ingot Silver Sold
2011 GT Premium 401A Grabber Blue Sold
Grabber Blue5.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2016, 03:32 PM   #3
Registered Member
Regular
 
WJBertrand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Ventura
Region: California
Posts: 517
Don't think there's much to be gained over OEM. I can watch the intake air temp with my panel on gauge mode and compare it to outside temp reading on the radio and it will be within 1 degree any time the car is moving. You're not going to get any colder than outside ambient.
__________________
-Jeff-
Ventura, CA
2013 GT Premium Brembo
MGW, Blow Fish, AM Hood Struts
Tinted, Borla Touring AB, ProCal Tune
Full Shelby/Kicker Audio Upgrade
WJBertrand is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Old 04-29-2016, 03:38 PM   #4
Registered Member
Regular
 
Diehard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: North Reading
Region: Massachusetts
Posts: 2,112
I think the OP's point was more along the lines of a less restrictive air inlet path.
Not sure if Voltwings tests a few months back included a look at pressure drop.
__________________
____________________________________________________
14 V6 auto, MCA, PP, BBK Shorties, MMD Hood Struts, Borla Touring A/B's, MAC ProChamber, aFe drop-in Filter
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Lets not forget, an opinion is a judgment, viewpoint, or statement about matters commonly considered to be subjective.
Diehard is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2016, 04:00 PM   #5
Registered Member
Regular
 
Grabber Blue5.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: East Haven
Region: Connecticut
Posts: 3,510
The stock CAI isn't restrictive.
__________________
2017 Dodge Challenger T/A Redline Tri-Coat
2015 Dodge Challenger Scat Pack Jazz Blue Pearl Sold
2015 GT Premium 401A Ingot Silver Sold
2011 GT Premium 401A Grabber Blue Sold
Grabber Blue5.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2016, 04:27 PM   #6
Registered Member
Regular
 
TRMN8ER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: San Diego
Region: California
Posts: 176
I probably should have clarified my intentions of this post - I am not concerned with the temperature of the air flowing through the intake, as I do understand the temperature difference in most cases is minimal. I am more aimed at the amount of air able to forced into the tubing. If the initial entry point of air is coming from some small rectangular opening, that is not efficient by any means. Not only is it not efficient, it is choking how much air can actually enter the intake filter area. The reason I used the Kenne Bell intake as an example, is because they have created a truly efficient and performance driven intake in regards to the initial air entry point.

The way I am looking at this is, as a theoretical example:
Your air entry point is lets say a 1 inch diameter and your filter / tubing is a 10 inch diameter. Your 10 inch diameter tubing will be starved of air flow due to the initial choke point of 1 inch diameter.

If your intake system was 10 inch diameter at the entry point and the filter / tubing,
you would end up with efficient and optimized air flow.

So... does anything like this exist?
TRMN8ER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2016, 11:25 AM   #7
Registered Member
Regular
 
Mimi15GT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Ledgewood
Region: New Jersey
Posts: 34
My Steeda CAI gets air through the same inlet where the stock air box gets it and also through the vent opening in the hood. That's more than enough. Had to get a tune to compensate for the extra airflow. I love it.
Mimi15GT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2016, 12:28 PM   #8
Registered Member
Regular
 
stanggtcs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: New London County
Region: Connecticut
Posts: 100
I was throwing this idea around with some co-workers. An isolated stand alone unit, cylindrical in nature with refrigerant running through it, installed in the inlet tube. As the outside air comes in it's chilled when it passes through the fins of the unit. Stupid idea?
__________________

2014 GT/CS 6spd. with total FR suspension upgrades.
stanggtcs is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2016, 01:05 PM   #9
Registered Member
Regular
 
TRMN8ER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: San Diego
Region: California
Posts: 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by stanggtcs View Post
I was throwing this idea around with some co-workers. An isolated stand alone unit, cylindrical in nature with refrigerant running through it, installed in the inlet tube. As the outside air comes in it's chilled when it passes through the fins of the unit. Stupid idea?
Interesting idea, but you should start up a new thread for that. I'm sure plenty of guys and gals have tinkered around with air chilling.
TRMN8ER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2016, 01:22 PM   #10
Registered Member
Regular
 
TRMN8ER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: San Diego
Region: California
Posts: 176
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mimi15GT View Post
My Steeda CAI gets air through the same inlet where the stock air box gets it and also through the vent opening in the hood. That's more than enough. Had to get a tune to compensate for the extra airflow. I love it.
I'm not concerned if the existing air inlet is "good enough" or "not very restrictive". I am only interested in a truly optimized air intake setup.

Think about this from an exhaust setup point of view. Would you be okay with a rectangular portion of your exhaust tubing? Would you be okay with a restrictive choke point in your exhaust flow? There is a reason why full 3" exhaust setups with mandrel bent tubing exists... it's efficient and optimizes the air flow.

I simply want to accomplish the same level of optimization for my air intake... If something like this doesn't exist, that's fine, I'm simply looking for a yes or no answer. And if yes, please share your knowledge with me!
TRMN8ER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2016, 02:02 PM   #11
Registered Member
Regular
 
Mimi15GT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Ledgewood
Region: New Jersey
Posts: 34
I know what your saying and I hope someone out there can help you. All I'm saying is there is no restriction with either the JLT or Steeda intakes because it gets the maximim air from the lower box and vent from the hood. So it is sucking in the most outside air possible, and no air under the hood. An intake that can only get a direct shot of air from the fender eoild be nice too but get the same outside air as the Steeda or JLT. The stock intake only gets air from the lower restrictive box.
Mimi15GT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2016, 03:40 PM   #12
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Charlotte, NC
Region: North Carolina
Posts: 1,045
REAL Cold Air Intake Replacement

Quote:
Originally Posted by TRMN8ER View Post
I'm not concerned if the existing air inlet is "good enough" or "not very restrictive". I am only interested in a truly optimized air intake setup.



Think about this from an exhaust setup point of view. Would you be okay with a rectangular portion of your exhaust tubing? Would you be okay with a restrictive choke point in your exhaust flow? There is a reason why full 3" exhaust setups with mandrel bent tubing exists... it's efficient and optimizes the air flow.



I simply want to accomplish the same level of optimization for my air intake... If something like this doesn't exist, that's fine, I'm simply looking for a yes or no answer. And if yes, please share your knowledge with me!

Based on everything I have seen no there is nothing like that for these cars.

The difference between your analogy is that crushed bends in exhaust will likely cause a loss of horsepower. Where as with the intake even though the stock inlet may seem small it allows more then enough air that the engine is able to consume so it is not a restriction or bottleneck which is why no aftermarket companies make a replacement.

With a NA setup air is not forced in the engine it is sucked. And regardless off what kind of intake you will always be limited at how much the engine can physically consume.
Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
StarzTA17 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2016, 03:42 PM   #13
Registered Member
Regular
 
JohnnyBob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 83
Well there's the corsa CAI box, I think that would be the most "optimized" cold air intake system you be able to get.
JohnnyBob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2016, 04:21 PM   #14
Registered Member
Regular
 
Voltwings's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Houston
Region: Texas
Posts: 3,439
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRMN8ER View Post
Everything I have found online and digging through Google, only yields upgrades of the intake tubing and air box. What I am looking for, is the replacement of the entire air intake system, more specifically the portion of the air box that goes down into the wheel well. Some of you may have noticed, that many aftermarket cold air intakes have a small rectangular opening at the bottom of their air box / heat shield, which actually allows the cold air into the air box / heat shield area. That rectangular intake hole is so damn small that it dwarfs the whole idea of upgrading your intake tubing and filter to begin with - it's like you are only being sold half of the solution.

On Kenne Bell's website Kenne Bell Homepage about 1/3 down, they clearly show that they replace the ENTIRE air intake system by running the intake tube all the way from the throttle body into the wheel well. This is exactly what I am looking for, for my N/A 2013 GT, but I have yet to find anything even close to it. I am not looking to fabricate my own solution; I want to buy a legit aftermarket product which will accomplish what I am looking for.

Thanks in advance for any replies.
I'm not certain, but i am willing to bet that supercharger is capable of sucking a hell of a lot harder than an otherwise "stock" NA engine. I can do more pressure testing, but i am willing to bet there is virtually no airflow to the fender area.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diehard View Post
I think the OP's point was more along the lines of a less restrictive air inlet path.
Not sure if Voltwings tests a few months back included a look at pressure drop.
It did, i'll include an excerpt, as well as a link to the testing Sakib and i did:

However, we also found the interesting result that the air flow to the engine significantly increases with the Steeda CAI over the stock intake--even when running the Steeda tune with the stock intake (Fig. 2). This result is further evidenced by the observation that the CAI forms a ram air effect of higher pressure in front of the intake at high speed, whereas the stock intake forms a vacuum, indicating that the engine is starved for air. This is a surprising result, given the previous finding that the vehicle speed increases with the Steeda tune on a stock intake, but does not further increase when adding the CAI.

What we found using my magnahelic gauge was that the stock airbox would experience an increase in vacuum as RPMs rose, whereas the steeda intake would experience relatively steady pressure. What this tells us is that the stock intake setup was in fact choked for air, and this showed up as well in our MAF vs rpm data. This was also on a v6, and the v8 uses the same airbox...
Cold Air Intake vs. Stock Intake: Quantitative Testing


Quote:
Originally Posted by Grabber Blue5.0 View Post
The stock CAI isn't restrictive.
I am not saying my word is law, just sharing our experiences, but i encourage you to read the above link and report back.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TRMN8ER View Post
I probably should have clarified my intentions of this post - I am not concerned with the temperature of the air flowing through the intake, as I do understand the temperature difference in most cases is minimal. I am more aimed at the amount of air able to forced into the tubing. If the initial entry point of air is coming from some small rectangular opening, that is not efficient by any means. Not only is it not efficient, it is choking how much air can actually enter the intake filter area. The reason I used the Kenne Bell intake as an example, is because they have created a truly efficient and performance driven intake in regards to the initial air entry point.

The way I am looking at this is, as a theoretical example:
Your air entry point is lets say a 1 inch diameter and your filter / tubing is a 10 inch diameter. Your 10 inch diameter tubing will be starved of air flow due to the initial choke point of 1 inch diameter.

If your intake system was 10 inch diameter at the entry point and the filter / tubing,
you would end up with efficient and optimized air flow.

So... does anything like this exist?
I am probably going to contradict myself here, but i like discussions like this and "problem solving" if you will. I have a stock airbox sitting in my garage, i will go out and do some measuring and maybe together we can figure out theoretical flow rate available based on mph, engine CFM needs, etc. Could be fun. I noticed the Pirelli World Challenge mustang used a substantially larger air intake, but those engines are also pretty well modified if i am not mistaken.
Sorry the picture isnt that great, but you can kind of make it out.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Mimi15GT View Post
My Steeda CAI gets air through the same inlet where the stock air box gets it and also through the vent opening in the hood. That's more than enough. Had to get a tune to compensate for the extra airflow. I love it.
That vent in the hood is a low pressure zone, and lets air out, not in. I did pressure testing on that too compared to a GT500 hood. Testing starts on post 10
General discussion on pressure zones

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mimi15GT View Post
I know what your saying and I hope someone out there can help you. All I'm saying is there is no restriction with either the JLT or Steeda intakes because it gets the maximim air from the lower box and vent from the hood. So it is sucking in the most outside air possible, and no air under the hood. An intake that can only get a direct shot of air from the fender eoild be nice too but get the same outside air as the Steeda or JLT. The stock intake only gets air from the lower restrictive box.
Quote:
Originally Posted by StarzTA17 View Post
Based on everything I have seen no there is nothing like that for these cars.

The difference between your analogy is that crushed bends in exhaust will likely cause a loss of horsepower. Where as with the intake even though the stock inlet may seem small it allows more then enough air that the engine is able to consume so it is not a restriction or bottleneck which is why no aftermarket companies make a replacement.

With a NA setup air is not forced in the engine it is sucked. And regardless off what kind of intake you will always be limited at how much the engine can physically consume.
Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
I agree with this, but again, we saw that the steeda box actually became pressurized, which means the engine had a surplus of air. Now, that being said, my gauge measures in inches of water, and like 27" of water is 1 psi, so the 1-2" of water worth of pressure we were seeing is not much at all, but it is still pressure nonetheless.
Voltwings is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2016, 05:40 PM   #15
Registered Member
Regular
 
TRMN8ER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: San Diego
Region: California
Posts: 176
@Voltwings Thank you for gracing us with your knowledge and expertise. I love getting into the nitty gritty, distinguishing what is truly fact and what is fiction.

It appears quite apparent that no part manufacturer makes an intake setup as I have described. On top of that, even if an intake as described was made, the 2013 N/A stock 5.0 motor could not fully utilize the additional airflow, only to increase performance by a marginal amount.

Kenne Bell, as my example, made their intake system in such a way because they had a need to. Their superchargers needed a more dynamic air intake system to support the functionality of the supercharger itself.

In my case, with a stock setup under the hood, it has become apparent that there is no need for such air intake optimization. That would be like putting slicks on a stock V6 S197 - you would never lose traction, but you would also never be able to fully utilize the slicks capabilities. Essentially, it's overkill.

I'll save my $400 bucks and apply it to a Whipple or KB. Thank you everyone for sharing your knowledge.
TRMN8ER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-30-2016, 08:09 PM   #16
Registered Member
Regular
 
k1DBLITZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Bixby
Region: Oklahoma
Posts: 269
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mimi15GT View Post
All I'm saying is there is no restriction with either the JLT or Steeda intakes because it gets the maximim air from the lower box and vent from the hood.
Yeah, about that....

Does the Steeda intake completely seal that hood vent?

In other words...is it still a functional hood vent to suck the hot air OUT of the engine bay?
__________________
2014 Mustang GT Premium (deep impact blue)
Too many mods to fit in my sig.
Follow my build list on my blog. (still updating mods installed so far)
k1DBLITZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 03:13 PM   #17
Registered Member
Regular
 
Mimi15GT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Ledgewood
Region: New Jersey
Posts: 34
I met up with someone that had the MMR intake, which is what you were looking for, from the wheel well....Here it is....

MMR 2015 2016 Mustang GT 5 0 Cold Air Performance Intake Filter Kit System | eBay
__________________
'15 GT w/PP - Deep Impact Blue - Kooks Long Tube Catted Headers & Cat-Back w/H-Pipe; Steeda ProFlow CAI; BBK 85MM Throttle Body; Tuned by Evans-Tuning; Steeda IRS Subframe Bushing Support System, Alignment Kit, Support Braces, Urethane Differential Bushings, and Vertical Links; Dynotech Aluminum Driveshaft; Ford Performance GT350 Halfshafts; Ford Racing Short Shifter; JLT Oil Separator; Silver MMD V-Series Stripes; AMSOIL Signature Series 5W-20 oil, Severe Gear Rear Diff and Trans Fluids.
Mimi15GT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 03:18 PM   #18
Registered Member
Regular
 
Mimi15GT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Ledgewood
Region: New Jersey
Posts: 34
Quote:
Originally Posted by k1DBLITZ View Post
Yeah, about that....

Does the Steeda intake completely seal that hood vent?

In other words...is it still a functional hood vent to suck the hot air OUT of the engine bay?
Not 100%, but the rubber gasket on top seems to do a good job against the hood. I was checking my air inlet temps on the highway this morning, outside air temp was 56, inlet temp was 59. Can't complain about that.
__________________
'15 GT w/PP - Deep Impact Blue - Kooks Long Tube Catted Headers & Cat-Back w/H-Pipe; Steeda ProFlow CAI; BBK 85MM Throttle Body; Tuned by Evans-Tuning; Steeda IRS Subframe Bushing Support System, Alignment Kit, Support Braces, Urethane Differential Bushings, and Vertical Links; Dynotech Aluminum Driveshaft; Ford Performance GT350 Halfshafts; Ford Racing Short Shifter; JLT Oil Separator; Silver MMD V-Series Stripes; AMSOIL Signature Series 5W-20 oil, Severe Gear Rear Diff and Trans Fluids.
Mimi15GT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 04:28 PM   #19
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Region: Canada
Posts: 2,974
Well, the testing in the article is done on a V6 Mustang so, that negates much relavance to us with GTs.

I'd say this, as long as the intake can flow more air than the engine can consume, which the stock intake can, there is no gain there. I'll remind that base level Vortech, Paxton and Roush kits use the factory airbox, with substantially more airflow there.
__________________
2014 Premium GT, SGM, Brembo, Auto, Tech, Comfort, etc. GT500s, Steeda UCA, VMP auto N/A tune. 100 shot nitrous on BBR tune. Best e/t 11.42 at 120.64

2012 Premium GT, Candy Red, Brembo package, 3.73, MT82, Comfort, Tech, et al. Procal tune, Roush UCA, UMI poly LCA, GT500s, Steeda red bracket, Hoosier 28x10x16 bias drags. Best e/t 11.91 at 115.23 RIP
5LHO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 05:34 PM   #20
Registered Member
Regular
 
DallasStang77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Dallas
Region: Texas
Posts: 1,842
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grabber Blue5.0 View Post
The stock CAI is as legitate as it gets. Years ago I and a few others did some testing at the track on a number of the aftermarket CAI and the stock one came out on top due to the lowest iat's.

This has been covered hundreds of times already here.

Don't lie. It's been covered thousands of times.


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
DallasStang77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 05:40 PM   #21
Registered Member
Regular
 
Grabber Blue5.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: East Haven
Region: Connecticut
Posts: 3,510
Quote:
Originally Posted by DallasStang77 View Post
Don't lie. It's been covered thousands of times.
And yet every week or so someone new has to start a new thread in hopes of catching that mythical unicorn.
__________________
2017 Dodge Challenger T/A Redline Tri-Coat
2015 Dodge Challenger Scat Pack Jazz Blue Pearl Sold
2015 GT Premium 401A Ingot Silver Sold
2011 GT Premium 401A Grabber Blue Sold
Grabber Blue5.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 09:54 PM   #22
Registered Member
Regular
 
Voltwings's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Houston
Region: Texas
Posts: 3,439
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5LHO View Post
Well, the testing in the article is done on a V6 Mustang so, that negates much relavance to us with GTs.

I'd say this, as long as the intake can flow more air than the engine can consume, which the stock intake can, there is no gain there. I'll remind that base level Vortech, Paxton and Roush kits use the factory airbox, with substantially more airflow there.
I would disagree. The GT and v6 use the exact same air box and considering the fact that we measured, with multiple variables, the stock airbox was a restriction on the V6 i would expect it to be more so on the GT. to highlight, we saw a vacuum being created in the stock airbox at WOT, which means the engine was starved for air, and we saw a substantial increase in airflow through the MAF when moving to a larger unit. While the stock box is good, and probably the best at keeping temps down, i wouldnt say its not worth getting an intake.

Also, i'm going to have to disagree with your statement about the superchargers on two accounts. The first being that those systems are drawing on the airbox much harder than the stock setup possibly can, and secondly that no one can deny adding open element filters to those setups does in fact result in substantial gains. The only reason those kits use the factory airbox is probably for CARB certification.
Voltwings is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2016, 10:23 PM   #23
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Region: Canada
Posts: 2,974
Well, they aren't the same. they have a different lid and inlet tube size. The point being, you can make 550 horse on the stock GT airbox with a blower easily. Thus, it isn't going to choke an N/A 5.0 any.
__________________
2014 Premium GT, SGM, Brembo, Auto, Tech, Comfort, etc. GT500s, Steeda UCA, VMP auto N/A tune. 100 shot nitrous on BBR tune. Best e/t 11.42 at 120.64

2012 Premium GT, Candy Red, Brembo package, 3.73, MT82, Comfort, Tech, et al. Procal tune, Roush UCA, UMI poly LCA, GT500s, Steeda red bracket, Hoosier 28x10x16 bias drags. Best e/t 11.91 at 115.23 RIP
5LHO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2016, 07:41 AM   #24
Registered Member
Regular
 
Voltwings's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Houston
Region: Texas
Posts: 3,439
OK, again, you cant compare them like that. The blower is capable of pulling on the airbox much harder than a naturally aspirated engine ever could, so that comparison isnt really apples to apples.

I'll also take some measurements if you would like, but when we laid the GT airbox and V6 airbox next to eachother they looked identical. I could be wrong though.
Voltwings is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2016, 08:30 AM   #25
Registered Member
Regular
 
Grabber Blue5.0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: East Haven
Region: Connecticut
Posts: 3,510
My car was significantly slower with a few of the aftermarket CAI's simply because heat soak was so bad. My iat's would climb pretty fast if I wasn't constantly moving.
__________________
2017 Dodge Challenger T/A Redline Tri-Coat
2015 Dodge Challenger Scat Pack Jazz Blue Pearl Sold
2015 GT Premium 401A Ingot Silver Sold
2011 GT Premium 401A Grabber Blue Sold
Grabber Blue5.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2016, 09:12 AM   #26
Registered Member
Regular
 
Voltwings's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Houston
Region: Texas
Posts: 3,439
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grabber Blue5.0 View Post
My car was significantly slower with a few of the aftermarket CAI's simply because heat soak was so bad. My iat's would climb pretty fast if I wasn't constantly moving.
This i think it the real thing to study here. I think it does take the right set of conditions for either intake (stock or aftermarket) to shine.

For example, our MAF readings. MAF stands for mass airflow, which means it is accounting for the density of the air. In our testing, we did notice higher IATs with the aftermarket steeda intake (and it has an aluminum MAF housing, so that is to be expected), however we also noticed increases in MAF flow. So even though the air was hotter, there was still more of it, and still resulted in higher MAF flow. More MAF flow = more fuel = more power, regardless of temp.

Obviously i imagine there will ultimately be a trade off. We did our testing in relatively mild weather, mid 70s or low 80s or something, its in there but i cant exactly remember. If we did our testing when it was 100* outside, i don't think its beyond the realm of possibility that we would have seen slightly different results.
Voltwings is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2016, 09:24 AM   #27
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Region: Canada
Posts: 2,974
The first photo I pulled off the web is a 3.7 and the second is a 5.0...they don't look the same to me. but,having never even looked at a 3.7 live, I dunno.

Now, it's precisely that a blower can draw so much more air than an NA motor that makes my comparison valid. If the airbox can support that level of demand, then there is no way the airbox is a restriction under n/a conditions. The only way you get meaningful gains is if you change the demand for air, not the size of the pipe that supplies it and then fuel for that increased volume of air.

You are correct that the use of the factory airbox is for CARB E.O. resons, for the blowers that meet that standard but, that doesn't change the fact the airbox can support more airflow than the engine can demand n/a.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	3.7.jpg
Views:	54
Size:	12.2 KB
ID:	200767   Click image for larger version

Name:	5.0.jpg
Views:	52
Size:	9.1 KB
ID:	200768  

__________________
2014 Premium GT, SGM, Brembo, Auto, Tech, Comfort, etc. GT500s, Steeda UCA, VMP auto N/A tune. 100 shot nitrous on BBR tune. Best e/t 11.42 at 120.64

2012 Premium GT, Candy Red, Brembo package, 3.73, MT82, Comfort, Tech, et al. Procal tune, Roush UCA, UMI poly LCA, GT500s, Steeda red bracket, Hoosier 28x10x16 bias drags. Best e/t 11.91 at 115.23 RIP
5LHO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2016, 09:38 AM   #28
Registered Member
Regular
 
Voltwings's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Houston
Region: Texas
Posts: 3,439
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5LHO View Post
The first photo I pulled off the web is a 3.7 and the second is a 5.0...they don't look the same to me. but,having never even looked at a 3.7 live, I dunno.

Now, it's precisely that a blower can draw so much more air than an NA motor that makes my comparison valid. If the airbox can support that level of demand, then there is no way the airbox is a restriction under n/a conditions. The only way you get meaningful gains is if you change the demand for air, not the size of the pipe that supplies it and then fuel for that increased volume of air.

You are correct that the use of the factory airbox is for CARB E.O. resons, for the blowers that meet that standard but, that doesn't change the fact the airbox can support more airflow than the engine can demand n/a.
Yes, the tops are different, the bottoms however are the same, including the duct that feeds them from the grille. The lid could very well provide more flow for the GT, like i said, i'll take some measurements. Could be interesting.

Again, i think <- "think," i could very well be wrong, that you're still confused on the concept of the supercharger.

I'm going to try to explain how i'm seeing it from the other way around and see if it makes sense. Think of the airbox as simply a straw. If i told you to put your mouth on it and blow, the average person can get 2, maybe 3 psi through that straw.

If i hook up an air compressor to that straw, i can cram significantly more air through that straw than 2-3 psi, not because the straw isn't a restriction, but because the force i am able to apply is much higher than with my mouth alone.

The same concept applies for the supercharger, the limiting factor is not the box itself, its what the engine is capable of drawing THROUGH the box. The supercharger is capable of doing more work on the box, and therefore capable of pulling more air through it.
Voltwings is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2016, 10:00 AM   #29
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Region: Canada
Posts: 2,974
I'm not confused; I've had many forced induction vehicles. What you are saying is fine. It's the same as testing a cylinder head on the flowbench at two different inches of water. Sure, if I pull harder, I can make more inches and show potentially more flow but the actual cfm capability of the tested head in normal conditions hasn't changed.

If the claim that the box is a restriction to producing power but, the induction system with that restriction in place supports producing over 100 more horsepower than the engine can produce stock, there is NO WAY the box is a restriction N/A. It's not possible for the engine to generate that level of draw under atmo conditions, without assistance. That's what I am saying.
__________________
2014 Premium GT, SGM, Brembo, Auto, Tech, Comfort, etc. GT500s, Steeda UCA, VMP auto N/A tune. 100 shot nitrous on BBR tune. Best e/t 11.42 at 120.64

2012 Premium GT, Candy Red, Brembo package, 3.73, MT82, Comfort, Tech, et al. Procal tune, Roush UCA, UMI poly LCA, GT500s, Steeda red bracket, Hoosier 28x10x16 bias drags. Best e/t 11.91 at 115.23 RIP
5LHO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2016, 10:51 AM   #30
Registered Member
Regular
 
TRMN8ER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: San Diego
Region: California
Posts: 176
I do believe there will be a difference between the results of the 3.7 and the 5.0, but if the 3.7 is capable of creating a vacuum, I would imagine the 5.0 would create an even larger vacuum. I believe Voltwings' testing and theories are correct.
TRMN8ER is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2016, 11:22 AM   #31
Registered Member
Regular
 
DallasStang77's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Dallas
Region: Texas
Posts: 1,842
Quote:
Originally Posted by Voltwings View Post
Yes, the tops are different, the bottoms however are the same, including the duct that feeds them from the grille. The lid could very well provide more flow for the GT, like i said, i'll take some measurements. Could be interesting.



Again, i think <- "think," i could very well be wrong, that you're still confused on the concept of the supercharger.



I'm going to try to explain how i'm seeing it from the other way around and see if it makes sense. Think of the airbox as simply a straw. If i told you to put your mouth on it and blow, the average person can get 2, maybe 3 psi through that straw.



If i hook up an air compressor to that straw, i can cram significantly more air through that straw than 2-3 psi, not because the straw isn't a restriction, but because the force i am able to apply is much higher than with my mouth alone.



The same concept applies for the supercharger, the limiting factor is not the box itself, its what the engine is capable of drawing THROUGH the box. The supercharger is capable of doing more work on the box, and therefore capable of pulling more air through it.

5HLO is saying that a forced induction application can easily draw enough air to put down 550hp. Yes the supercharger can draw air harder and will greatly benefit from an open air unit but what 5HLO is saying is that despite having to draw harder there is still enough flow to generate 550hp so any non-forced induction application would have no problem with the stock unit because the amount of flow is more than a stock engine can draw.


Sent from my iPhone using Mustang Evolution
DallasStang77 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2016, 11:43 AM   #32
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Region: Canada
Posts: 2,974
This makes no sense from a fluid dynamics standpoint, to my mind.

There is a vacuum pressure differential in the engine it creates by its operation behind a closed throttle plate, for example. This doesn't mean the engine is "starved for air" it's running fine at that rpm (idle and low rpm).

WOT operation is the lowest vacuum the engine will see, obviously, as the throittle is wide open, the positive pressure acting on the charge air is atmospheric and a little bit of laminar flow encouragement in the intake. It's could very well still see some negative pressure at the airbox because the engine is just a giant air pump anyway and positive pressure is capped at atmo. This could actually help power as it could increase the velocity of the intake charge.

Now we are really getting out there and sciencing this up.....


I was giving this some more thought and, while there is evidence that increasing the plenum volume of the intake (essentially what we are talking about here if we make a bigger/open airbox) can result in some steady state performance increase, the back blade of that is it kills throttle response and general performance because of the dead gas velocity due to having more volume of air in the plenum than the engine can use and thus having no cyclic forces on the replenishment of the air in the plenum. Intake tuning is incredibly complex, I am afraid....
__________________
2014 Premium GT, SGM, Brembo, Auto, Tech, Comfort, etc. GT500s, Steeda UCA, VMP auto N/A tune. 100 shot nitrous on BBR tune. Best e/t 11.42 at 120.64

2012 Premium GT, Candy Red, Brembo package, 3.73, MT82, Comfort, Tech, et al. Procal tune, Roush UCA, UMI poly LCA, GT500s, Steeda red bracket, Hoosier 28x10x16 bias drags. Best e/t 11.91 at 115.23 RIP
5LHO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2016, 01:29 PM   #33
Registered Member
Regular
 
Voltwings's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Houston
Region: Texas
Posts: 3,439
Quote:
Originally Posted by 5LHO View Post
This makes no sense from a fluid dynamics standpoint, to my mind.

There is a vacuum pressure differential in the engine it creates by its operation behind a closed throttle plate, for example. This doesn't mean the engine is "starved for air" it's running fine at that rpm (idle and low rpm).

WOT operation is the lowest vacuum the engine will see, obviously, as the throittle is wide open, the positive pressure acting on the charge air is atmospheric and a little bit of laminar flow encouragement in the intake. It's could very well still see some negative pressure at the airbox because the engine is just a giant air pump anyway and positive pressure is capped at atmo. This could actually help power as it could increase the velocity of the intake charge.

Now we are really getting out there and sciencing this up.....
I'll take it you didn't read our article lol, but i'll recap here.

I can agree with this statement. The perspective comes when you measure the steeda airbox as well. The stock airbox saw a continuously increasing vacuum (or decrease in pressure, whichever is easier to perceive) as rpms increase. I can agree with what you're saying that it is possible we were measuring the draw of the engine. However, on the flip side, the Steeda airbox saw an increase in pressure as rpms increased.

Naturally the indication of a surplus of air from the steeda airbox pressure readings, plus a higher recorded MAF flow would lead you to believe the stock airbox was in fact starved for air. At least that was our take away. It was honestly a LOT of work to do that testing; 12 datalogs, swapping intakes, interpreting and graphing the data, but i prefer not to talk out of my *** if i can help it lol, so i suppose if i am going to try to make these claims i should attempt getting some actual GT data.
Voltwings is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2016, 01:42 PM   #34
Registered Member
Regular
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Region: Canada
Posts: 2,974
I read it....but your conclusions are too simple. There is far more to manifold design than just reducing pressure differential. In fact, reducing that differential can negatively affect performance. Just because that differential is there does not enable you to draw the conclusion the airbox is starving the engine.

Stock intake design tends to favour two methods of addressing the concerns with throttle response v. WOT performance. Either you make a huge airbox feed a tiny TB to keep velocity up or, you choke down the plenum volume of the airbox and put on a big TB to create a cycling replenishment of all the air in the airbox.

This setup smacks a bit more of the latter than the former and, as such, increasing the plenum volume of the intake like this will likely diminish performance in most situations, if the basic VE of the engine is unchanged. This is why tuning can work with CAI because tuning changes the VE of the engine to better match the parameters of the CAI.

I appreciate the effort you've made here but, I don't agree with the conclusions you've arrived at from the data you collected.
__________________
2014 Premium GT, SGM, Brembo, Auto, Tech, Comfort, etc. GT500s, Steeda UCA, VMP auto N/A tune. 100 shot nitrous on BBR tune. Best e/t 11.42 at 120.64

2012 Premium GT, Candy Red, Brembo package, 3.73, MT82, Comfort, Tech, et al. Procal tune, Roush UCA, UMI poly LCA, GT500s, Steeda red bracket, Hoosier 28x10x16 bias drags. Best e/t 11.91 at 115.23 RIP
5LHO is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2016, 01:46 PM   #35
Staff
Regular
Staff
 
scottydsntknow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: JB MDL
Region: New Jersey
Posts: 16,576
You can have super restrictive parts and still make big power with a blower. Witness the JY 5.0 HO motors with a turbo setup on them making 500 through E7s. E7s are hella restrictive but the blower stuffs a ton of air through them.


Just one example, blowers compensate for a lot when it comes to that sort of thing.
__________________
2000 Mustang GT Steeda #0048

Just because I give you advice, doesn't mean I know more than you. Its just means I've done more stupid ****.
scottydsntknow is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Lower Navigation
Go Back   Mustang Evolution > 1979-2015 Mustang GT || Tech and Talk > 2011-2014 Mustang GT

Tags
cold air intake

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
COLD AIR INTAKE or SHAKER COLD AIR INTAKE zalizar21 2005-2010 V6 Mustang 14 08-19-2012 08:41 AM
94gt factory cold air intake vs aftermkt cold air intake justjake94boss 1979-1995 Mustang GT 1 04-15-2012 12:22 PM

» Like Us On Facebook



06:17 AM


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0

MustangEvolution.com is in no way associated with or endorsed by Ford Motor Company.