Mr. D

Thanx for the education. I'm still waiting for an "independent" comparsion that seems to be objective. I still suspect a CAI for a newer Mustang is not necessary unles other "substantial" modifications have been made. It just makes no sense that if putting a CAI was an instant improvement then Ford would do it much like just increasing the exhaust by size by an inch. I don't thing many mods are very much "Bang for the Buck". Tuners, on the contrary can add substantial performance as I suspect many engines are "under tuned" so HP can be easily added in the next model year to keep up with the competition. I've put tuners on several vehicles from diesel trucks to Mustangs & have always been happy with the results.

ucinn

I would agree with that except that the manufacturer (in this case ford) wouldn't put them on for the fact it is more care for a CAI filter (cleaning, oiling) and the filters could last for a good long time thus no profits from replacement paper filters.

Derf00

On new unmodded stangs, the performance gain is minimal (few HP or a couple TQ) from a CAI that does not require a tune. 90-95% of the power gain on the CAI + Tune is in the Tune.

The flow rate of the intake system is not the bottle neck. It's the heads.

here's the only one that I've ever come across that is pretty inclusive and objective. It's based on the 4.6L

http://www.mustangandfords.com/parts...e-comparisons/

There is another study that takes this to the next level and uses various CAI's with changing the Heads, cams, and the intake manifold as well to further prove that the stock air box is fine in unmodded and even lightly modded cars as it is not the bottleneck. That one I haven't been able to find.

IIRC this same magazine (5.0 Mustang and Super Fords) did all of their own comparisons. Unfortunately they went out of print. You can still search their archive in the link I provided above though to see if you can find the more extensive one where they used the same air intakes then varied the intake manifold, cams, and I believe heads.

other stuff of interest:
http://www.mustangandfords.com/how-t...ake-manifolds/

Mike@DiabloSport

The heads were certainly the restriction on the 4.6 2V, and likely on the 3V as well, but the 5.0 heads are far from the choking point on the Cotoye

chipss36

I find it funny, with mustangs, there is a lot of somone said.....ect..

vrs the harley hotrod people, I base my harley motor builds after pooring over every dyno sheet I can find, and there are many posted online, that can lead you to a mean, these parts do this, set the powerband here....ect.
helps me a great deral with cam choice, setting compression....ect.

yet in the mustang world, dispite the mustang being around for awhile, even the cyote, and tons of tunes done, very little dyno sheets???

many thanks to anyone posting dyno sheets/timeslips...ect and build lists.

1 Alibi 2

I have dyno sheets for both cars, but they won't give you the information you're looking for.
Dyno time @ my tuner is $ 175, and the car doesn't go to the dyno until it's been street driven and data-logged.
...........( the dyno is the last stage of the tuning process with a custom tune )
Also, both cars had more than 1 mod done @ a time.
So I can't tell you what gain I got from LT's, or a CAI, or T/B by itself.
.

chipss36

I would say spark advance and borderline spark tables is the last step.....
but to each his own.