really cheap cai

wbt

Banned
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
715
Location
Texas
I am back, guys. I had a terrible night racing. Traction issues, missed shifts, tire sway. I made 6 passes, 4 on the box and 2 on the JLT. First two box passes were wastes. The second and third were crap 60 foot runs and a 12.5 and 12.6. I was disgusted, but I bolted up the JLT and went out anyway. I immediately went 12.1 with the JLT and then essentially hot-lapped it to a 12 flat. Never broke out of the 12's tonight and never cracked below a 1.7 60 foot. I will post the full story tomorrow. I just sent Shaun the logs for his review.

In my honest opinion, the JLT worked. I was struggling all night with a crap track. Plus it was humid and windy. We had a wicked head wind. As soon as the JLT went on, the car woke up and pulled through the 60 and just ran better.

However, I know the test is inconclusive and I blame myself. I just could not get it together tonight. I will check the DA tomorrow and see what I was up against.

Best pass was 12. 043 @ 114.74 with a 1.74. Best mph I ran with the box was 112.98.

I am beat, and I have to get up in 5 hours to swap off the slicks.

Mike

Can you also post up all the timeslips for comparison? From the sound of it, it doesn't sound like we have a valid data sample to draw a conclusion from.

BTW - weather is not looking good for us on Saturday. 70% chance of heavy rain. It may be next week before we can track test and post results.
 
Last edited:

tt54l32v

Active Member
Established Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2007
Messages
2,385
Location
dothan
I am back, guys. I had a terrible night racing. Traction issues, missed shifts, tire sway. I made 6 passes, 4 on the box and 2 on the JLT. First two box passes were wastes. The second and third were crap 60 foot runs and a 12.5 and 12.6. I was disgusted, but I bolted up the JLT and went out anyway. I immediately went 12.1 with the JLT and then essentially hot-lapped it to a 12 flat. Never broke out of the 12's tonight and never cracked below a 1.7 60 foot. I will post the full story tomorrow. I just sent Shaun the logs for his review.

In my honest opinion, the JLT worked. I was struggling all night with a crap track. Plus it was humid and windy. We had a wicked head wind. As soon as the JLT went on, the car woke up and pulled through the 60 and just ran better.

However, I know the test is inconclusive and I blame myself. I just could not get it together tonight. I will check the DA tomorrow and see what I was up against.

Best pass was 12. 043 @ 114.74 with a 1.74. Best mph I ran with the box was 112.98.

I am beat, and I have to get up in 5 hours to swap off the slicks.

Mike
Way back at the beginning of the thread, the guy that posted and said he picked up from an intake and posted a slip. Most of it was early in the run. Or at least it looked that way to me.
I dont have one of these car (maybe one day), but how do these cars get air to the box? Do they draw from the fender well? Is it fed from a high pressure area? Could it be that an open element out performs the stocker at lower speeds ( and the dyno) and the stocker be benefiting from any slight amount of "ram air" ?
:shrug:
 

wbt

Banned
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
715
Location
Texas
Way back at the beginning of the thread, the guy that posted and said he picked up from an intake and posted a slip. Most of it was early in the run. Or at least it looked that way to me.
I dont have one of these car (maybe one day), but how do these cars get air to the box? Do they draw from the fender well? Is it fed from a high pressure area? Could it be that an open element out performs the stocker at lower speeds ( and the dyno) and the stocker be benefiting from any slight amount of "ram air" ?
:shrug:

The stock air inlet is behind the front grille on the driver side. Directly behind the fog light to be exact. As the car begins to move, air will flow into the duct and into the airbox.

Last time at the track, I tried to do a comparison between the JLT and stock CAI. I had something happen in the tune that prevented the car to shift into 2nd until I let off the throttle with the JLT installed so the only valid data point I have is 60' comparisons.

With the stock CAI:
1.88

With JLT:
1.89

Comparison timeslips:
IMG_20120308_005405.jpg


My car is an auto. The only tune change made was for the MAF transfer function as it should be.
 
Last edited:

me32

BEASTLY SHELBY GT500 TVS
Moderator
Premium Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2005
Messages
18,457
Location
CA,NorCal
Well looks like another track date will have to be setup. To runs seem to be off today.
 

TheCPE

Skeptic
Established Member
Joined
May 21, 2011
Messages
1,702
Location
FL
However, I know the test is inconclusive and I blame myself. I just could not get it together tonight. I will check the DA tomorrow and see what I was up against.

Mike

First, thanks for doing this and trying to get the data for this forum. Maybe next test & tune will be better for gathering data.

I agree, with the description of your passes there isn't anyway to make an objective comparison. It can be tough at the drag strip to be consistent enough with just a few passes to generate a useful data set.

An auto car would definitely help.

This is another reason that the method I described with my GPS box is a better method. So much easier to control the tests and eliminate practically all the variables between pulls.

Thanks for giving this a shot and good luck if you try again at another test & tune!
 

Tucker

Active Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2003
Messages
4,727
Location
Chesapeake VA
Great job Mike and thanks for all your efforts, same goes for you Shaun.

Sorry the track wasn't so good, but with all passes on the same night isn't it still apples to apples?:shrug:

:lol:
I think it's hilarious that you make 4 runs with the stock box and AED tune and run 12.5 and 12.6 with a best MPH of 112

Then swap the box for the JLT and AED tune, immediately go 12.1 and HOT LAP it to a 12.0
GAINING: .4-.6 total and 2 MPH and people think the testing is inconclusive. :lol::lol: Not by you Mike, you even state:
In my honest opinion, the JLT worked. I was struggling all night with a crap track. Plus it was humid and windy. We had a wicked head wind. As soon as the JLT went on, the car woke up and pulled through the 60 and just ran better.

WBT's test was a fail due to a tune issue and his conclusive test was locked down in the first 60' :lol: claiming the JLT didn't work.:uh oh:

Let's change things up a little and I'll throw out a thought:
Let's say he ran the JLT 4 times, never doing better than a 12.5 AND THEN swapped to the stockbox picking up the same .4-.6 and 2 MPH.

What would you say? Inconclusive or burn your intakes at the track gates?;-)

Again, thank you for doing your unbiased, 3rd party test in LA while your tuner was in CA and the Manufacture was in VA. :beer:


Thanks
Jay
 

MikeLTDLX

Active Member
Established Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2004
Messages
2,174
Location
Mandeville, La
Great job Mike and thanks for all your efforts, same goes for you Shaun.

Sorry the track wasn't so good, but with all passes on the same night isn't it still apples to apples?:shrug:

:lol:
I think it's hilarious that you make 4 runs with the stock box and AED tune and run 12.5 and 12.6 with a best MPH of 112

Then swap the box for the JLT and AED tune, immediately go 12.1 and HOT LAP it to a 12.0
GAINING: .4-.6 total and 2 MPH and people think the testing is inconclusive. :lol::lol: Not by you Mike, you even state:


WBT's test was a fail due to a tune issue and his conclusive test was locked down in the first 60' :lol: claiming the JLT didn't work.:uh oh:

Let's change things up a little and I'll throw out a thought:
Let's say he ran the JLT 4 times, never doing better than a 12.5 AND THEN swapped to the stockbox picking up the same .4-.6 and 2 MPH.

What would you say? Inconclusive or burn your intakes at the track gates?;-)

Again, thank you for doing your unbiased, 3rd party test in LA while your tuner was in CA and the Manufacture was in VA. :beer:


Thanks
Jay

And, as I stated Jay, I feel very confident that the JLT did indeed make a difference. The car just felt better. I will also say that the JLT did not get many of the same benefits the box got. It did not get nearly as much cool down time, because by the time the JLT went on, it was approaching 9 o'clock. The staging lanes were much longer with the JLT and I kept having to stop and re-start the car. The best run was separated by 32 minutes exactly, of at least 20 was spent in the lanes. The humidity was 87% when I ran, and the DA was 673 feet. If you give me a correction factor, the run is an 11.971 @ 115.384 with a 1.74 60 foot. My best run to date was an 11.976 @ 114.76 with a 1.67 (uncorrected). So this pass was my best pass yet, albeit corrected.

I am going to start a new thread so we can discuss these results there.

Mike
 

BigMackCoyote

I have a Boost Leak!
Established Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2011
Messages
495
Location
Pittsburgh,pa
Ok so after reading this thread i have came to this conclusion for myself. If you buy an intake and only change the maf transfer function then its pointless. If you buy an intake and get a tuner that knows how to tune for it and not just turn the maf transfer on then its worth it.


Last time at the track, I tried to do a comparison between the JLT and stock CAI. I had something happen in the tune that prevented the car to shift into 2nd until I let off the throttle with the JLT installed so the only valid data point I have is 60' comparisons.

With the stock CAI:
1.88

With JLT:
1.89

My car is an auto. The only tune change made was for the MAF transfer function as it should be.
Why should the only change be maf transfer if changing other things helps wake the intake up?
 
Last edited:

TheCPE

Skeptic
Established Member
Joined
May 21, 2011
Messages
1,702
Location
FL
I think it's hilarious that you make 4 runs with the stock box and AED tune and run 12.5 and 12.6 with a best MPH of 112

Then swap the box for the JLT and AED tune, immediately go 12.1 and HOT LAP it to a 12.0
GAINING: .4-.6 total and 2 MPH and people think the testing is inconclusive. :lol::lol:

However, I know the test is inconclusive and I blame myself. I just could not get it together tonight. I will check the DA tomorrow and see what I was up against.

Mike

I am back, guys. I had a terrible night racing. Traction issues, missed shifts, tire sway. I made 6 passes, 4 on the box and 2 on the JLT. First two box passes were wastes. The second and third were crap 60 foot runs and a 12.5 and 12.6.

It is hilarious tucker that you think this is a conclusive test. It is anything but that. The JLT + tune combo could be good for every bit of 20hp that doesn't change that this test is inconclusive and the data useless to prove that.
 
Last edited:

MikeLTDLX

Active Member
Established Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2004
Messages
2,174
Location
Mandeville, La
It is hilarious tucker that you think this is a conclusive test. It is anything but that. The JLT + tune combo could be good for every bit of 20hp that doesn't change that this test is inconclusive and the data useless to prove that.

I don't think it is "conclusive." I think it is what it is. I ran better with the JLT than the box last night. The 60 foot times were definitely not close. The testing was not a scientific and perfect sterile situation. An auto would really be the best for this test. However, I will be out there again trying to get a more consistent test.

I said the JLT felt better and felt stronger. I also said the test was not conclusive, due to my inconsistent driving yesterday.

Mike
 

wbt

Banned
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
715
Location
Texas
Tucker;11579968 I think it's hilarious that you make [B said:
4 [/B]runs with the stock box and AED tune and run 12.5 and 12.6 with a best MPH of 112

Then swap the box for the JLT and AED tune, immediately go 12.1 and HOT LAP it to a 12.0
GAINING: .4-.6 total and 2 MPH and people think the testing is inconclusive. :lol::lol: Not by you Mike, you even state:

WBT's test was a fail due to a tune issue and his conclusive test was locked down in the first 60' :lol: claiming the JLT didn't work.:uh oh:

What would you say? Inconclusive or burn your intakes at the track gates?;-)

More selective reading going on and a person who can't seem to understand a timeslip. You would do yourself a favor just by not commenting at all.

Bottom line is the difference in his runs were in the 60'. Since he was having consistency issues with launching the car, there is no way to compare the results. Oh wait, my 60' times aren't comparable because they don't favor your intake even though I have an auto and it is much more consistent when launching the car.:kaboom:

:bash:
 

GabeMarlin

V8/RWD Fanatic
Established Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2011
Messages
109
Location
Avondale, AZ
More selective reading going on and a person who can't seem to understand a timeslip. You would do yourself a favor just by not commenting at all.

Bottom line is the difference in his runs were in the 60'. Since he was having consistency issues with launching the car, there is no way to compare the results. Oh wait, my 60' times aren't comparable because they don't favor your intake even though I have an auto and it is much more consistent when launching the car.:kaboom:

:bash:

Your 60' times aren't valid in this arguement because you only changed the MAF transfer function, not all the other stuff that Shaun had to change to get the JLT intake to work properly. Comparing a properly tuned stock box run to a improperly tuned CAI is not a valid comparison IMO. The MAF transfer not working with the JLT is what this whole thing has been about for the last bunch of pages.

From the top of page 12:
ShaunAED
"More than the Maff transfer is different between the 2 tunes.
Airflow modeling needed changing as well"
 
Last edited:

kdanner

Banned
Joined
Sep 29, 2003
Messages
298
Location
This forum can **** right off
Oh goody, Jay Tucker came back.

Hey Jay, I understand you talked to JJ in Bradenton about this and he told you as far as he was concerned his car didn't pick up anything with your product. Why fail to come back here and update this info?
 

wbt

Banned
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
715
Location
Texas
Your 60' times aren't valid in this arguement because you only changed the MAF transfer function, not all the other stuff that Shaun had to change to get the JLT intake to work properly. Comparing a properly tuned stock box run to a improperly tuned CAI is not a valid comparison IMO. The MAF transfer not working with the JLT is what this whole thing has been about for the last bunch of pages.

From the top of page 12:
ShaunAED
"More than the Maff transfer is different between the 2 tunes.
Airflow modeling needed changing as well"

I am aware of what Shaun said. He used a value file to change the MAF transfer function for the JLT that didn't work.

This topic has been discussed with several tuners recently, as a result of his post about needing to make additional changes outside of the MAF transfer function, and all of them agree the ONLY change needed between the stock CAI and an aftermarket CAI is for the MAF transfer function. We are talking about folks who have tuned the quickest/fastest 2011+ 5.0 Mustangs on the planet. No disrespect to Shaun however there is a disagreement.

On that note, everyone certainly has the right to draw their own conclusions and to believe what they want. If you are saying my tests are invalid then anything Mike just did is too.
 

Tucker

Active Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2003
Messages
4,727
Location
Chesapeake VA
Oh goody, Jay Tucker came back.

Hey Jay, I understand you talked to JJ in Bradenton about this and he told you as far as he was concerned his car didn't pick up anything with your product. Why fail to come back here and update this info?

Becasue you addressed me personally I'll answer your questions.

I did speak with JJ, a few times and he did not say the car didn't pick up nothing, so I'm not sure where you got that from.

What he said to me and my wife was that he did make the gains he posting on the first test, but he tested it again with little gain and couldn't say one way or another if the gains were from the intake or shifting.

He also said he doesn't use parts that don't make his car go faster.

I then said "Then take it off and run the stock box!"
he replied, "well it looks good and I can't say for sure it's not helping."

My responce "Oh, come on JJ, your this stand up guy who doesn't run parts that don't make you go faster, take it off if it doesn't work"

We then BS'd about the internet and how silly this stuff is (back and forth crap)
Do I agree with JJ and many of his opinions? No, not at all and I told him so.
Do I respect him as friend and racer?? Yup, sure do!

Why didn't I run in here to talk to a wall?
Because JJ told me he didn't want to be involved in this thread and I was respecting his requests.

So, his first test is bad, Beefcakes test is bad, all the cars at the shootout running well into the 11's are bad tests, my car running 11.90's and now Mike's test is bad.
All gained ET and MPH.

I'm done with this thread and arguing.
I don't know if it's the good press from the fast cars or the negitive press from you saying my name over and over, but we are having a record sales month I need to go.

Enjoy
Jay
 

GabeMarlin

V8/RWD Fanatic
Established Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2011
Messages
109
Location
Avondale, AZ
I am aware of what Shaun said. He used a value file to change the MAF transfer function for the JLT that didn't work.

This topic has been discussed with several tuners recently, as a result of his post about needing to make additional changes outside of the MAF transfer function, and all of them agree the ONLY change needed between the stock CAI and an aftermarket CAI is for the MAF transfer function. We are talking about folks who have tuned the quickest/fastest 2011+ 5.0 Mustangs on the planet. No disrespect to Shaun however there is a disagreement.

On that note, everyone certainly has the right to draw their own conclusions and to believe what they want. If you are saying my tests are invalid then anything Mike just did is too.

I never said his test were valid, even he agrees they're not. I just pointed out the hyprocracy of you saying his test were inconclusive and acting like yours weren't. My C&L intake was running something like 17% rich on the LT fuel trims with a Lund tune and the SCT tune, then I put the stock box back on and the the same two tunes minus the maf transfer and the LT is around 3% rich now. This is why I think the CAI's and accompanying MAF trans files are crap. Oh, and those rediculous IAT's in daily driving.
 
Last edited:

MikeLTDLX

Active Member
Established Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2004
Messages
2,174
Location
Mandeville, La
I will say this and Shaun can confirm it:

When Shaun sent the final files over to me on Monday, I mentioned to him that the car really felt great. The SOTP improvement was there from the JLT. I know my car, I have been driving it every day for close to 5 months. I could tell that the JLT/Tune was a power increase over the Box/Tune.

I know everyone wants to downplay the tests. What would everyone say if my 60 foot had been equivalent to my best 60 foot in this car, 1.67, and I picked up a couple of tenths and the JLT went 12.8 in that shit air? All I am going to say is that last night I almost duplicated my all time best, with a 60 foot that was a tenth slower, and in DA that was 1000 feet higher. My corrected time was better. I think the JLT played a part in these times.

Mike
 

Users who are viewing this thread



Top