They still make the hydrodipped one, not the real one.
Buying a JLT Intake - need help?
- Thread starter fearthesnake
- Start date
They still make the hydrodipped one, not the real one.
Yes you'll need one. Is Lund tuning your car
Looks like AM has a mistake on the MAF size housing, JLT says 123mm and AM says 127mm. They both show the same part #.
I remembered the old JLT CF intakes had a 127mm MAF housing which is why I thought AM was still selling them.
I run the JLT Super Big Air 155mm. Drivability is perfect and currently ~ 750rwhp at 16psi. Mated to VMP 67mm Twinjet TB. Will support my future mods as well was why I chose the larger CAÍ.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
VMP tuned my car
Can’t say that I’m not happy. I wanna try something different.
Here's a couple of cropped pics I had. It's off the car, so I can post some more detailed shots later.
VMP will have no issues sending you a updated tune. I doubt they will even charge you for it.
Thank you sir. It looks good and I see you reused the stock heat shield. I went ahead and bought the new JLT unit instead. I've never had any issue with them but this time went with the black tube (matches the matte stripes lol), no carbon fiber look this time around.
I notice we have the same upper pulley as well.
Where is the 149mm PMAS intake on their website for our Shelbys? Don't see it listed when I checked.
Would the 120mm intake support enough airflow to the FRPP monoblade TB?
Pm 1320 junkie, he helped PMAS w/ designing the 149.
Yup, 1320 junkie sells them.
Im not hating on JLT, but I started off my GT500 ownership experience with multiple JLT items on my car. In a few months from now, the only JLT device Ill have left on my car is the axle tube catch can. Ive found more and more issue with my JLT oil separator. Specifically, I found a pool of oil in my supercharger this past summer. I empty the separator regularly. I had the JLT 123 intake and felt that while it flowed more than the factory intake, it just felt like there was power left on the table.
PMAS just felt smoother and Lund Racing has stated multiple places that the PMAS is much better at giving clean MAF signals from every unit. Little to no variance between each produced unit. There was a time that Lund would charge a JLT tax to dial in a specific car/combo because the advertised 123mm could be as small as 118mm or as big as 126mm.
Based on personal experience and observation, other companies just have better products that work all the time. JLT is ok, but far from the best.
PMAS just felt smoother and Lund Racing has stated multiple places that the PMAS is much better at giving clean MAF signals from every unit. Little to no variance between each produced unit. There was a time that Lund would charge a JLT tax to dial in a specific car/combo because the advertised 123mm could be as small as 118mm or as big as 126mm.
Based on personal experience and observation, other companies just have better products that work all the time. JLT is ok, but far from the best.
I run the Whipple 2,175 cfm Monoblade when my car is in race trim. Even with my ported M122, Lund Racing indicated I had a ton of headroom when I go to a bigger blower. Trust me, the Whipple mono outflows the SCJ mono and my 120mm PMAS is nowhere near being a restriction.
Yeah I agree, the PMAS 120mm intake will support 800whp, I think after that a 149mm will be a good upgrade.
Sept '16 my buddy's '08 with a 2.3TVS made 655rwhp thru 373's STILL using the "stock '08 tube" but with FRPP filter. He added a 10% lower and made 670rwhp....this time thru 410's. Finally he upgraded to the JLT 123 CAI system...expecting bigger gains . After tweak tune at the shop.....Gain ? 6RWHP ! SAD !
My '13 had JLT123 with 2.4 upper, headers , VMP67 thru BPS O-sized plenum making 680rwhp on Lund Tune. Never need for cone diffuser with the JLT123.
When I went on a Monoblade hunt past August Lund recommended the KB 168 Mono/XBA O-Sized plenum with PMAS for cleaner MAF signal & driveability. At the time I only backed away from PMAS because I wasn't aware 1320 had made the kit to complete the filter + tube. Dopey me .
I wound up with the Power By Hour combo... Lund Tuned- KB168 Mono/XBA O-Sized plenum with JLT148. Despite the huge JLT148 Lund did his magic . There was zero need for the cone air diffuser. There are zero issues with idle, off idle, part throttle or WOT. Accel is smooth & linear. Thru the same 410 gears the Lund/PBH combo made 715rwhp...a gain of 35 over the VMP 67. The combo also widened the entire TQ power curve.
Looking at the huge JLT148 I still laugh! My power output should never require this gigantic intake tube! But this combo sure produced as promised. All over again if just for size appearance I might've grabbed the PMAS 120 with 1320Junkie's tube ....painted black. But I have NO regrets with the performance results of my KB168/JLT148 upgrade.
Someday maybe we'll see back to back PMAS120 vs JLT123/148 comparisons as we saw with Twin TB vs. Monoblade.
Here's an obvious PMAS trashing video produced by JLT that might incite some critical comment:
https://www.jlttruecoldair.com/ZenCart/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=1162
My '13 had JLT123 with 2.4 upper, headers , VMP67 thru BPS O-sized plenum making 680rwhp on Lund Tune. Never need for cone diffuser with the JLT123.
When I went on a Monoblade hunt past August Lund recommended the KB 168 Mono/XBA O-Sized plenum with PMAS for cleaner MAF signal & driveability. At the time I only backed away from PMAS because I wasn't aware 1320 had made the kit to complete the filter + tube. Dopey me .
I wound up with the Power By Hour combo... Lund Tuned- KB168 Mono/XBA O-Sized plenum with JLT148. Despite the huge JLT148 Lund did his magic . There was zero need for the cone air diffuser. There are zero issues with idle, off idle, part throttle or WOT. Accel is smooth & linear. Thru the same 410 gears the Lund/PBH combo made 715rwhp...a gain of 35 over the VMP 67. The combo also widened the entire TQ power curve.
Looking at the huge JLT148 I still laugh! My power output should never require this gigantic intake tube! But this combo sure produced as promised. All over again if just for size appearance I might've grabbed the PMAS 120 with 1320Junkie's tube ....painted black. But I have NO regrets with the performance results of my KB168/JLT148 upgrade.
Someday maybe we'll see back to back PMAS120 vs JLT123/148 comparisons as we saw with Twin TB vs. Monoblade.
Here's an obvious PMAS trashing video produced by JLT that might incite some critical comment:
https://www.jlttruecoldair.com/ZenCart/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=1162
Last edited:
I run the JLT 155 (CF version of 148 no longer made), but I had the PMAS 149 ready to do a dyno comparison, but my tuner reminded me it's already at 965rwhp, so let's track it first.
After the TVS 2650 goes on, I will do that comparison as it should be an even better test.
Most tuners prefer PMAS signal, but all the good guys can easily make JLT perform.
JLT has been proven for a while.
-J
After the TVS 2650 goes on, I will do that comparison as it should be an even better test.
Most tuners prefer PMAS signal, but all the good guys can easily make JLT perform.
JLT has been proven for a while.
-J
Here's the short version:
A JLT 123 will support up to 800 rwhp. Anything more than that and you're a candidate for a 140-ish from one of the two vendors.
I have used both the JLT 148 and the DD149 from Pmas. The Pmas made 5 rwhp more on a scientific, back to back comparison. The JLT has better overall driveability. The biggest bitch people have had about JLT is that the plastic housing will increase/decrease size with heat/cooling cycles. I have found it to be true...sometimes...and nowhere near as bad as people say ("People" are for the most part "people" who sell something else).
The DD149 is a great option for wot work but is tricky for driveability unless you tune around it. JLT is the same way but I will assume it's the JLT filter with the screen diffuser that makes the difference, but it does. I added a HVAC metal honeycomb diffuser to the DD149 and it made a world of difference.
So, in essence, if you want to try something else just because you're bored, go for it. Otherwise, what you have will work with the right tuning.
bj
A JLT 123 will support up to 800 rwhp. Anything more than that and you're a candidate for a 140-ish from one of the two vendors.
I have used both the JLT 148 and the DD149 from Pmas. The Pmas made 5 rwhp more on a scientific, back to back comparison. The JLT has better overall driveability. The biggest bitch people have had about JLT is that the plastic housing will increase/decrease size with heat/cooling cycles. I have found it to be true...sometimes...and nowhere near as bad as people say ("People" are for the most part "people" who sell something else).
The DD149 is a great option for wot work but is tricky for driveability unless you tune around it. JLT is the same way but I will assume it's the JLT filter with the screen diffuser that makes the difference, but it does. I added a HVAC metal honeycomb diffuser to the DD149 and it made a world of difference.
So, in essence, if you want to try something else just because you're bored, go for it. Otherwise, what you have will work with the right tuning.
bj
Thanks BJ.
Yes, it's all a big science experiment right?
I plan to keep my combo the same as is currently then just swap Gen2R for Gen3 blower. Once we're happy with that tune, I plan to swap the JLT for the PMAS.
Interesting on screen, very good to know.
I expected similar peak powers but thought the PMAS claim to fame was a cleaner signal for better driveability.
I guess that's why we test
-J
Yes, it's all a big science experiment right?
I plan to keep my combo the same as is currently then just swap Gen2R for Gen3 blower. Once we're happy with that tune, I plan to swap the JLT for the PMAS.
Interesting on screen, very good to know.
I expected similar peak powers but thought the PMAS claim to fame was a cleaner signal for better driveability.
I guess that's why we test
-J
Users who are viewing this thread
