Mr. D

Yes, this is an old subject, but I've never seen adequate answers to the question! Maybe I've missed the answer!

Of course the outfits making a buck can prevent biased/cooked testing that shows their CAI increases H.P. but why wouldn't Ford use the same methods in CAI's in Mustangs!

Have you have seen any "INDEPENDENT & SCIENTIFIC" comparisons the prove these expensive CAI's make a significant improvement over stock air intakes on "modern" cars like a stock Mustang 5.0L GT setup? They certainly make more intake noise which sounds like power, but how much more H.P. is proven by independent testing a person can actually believe?

tj@steeda

I can at least start the conversation ... I understand that I am not independent:

We did this more recently with our 2011 Mustang GT. This same principle will apply with earlier model Mustangs.


On this test the car was loaded with a basic tune with no cam timing changes just so we could have a higher rev limiter that way we could rev the engine to the same RPM with both intakes without running into a limiter. Ignition timing was the same for both tunes.


The results show a “peak” gain of only 5 horsepower, but there is a lot more there if you read the dyno sheet. Gains started at about 4,500, with gains of 6 to 9 horsepower between 4,500 and 5,000. Between 5,300 and 6,100 gains were 7 to 10 horsepower. And between 6,700 and 7,200 the gains were an impressive 12 to 15 horsepower. So you can see measureable gains from a cold air intake.


With this power increase in a car weighing 3700 to 3800 pounds with the driver you would be lucky to measure a 10th of a second. This is because the driver alone could loose a 10th of a second just from pass to pass so relying on seeing that 10th of a second is a shot in the dark at best. These are not the days of the Fox body Mustang where a 3100lb car including the driver would see a tenth of a second from just 5 or 6 horsepower. These are heavier cars and that makes a huge difference.


What you can go on is ¼ mile trap speed. With a cold air intake trap speed should go up slightly with the increase in power assuming no gears are missed and the shift points take advantage of the extra upper RPM power. That is how you will see the results of a cold air intake at the drag strip.

Best Regards,

TJ

Mike@DiabloSport

The 05-10 GTs had a slightly more restrictive intake setup, and swapping to one of the popular CAI kits generally provides solid gains, although most require tuning to dial in the MAF curve since the housing size/shape changes.

The 11+ models seem to have a much better intake design from Ford, and the gains from the addition of the CAI dont seem to be quite as solid, as TJ pointed out. The main benefit there would be as you can see in the dyno chart, power fell off less sharply with the CAI as the motor was able to breathe better up top where the stock intake had finally become something of a restriction.

Obviously if you are planning any further mods to improve breathing, a CAI will help more as the motor demands more airflow requirements.

Mr. D

Thanx for the response!

I was watching again a Jay Leno Youtube episode where (about half way through) the Ford Rep. told Jay that the CAI on the 2014 Boss 302 was as good as anything you could buy on the after market. I assume you guys would disagree.

Question: Were test comparisons shown by Steeda done with a "stock Ford paper filter" used in the stock air cleaner? My point in asking is the stock paper filters might be more restrictive at high RPM than the foam filters used with most after market CAI's. It seems at very least a K&N type foam filter in the stock air cleaner box should have to be used to isolate the affect to the CAI design alone. As you know, it is always important to eliminate all the uncontrolled variables possible in any scientific test & it seems any difference in filters would affect the results.

Mr. D

Independent Tests on CAI's I dare you!!!!!!

It would be east to take a stock 2015 GT with a K&N type foam filter in the stock Mustang setup, no tune

Versus

Any brand after market CAI, no tune

Do two sets of Comparisons Tests:

One test without a tune, & another with an after market tune!

I can only think of one reason why no independent tests are done! Aftermarket CAI's do little or nothing on a 2015 mustang GT! Amazing that no on will do these simple tests! What's being hidden?

Mike@DiabloSport

A CAI that changes the size/shape of the MAF housing will require a tune for proper operation, hence the lack of A to B testing...

kirk35

The only thing needed for tuning in that scenario would be calibrating the MAF curve for the new CAI, no other parameters need to be changed. Which it appears Steeda was close to in their test.

My only issue with the gains shown are not knowing how many runs were made with each set-up and how consistent the various runs were.

1. Are the graphs shown the averages of multiple runs? The highest with the aftermarket CAI and lowest with the stock airbox?
2. Would the gains be realistic in a heat-soaked real-life scenario or only on a dyno with high powered fans blowing cool air on the aftermarket filter?

A few HP deviaton from pull to pull on a dyno is not unusual, and in my opinion not worthy of considering an improvement.

I ran a Steeda CAI on my '13 and just installed it on my '14. The big change I have noticed is the increase in IAT's, the '13 was a base model so I didn't have the ability to monitor IAT's routinely. The '14 has the fancy gauges and I have noticed that during stop & go traffic, I've seen temps as high as 36 degrees above ambient. I'm going to have to research to see at what IAT the PCM starts to pull timing, but I'm guessing at an IAT around 125 degrees (+/-) timing is being retarded and power reduced. I never saw increases like that with the factory airbox.

Unfortunately, I fell for the marketing hype before I really looked at the entire intake tract. The stock intake manifold and throttle body are 80mm in diameter which gives you an area of 7.74 square inches. I don't care how big the intake tube or filter is on the aftermarket CAI's they can't flow any more air than the TB will allow or the engine requires.

The fresh air duct on the factory airbox has an area of 16.25 square inches, so there is no benefit from having the open airbox under the hood. The panel filter has more than enough surface area to support the needed airflow, so no benefit from a giant cone filter. The larger tube still can't make the intake manifold or throttle body larger, so once again no benefit. You will see higher IAT's, but guess what................ not a benefit.

Do the aftermarket intakes still have a place on the S197's? I believe they could be beneficial on a highly modified car that has significantly increased airflow requirements. Until you go to aftermarket camshafts, and find an intake manifold/TB with a larger than 80mm opening, my opinion is you will be wasting your hard earned money, just as I did. If anyone is still determined to go with an aftermarket CAI, I'll have one for sale on Ebay next week!

Mr. D

Excellent post! I suppose an advantage might be found when running a supercharger??

Mr. D

If I understood right, to do this comparison test properly you would have to put a "tune designed to optimize the MAF Curve for both setups" & then compare maximum outputs?? Right? Maybe? Sorta?

kirk35

Correct, that would be the only change needed for a true comparison. The MAF sensor measures the velocity of the air moving across it, you just need to calibrate it for the larger tube.

In my experience a supercharged application would likely see a benefit from the larger tube and filter vs. stock intake. Even then the only accurate method of measuring the effectiveness of intake modifications is by measuring Manifold Absolute Pressure under WOT conditions.