http://www.steedablog.com/2012/03/mu...-intake-truth/

 

Do you have these compared to the OEM intake air temps? What is the delta over stock (+/-)?

Don

 

It seems like everytime some brings up a stock box comparison the vendors go silent.

 

Funny. I noticed that too. Hence why I am still running my stocker.

 

Testing of this kind has already been done by consumers on other forums. Since people seem to trust consumers more than vendors no one wants to step up on an internet forum and give their 2 cents, especially since consumers draw their own conclusions many times not realizing they are not looking at the whole picture. Put some time into searching outside this forum and you will find some answers.

In the meantime, here is what WE know. In our testing the stock airbox ran just a hair cooler than our Steeda cold air SOMETIMES. There were certain conditions ours ran slightly cooler. If you do some research you will find most people who did their own testing found the stock airbox ran slightly cooler. This was only one test on one day, we have tested under a variety of conditions from hot days to cool days, so we have quite a bit of data on this.

HOWEVER, what the average consumer has trouble understanding is that the difference in temperature is not enough to overcome the fact you have extra airflow which makes more horsepower starting around 4,000rpm and up, in addition, the difference in temperature is not enough to change the amount of spark being added or subtracted through the IAT spark modifier to affect spark advance.

If you compare temperature readings to the IAT spark modifier in the calibrations, you will find in 98% of cases spark does not suffer from the differences in air charge temps you will find between our cold air and a stock airbox.

Now I am not saying there is no spark modification for air charge temps, some people also think that is what I am trying to imply. What I am saying is that the difference in temperatures between the stock airbox and our cold air are not enough to significantly change the amount of spark modification that already occurs due to air charge temps. Does it change slightly? Sure. But spark modification due to IAT's remains fairly consistent, which is the opposite argument people make about the cold air which is completely wrong.

 

Thanks for trying to clarify this Gus...

So if I understand your post, you state that yes, while there is a difference in IAT between the OEM intake and the Steeda CAI, that difference is (1) not a large enough delta to require the PCM to modify the spark significantly, and (2) offset by the larger VOLUME of air that is flowing from the increased tube diameter and better design over the OEM tubing... so essentially you're saying that there is no real benefit to retain the OEM intake if one is looking for more power?

Am I getting it right?

On a related question, and I know that every car is different, but in regards to the Steeda tune and CAI, how is driveability in a 5.0 when compared to the FRPP tune (with stock intake)? Have you had an opportunity to test a vehicle when equiped with the FRPP tune in terms of throttle response, torque below 4k rpm, the kind of things that would impact someone who uses their car for daily driving?

Don

 

I've run both of these exact setups. The Steeda tune was pretty good, mine never did idle correctly with it, however power delivery was linear for the most part. It was almost a dead ringer for the Bama Race tune overall, hard to tell the difference. Throttle response was typical of the several tunes I've tried on the 2012, better than stock. This CAI/tune setup, as well as all the other tunes I tried with both the Steeda intake, and a C&L, all felt lacking on the low end (below 4k in other words). This is what left me disappointed in all of them ultimately. I don't know what they put down on a dyno, but what I do know is when I went back to bone stock, the car felt much better in around town driving. I have no doubt the peak #s are there on a dyno with the tunes however... I just didn't like any of them personally.

The FRPP tune took the stock formula and improved it, the car has noticeably more "grunt" below 4k. It lights up the tires much more easily. Overall feel is fantastic. Above 4k, well, you're hauling *** anyway. I don't track my car so it feels no different to be up there. I know the FRPP tune will likely dyno lower #s than the Steeda tune, the difference is where in the powerband and how the car behaves IMO. And either you prefer one, or the other. I didn't bother to put any of them on a dyno because, well, I don't give a @#$% about numbers, lol.

Anyway, the FRPP tune is excellent, provided that is all you want to do. I threw a Roush no-tune intake on mine for sound only, I don't think it did anything really. Certainly was not a degradation though. It was worth the $195 to me. The car sounds pissed off between the mufflers and the intake. If you are wanting to mod beyond just a tune or an intake/tune, then you have no choice but to go with something else. There are multiple vendors offering reasonably competent packages in this case, so pick the one you like, I won't insert my bias here.

 

So why not create a better flowing intake (over stock) that only draws ambient air and is constructed of plastic or poly? That way you get thebest of everything? Is it an issue with the room in the engine compartment that the filter draw site can't be from somewhere outside the engine bay area? Thanks for the reply, BTW.

 

We considered doing it this way with a sealed airbox years back for CARB legality, but the cost involved for CARB certification would have to have been put into the cost on the part which would have made retail pricing unrealistic....

 

So why not still use the design and ditch the CARB cert?