The JLT vs. Stock Airbox with AED tune results and discussion thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

Tucker

Active Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2003
Messages
4,727
Location
Chesapeake VA
. I would like to think the JLT was part of that equation, but I 100% must prove it before I can consider it a part that makes the car quicker.

Mike
I understand Mike, but so far your car has run faster than ever twice, both times WITH the JLT.
Now if you test a third time and get different results, what's the answer?
Might be time to move on to the next mod and go even faster, but again, I understand and know what you will find.

For the record on the shorties, a good read here: http://www.svtperformance.com/forums/2011-mustangs-354/792754-shorty-headers-worth.html

I stand behind everything I have tested and the results provided both dyno and track. That is something you can make 0 claim to.
Did you really post dyno results comparing different cars on different dynos?
 

Tucker

Active Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2003
Messages
4,727
Location
Chesapeake VA
Unless I'm mistaken kdanner wasn't launching the vehicle at the TX Mile... most people don't launch for a 1 mile run. You roll out and start applying more power as you accelerate.
Your right, but there are still many variables in a mile run.
If not every run would be exactly the same.

100 - 150 RPM off in any shift or at the end of the run can equate to a new top speed.
Lots of variables here too.

If it was easy due to an auto the MPH would be the same for all runs in each mod configuration.

Did you know that the fastest run was with the JLT?
 

TheCPE

Skeptic
Established Member
Joined
May 21, 2011
Messages
1,702
Location
FL
Your right, but there are still many variables in a mile run.
If not every run would be exactly the same.

Right, that is the reason you do multiple passes and perform statistical analysis. This point is apparently elusive.

You can't just take the best or worst run and say it is representative of the gains from a specific mod. One run is meaningless.
 

mikestoyz

Member
Established Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2002
Messages
577
Location
Mandeville, LA
Right, that is the reason you do multiple passes and perform statistical analysis. This point is apparently elusive.

You can't just take the best or worst run and say it is representative of the gains from a specific mod. One run is meaningless.

That is true. Way too many variables. Looking for a trend is the key. With so many aborted runs, ruined lights, poor track days, etc its really hard to come up with a hard conclusion.

With that said, the trend is looking toward a gain with the JLT, but would I bet $100 on it? No.
 

MikeLTDLX

Active Member
Established Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2004
Messages
2,174
Location
Mandeville, La
I understand Mike, but so far your car has run faster than ever twice, both times WITH the JLT.
Now if you test a third time and get different results, what's the answer?
Might be time to move on to the next mod and go even faster, but again, I understand and know what you will find.

Actually, Jay, it ran faster than ever before three times in a row. In horrible air. However, it had a tune revision prior to those runs, and I was on like Ronnie Sox that day. LOL. I so wish I had thrown on the box and slowed down for three runs. Then, I would be convinced. Still, former best run of 11.96. New best run of 11.90. Former best mph of 115. New best mph of 116.5. Could be the 15 hp, could be pie in the sky. I like the 11's in the heat.

I like your product (although it took another tune revision to get where I wanted), and it is on my car right now. I am pulling for it to be partially responsible for my car running 11.90 in terrible air, with a mediocre 60 foot, small tire and 3.31 gears. I am still stunned at how easy these cars are to get to run.

Mike
 
Last edited:

z28th1s

The 5.0 is Back!!!
Established Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2008
Messages
3,932
Location
Lynchburg, VA
Anyone that cherry picks a data point as proof of the performance of their product is dishonest.

Pertaining to driver inconsistency, just what do you think his inconsistency was in his automatic GT driving down a mile straight away... that is a terrible excuse.

Further, once again look at wbt's time slips if "driver inconsistency" is going to be your excuse.

I think it was apparent about 8 pages back but it wouldn't matter what evidence or proof was provided a salesman will spin it however he needs so that he can sell a product.

So I provide this challenge:

What would it take for Tucker to admit his product doesn't work? What test and result would it take?

If there isn't one, that is a shame... an unfalsifiable product (much like an unfalsifiable theory) is useless.

This is a quote from kdanner about his testing at the TX Mile:

3. This isn't just a long dragstrip. It's not a prepared surface, there is no traction compound on it. They run street sweepers over it so it is clean, just think of it as a street that has more hook than most. This means you can't just hammer it out of the hole, not even close, you'll see big power cars go a quarter mile before they have enough speed up to where traction is not a problem and they can start to pour on the power. This is simpler for me since I have so little power, I just have to baby it out to around 30MPH, then I can nail it since it won't downshift to first and smoke the tires. You can't do this the same every time, so there will be some variances. I probably am a little slower doing this than is possible in my car, but going up in smoke is worse and I never spun the tires at all through the weekend.

He even said there is variances in his acceleration methods at the TX Mile. :shrug:
 

TheCPE

Skeptic
Established Member
Joined
May 21, 2011
Messages
1,702
Location
FL
You can't do this the same every time, so there will be some variances.

I never spun the tires at all through the weekend.

Much less variance than would be experienced by someone launching a manual and shifting it through a 1/4 mile run.

Again, this is why you average multiple runs.
 

kdanner

Banned
Joined
Sep 29, 2003
Messages
298
Location
This forum can **** right off
100 - 150 RPM off in any shift or at the end of the run can equate to a new top speed.

I'm simply quoting this for prosperity at this time, I'm glad you mentioned this using those words. If I'm on to what I think I am on to, we will revisit this statement and discuss something else.

Unless I'm mistaken kdanner wasn't launching the vehicle at the TX Mile... most people don't launch for a 1 mile run. You roll out and start applying more power as you accelerate.

There is a huge difference in the prep on a 1/4 mile and an unprepped surface that is used for a mile, to validate Jareds statement. Even the best drivers in an auto can have a hard time replicating the same traction. So unless there is a 60' or 100' measurement, traction in the mile could play a large role in his times.

Thank you for understanding how it actually works. For the record, I never had a traction problem, I never drove the car out hard enough to spin at all on any run with the sole exception of the final run on Sunday where I did get more aggressive and they just squealed a hair through first, probably perfect, the extra wheel speed helped, it wasn't overdone to where excess spin would hurt the results. This run was by far the best of all the afternoon passes which had near identical DA both days and I could have pulled a Jay Tucker and said the Airaid was the fastest based on that, but that would be dishonest due to the different driving technique and the extra tape on the car. Normally I just use moderate throttle, it shifts to 2nd gear, once I see enough MPH to where I know it can no longer downshift to 1st, I go WOT. So no, that can't happen 100% identical every time, no matter who is driving.

When was the last time that ANYONE that has raced their car in certain trim said "My car ran 12.0, but it also ran 12.9" and then called their car a 12.9 car? Yes, time spread I used is more dramatic, but it gets the same point across.

Apples to oranges, this isn't a drag race, this is a speed trial. Weather conditions change to some degree always. We were lucky to have plenty of time with near identical temp, pressure, and humidity. The wind did move around a little. A 1.2 MPH spread while doing this testing is infinitesimal. I could have just thrown the Sunday morning run into the mix that was 2.4 MPH faster than any other run due to the weather, however again, this would have been dishonest, and I'm not trying to do any dishonest testing here.


Because you can't blame someone's driving inconsistency on a cold air intake. The potential is obviously there, it went faster, now it's up to the end user to drive their car.

So the potential is there, but the driving wasn't? But that wasn't the same case when the stock airbox was installed, the driving was just fine then? Nice selective reasoning there.
 

AluminatorSnake

Active Member
Established Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2009
Messages
999
Location
Pennsylvania
Thank you for understanding how it actually works. For the record, I never had a traction problem, I never drove the car out hard enough to spin at all on any run with the sole exception of the final run on Sunday where I did get more aggressive and they just squealed a hair through first, probably perfect, the extra wheel speed helped, it wasn't overdone to where excess spin would hurt the results. This run was by far the best of all the afternoon passes which had near identical DA both days and I could have pulled a Jay Tucker and said the Airaid was the fastest based on that, but that would be dishonest due to the different driving technique and the extra tape on the car. Normally I just use moderate throttle, it shifts to 2nd gear, once I see enough MPH to where I know it can no longer downshift to 1st, I go WOT. So no, that can't happen 100% identical every time, no matter who is driving.

I should have said acceleration instead of traction, my fault. I should have been more specific by saying the "roll in" throttle technique cant be exactly replicated every time, since the track is unprepped and requires different throttle modulation. That way everyone wouldnt get their panties in a bunch. I always wondered what the mile would be like if the first 1/4 was a highly prepped surface.
 
Last edited:

Tucker

Active Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2003
Messages
4,727
Location
Chesapeake VA
Funny how it's only selective reading on our part, but your posts are not.

All testing showed a gain with the JLT not the stock box.
Not even 50/50
Not even 75/25
All best runs from Mike, WBT and the guy in TX were with the JLT on the car.

Keep testing, you'll get that glory run where the stock box "somehow" gains .001 over the JLT and you can jump for joy, until then were doing just with your results.


Thanks
Jay
 

AluminatorSnake

Active Member
Established Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2009
Messages
999
Location
Pennsylvania
Unless I'm mistaken kdanner wasn't launching the vehicle at the TX Mile... most people don't launch for a 1 mile run. You roll out and start applying more power as you accelerate.

I understand that, and it was my mistake as I should have typed acceleration instead of traction. My point was, as a human, you cant replicate the same exact roll out and acceleration every time. You can ramp up your speed faster or slower on different runs resulting in different times.
 

Carbd86GT

You're Gator Bait
Established Member
Joined
Feb 29, 2004
Messages
5,838
Location
Jupiter, Florida
So the potential is there, but the driving wasn't? But that wasn't the same case when the stock airbox was installed, the driving was just fine then? Nice selective reasoning there.

AluminatorSnake already stated what I was trying to explain.

I understand that, and it was my mistake as I should have typed acceleration instead of traction. My point was, as a human, you cant replicate the same exact roll out and acceleration every time. You can ramp up your speed faster or slower on different runs resulting in different times.

It's nothing personal, so no need to be offended. You are questioning Jay's product, I am questioning your method of testing, that's all. :beer:
 

me32

BEASTLY SHELBY GT500 TVS
Moderator
Premium Member
Joined
Sep 6, 2005
Messages
18,457
Location
CA,NorCal
[youtube_browser]M9Nv7yLRjJo[/youtube_browser]

well i sure hope i never hear anyone say that the ZL1 is a low 12/high 11 second car without mentioning that it went 13.5 as well then...

:lol:what a joke!

damn that was funny. great post its still slower than a 11-12 GT500 stock hahahahaha
 

TheCPE

Skeptic
Established Member
Joined
May 21, 2011
Messages
1,702
Location
FL
Keep testing, you'll get that glory run where the stock box "somehow" gains .001 over the JLT and you can jump for joy, until then were doing just with your results.

I think you are being a little too defensive and thus misunderstanding the point of the testing, at least the point of my testing.

Again, 1 run showing a better time with the stock box vs 1 run with the jlt doesn't mean anything, it is about averages, you really need to try to understand this.

Second, I'm not doing these test looking for a "glory run" with the stock box. I'm doing these tests to see what the hp difference is between the two. This hp difference will be calculated based on MULTIPLE runs in both setups. If the differential turns out to be 0hp, 5hp, or 15hp that is the information I think people are interested in.
 

Tucker

Active Member
Joined
Sep 7, 2003
Messages
4,727
Location
Chesapeake VA
I think you are being a little too defensive and thus misunderstanding the point of the testing, at least the point of my testing.

Again, 1 run showing a better time with the stock box vs 1 run with the jlt doesn't mean anything, it is about averages, you really need to try to understand this.

Second, I'm not doing these test looking for a "glory run" with the stock box. I'm doing these tests to see what the hp difference is between the two. This hp difference will be calculated based on MULTIPLE runs in both setups. If the differential turns out to be 0hp, 5hp, or 15hp that is the information I think people are interested in.

:lol: I'm being defensive?
Not trying to be and I understand completely.

When you do your test please be sure to post the datalogs so we can see the tunes are the same for each run.

I look forward to your results.
I just showed 15+ RWHP over the stock box on our '13 no problem.

Thanks
Jay
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread



Top