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

[STAMPEDE3]

You're damn right I am going to post in such a definitive manner. I did the test and spent MY OWN TIME AND MONEY doing so. The results were clear and they were provided. I could care less who disagrees. Where are their comparative results? There are also those who, just like me, didn't gain a thing at the track. Are you dismissing their testing as well?



Who gives a damn if the dyno shows positive results WITH THE HOOD OPEN. We have been over and over this in two separate threads now and I am perplexed why you don't "get it".

Dyno with the hood closed with both the stock and aftermarket CAI's and see that gain with an aftermarket CAI diminish. I believe it was you who pointed out with the Airaid that was the case.

What I am seeing here is you trying to "prove" that a aftermarket CAI MUST be better than stock because it allows "easier" airflow. If that was the case, then real world track testing would show the same.

Your rebuttal is moot. Are you looking out for the best interest of your site sponsors here or are you more concerned about giving the community results they can base a purchase decision from?

From what I can tell, you are more concerned about protecting the the site sponsors....:nono:

Why are you so stuck on this "hood open" stuff.

Any shop I use does NOT put a fan blowing on the filter, only through the radiator.
The CAI will be sucking the same ambient shop air as the stock box.

That gives a fair test.

Closing the hood would in fact give an advantage to the stock box.

AITs with a CAI will be higher as we all know at idle with hood closed but cools off after the car is moving. Open hood gives a more real representation of the air it would have with the car moving.

You don't dyno from a dry stop in 1st gear.

 

[JerryC]

The airbox breathes through a relatively small opening compared to the area a CAI has when the hood is up.

 

[SID297]

To put an end to this infinite loop we are in...

Do your special flow test and post the results, it is that simple. You are so sure of yourself than why not prove me wrong, do the test...

I'll go ahead and point out why it will be moot. I'll use your video as the example...

The CAI in your linked video was able to flow 300 cfm at a mere .30 psi. So what psi do you think would be required to flow 500-600 cfm across the JLT or the stock air box? We don't have those numbers but we can make an educated guess that the range of .30 - .60 would be sufficient for both the stock box and the JLT. Which means the test is moot, because the psi differential that may or may not exist between the stock box and the JLT will be far to minute to account for 15hp.

Again, do the test and prove me wrong :banana:

If I find time I'll do it, but like I said before it's going to be weeks from now at the very least.


Do you agree that a CAI makes more power than stock on the dyno? If so, and if the stock intake can provide enough airflow for the stock engine, where does the extra power come from?

ok, ok...

The JLT makes power on the dyno, I don't think there is much to be gained by disputing that.

We need somebody to figure what it takes to take those HP gains to the track and get results that are comparable to the dyno results.

Others have posted them in other threads. The only thing I get from any of the results posted by anyone is that it's basically impossible for anyone but the greatest of drivers to consistently demonstrate the results of a 10-15 HP gain at the track.

You're damn right I am going to post in such a definitive manner. I did the test and spent MY OWN TIME AND MONEY doing so. The results were clear and they were provided. I could care less who disagrees. Where are their comparative results? There are also those who, just like me, didn't gain a thing at the track. Are you dismissing their testing as well?

Nope, see above.

Who gives a damn if the dyno shows positive results WITH THE HOOD OPEN. We have been over and over this in two separate threads now and I am perplexed why you don't "get it".

Dyno with the hood closed with both the stock and aftermarket CAI's and see that gain with an aftermarket CAI diminish. I believe it was you who pointed out with the Airaid that was the case.

Incorrect, tell me what the hood position is in this vid:

SVTPerformance.com 2012 Mustang GT - Airaid Intake Dyno Runs - YouTube

With the hood down with both setups the Airaid showed a gain of 9.2 RWHP and 7.9 RWTQ, without the need for a custom tune.

Here's a link to the thread if you would like to refresh yourself:

http://www.svtperformance.com/forum...hing-treatment-airaid-mxp-intake-install.html

Your hood position argument is erroneous here.

What I am seeing here is you trying to "prove" that a aftermarket CAI MUST be better than stock because it allows "easier" airflow. If that was the case, then real world track testing would show the same.

All other things being equal, any intake that can flow an equal amount of air with less vacuum that its competition is superior to said competition. Simple as that. Yours, or anyone else's for that matter, ability or inability to consistently demonstrate an 8-15 HP difference at the track doesn't surprise me in the least. I know for a fact there's no way I could drive consistently enough to show that.

Your rebuttal is moot. Are you looking out for the best interest of your site sponsors here or are you more concerned about giving the community results they can base a purchase decision from?

From what I can tell, you are more concerned about protecting the the site sponsors....:nono:

Ah, nice. I see you're now basically calling me a liar, always classy. I realize you haven't been an SVTP member for a very long time, and therefore probably haven't seen what I expect from the vendors on SVTP. Do a little research on LFP, RPM Outlet, MSX, and BOI. They're no longer vendors here, see if you can figure out why. How much protection did they receive from me?

If you're still confused about my motivations perhaps you should reread this (which I posted in the the other long intake thread):

Who provided the parts, are they a sponsor?

The manufacture of both CAIs provided the parts, and they are both vendors on SVTP (JLT and Airaid). Now if you think that I would misrepresent results due to vendors providing the parts you are extraordinarily short sighted and and suffering from tunnel vision. Let's take a closer look at it:


Has SID297 been doing these tests for free parts?


In short, no. Let's say a CAI costs $300. To do the actions necessary to produce an article the way I do I typically have to spend about $200 on fuel, $150-200 in hotel rooms, $125 in food, and 2-3 days of my very valuable time. Doesn't make a lot of sense to do all of that for a $300 part.

Is SID297 misrepresenting results because the parts are provided by a vendor?

Again, no. Let's take JLT for example, they have been an SVTP vendor since before I owned the site. I believe they've been here for about 8 years, but I'm not sure without looking. SVTP doesn't get one extra penny if Jay sells 1,000 more intakes after I release an article. Whether I produced an article or not it is unlikely he is going to stop being a vendor on SVTP anytime soon. There's no financial benefit to be had there.

But it sure would be tempting just make that SVTP vendor happy by posting falsely positive results. Wouldn't that make SID297 biased towards only giving positive reviews?

Finally, no. That's the easiest thing to dispel. Think to yourself what benefits I would get from lying. There's not much. Now think of the down sides. Let's see, for one no one would ever believe anything I ever wrote again. It would reflect extremely poorly on SVTP, and if you've been here any amount of time you'll realize that the site's integrity is very important to me. Further, why would any other vendor work with us on articles if they believed we were skewing the results for their competitors (I'm pretty sure JLT and Airaid compete for the same customers here)?

You may ask, what are SID297's qualifications to carryout such tests.

For starters, I'm a trained scientist. How many automotive journalist, besides Dr. Jamie Meyer, can say that? My undergrad degree is in chemistry. Some of the work I carried out is still be studied as a foundation for a possible cure for Alzheimer. My minor is in economics, which gives one an appreciation for components can interact with one another to produce a given result. Finally, as a JD I'm well versed in looking at all possible alternatives and possibilities to find the truth and then to effectively communication my findings to my audience.

But what about the dyno SID297 uses, maybe the owners are dupping him with fake numbers?

What would be Arrington's motivation for falsifying data? Maybe it will ehlp them sell more parts? As far as I know they aren't dealers for JLT, Lethal Performance, Airaid, SCT, or pretty much anything I've published an article about so far. I doubt too many SVTP members are going to head over to ShopHEMI.com to buy a JLT CAI for their Mustang.

Well why does SID297 take his valuable time to write these kickass articles with more information than we can find in any magazine or on any other site?

First, I enjoy working on cars and seeing what kind of results I get from various parts. Second, it gives me more access to an industry I like working in. And finally, it adds considerable value to the SVTP community. Fun times indeed.

:beer:

 

[wbt]

Incorrect, tell me what the hood position is in this vid:

SVTPerformance.com 2012 Mustang GT - Airaid Intake Dyno Runs - YouTube

With the hood down with both setups the Airaid showed a gain of 9.2 RWHP and 7.9 RWTQ, without the need for a custom tune.

Here's a link to the thread if you would like to refresh yourself:

http://www.svtperformance.com/forum...hing-treatment-airaid-mxp-intake-install.html

I believe I mis-understood you stating the differences. I have no issue admitting that. I interpreted it as the difference with the hood closed between the intakes, not the difference of each intake.

http://www.svtperformance.com/forums/2011-mustangs-354/831255-really-cheap-cai-4.html#post11544247

Your hood position argument is erroneous here.

It is right on. How many folks dyno in a wind tunnel? How many people drive around with their hood open?

All other things being equal, any intake that can flow an equal amount of air with less vacuum that its competition is superior to said competition. Simple as that. Yours, or anyone else's for that matter, ability or inability to consistently demonstrate an 8-15 HP difference at the track doesn't surprise me in the least. I know for a fact there's no way I could drive consistently enough to show that.

I guess you missed my timeslips......
http://www.svtperformance.com/forum...e-results-discussion-thread.html#post11600909

Said passes:
[youtube_browser]XXcW8Z2n43k[/youtube_browser]
[youtube_browser]LdfMCkxmt9c[/youtube_browser]

 

[TheCPE]

If I find time I'll do it, but like I said before it's going to be weeks from now at the very least.

That is fine, because once you see the numbers you'll see exactly what I'm saying. Any pressure differential at some X CFM between the two will be minute and thus negligible pertaining to a power advantage.

Do you agree that a CAI makes more power than stock on the dyno? If so, and if the stock intake can provide enough airflow for the stock engine, where does the extra power come from?

Couple things, first 99.9% of people that put a CAI on also have it tuned at the same time. This makes those dyno numbers useless for comparison.

Two whether you want to acknowledge it or not there is a "conspiracy" if that is what you want to call it that exists for people selling anything whether car parts, shamwow towels, enzyte pills, octane boosters, and especially AXE body spray (doesn't work anything like the commercials when I use it) to convince people their product works when it might not, or at least not as well as advertised.

Why are the dynos showing the power but in the real world it isn't there? I don't know, I'm still leaning toward the apples to oranges environment pertaining to air flow. And it is more than just the hood position, a fan can't properly simulate the car going down the highway at 70 mph.

So if these CAI manufacturers are designing and testing them using dynos and seeing gains there they might not take the next step and verify gains on the street...

Others have posted them in other threads. The only thing I get from any of the results posted by anyone is that it's basically impossible for anyone but the greatest of drivers to consistently demonstrate the results of a 10-15 HP gain at the track.

WBTs time slips were more than consistent enough to show a 10hp gain. The simple fact is that his test proved he had negligible gain from the JLT.

-----

A couple times you've suggested already prior to me even doing my tests on the JLT that my GPS box wont be able to discern the power increase etc etc.

I'll remind you/everyone interested in the test and results. I have already used my box and measured an 18-20 hp gain from my tune alone and a 14-16 hp gain from my hpipe. I've also tested a k&n filter and found no gain at all (no surprise). My gps box is more than capable of performing these tests.

 

[TheCPE]

Right, obviously it doesn't directly read velocity, it computes it based on the change in position and the time differential. What I'm getting at is this, if you pull a log off this device(I guess you can do that?), in 1 second how many samples would you have? 100?

Yes, for all intensive purposes you'll have 100 samples of TSPI for every second.

I'm asking for comparative reasons with what I can get by datalogging on the CAN bus, which also varies depending on the device used, i.e. a consumer device like the handhelds people use to flash their cars are quite a bit slower than J2534 passthru device.

What frequency are you getting the data off the CAN with your device?

Also, the data put on the CAN you are reading is what also feeds the speedo, the sensors reading the tire rotations will have error as well I guess is what I'm getting at here.

Your device may be much more capable than the livelink software I've used, but I know livelink wouldn't be able to make a high enough resolution measurement to discern 10hp.

 

[TheCPE]

All other things being equal, any intake that can flow an equal amount of air with less vacuum that its competition is superior to said competition. Simple as that.

And like I've pointed out and challenged you to perform your test, the pressure required to flow X CFM through these units is so small that the differential will be even still a fraction of that and will if it exists be negligible.

Ah, nice. I see you're now basically calling me a liar, always classy.

I don't think he was calling you a liar, and it does appear that you have interest in defending your vendors. You've taken a position of authority in a debate with no data to back it up and at one point completely deflecting from ever performing the special test to ever have any data to back up your position...

WBT had exceptionally consistent time slips and thus had real data to back up his position, you are just claiming there might exist some pressure differential between the two units without having any evidence. :shrug:

Also, any test by independent people you quickly dismiss (with not much scientific basis mind you) whether they've been carried out yet or not, sure seems like more defense of a vendor versus objective analysis.

 

[rich5150]

And like I've pointed out and challenged you to perform your test, the pressure required to flow X CFM through these units is so small that the differential will be even still a fraction of that and will if it exists be negligible.



I don't think he was calling you a liar, and it does appear that you have interest in defending your vendors. You've taken a position of authority in a debate with no data to back it up and at one point completely deflecting from ever performing the special test to ever have any data to back up your position...

WBT had exceptionally consistent time slips and thus had real data to back up his position, you are just claiming there might exist some pressure differential between the two units without having any evidence. :shrug:

Also, any test by independent people you quickly dismiss (with not much scientific basis mind you) whether they've been carried out yet or not, sure seems like more defense of a vendor versus objective analysis.

I'm still sticking by the track/road method. If you repeat any "Scientific test" multiple times, and reach the exact same outcome each time, one can summarize that the results are true ...one way or the other. Consistent higher MPH(trap speeds) at the track and multiple pulls on the highway(irregardless of who was driving, who started first..etc) the JLT CAI car with tune, would out accelerate the car with the stock airbox with tune only.

I'd love to have a real world test in which you had 2 bone stock cars. Installed the CAI/tune on one car, and just a tune on the other car and run them side by side 5 times....

then SWITCH the CAI to the other car...tune only...etc. I would bet you an "all you can eat" meal at the Waffle House at Mustang Week 2012... that the CAI/tune car will be faster.


:burnout:

 

[TheCPE]

I would bet you an "all you can eat" meal at the Waffle House at Mustang Week 2012... that the CAI/tune car will be faster.
:burnout:

Did you see wbt's time slips?

 

[JerryC]

I'd love to have a real world test in which you had 2 bone stock cars. Installed the CAI/tune on one car, and just a tune on the other car and run them side by side 5 times....

then SWITCH the CAI to the other car...tune only...etc. I would bet you an "all you can eat" meal at the Waffle House at Mustang Week 2012... that the CAI/tune car will be faster

You make the assumption the cars even though "bone stock" would perfom the same way.

I bought two GT's on the same day, Identical except for paint color. One of them was noticably stronger than the other. Unfortunately for me it was her car that was faster.

In your test her car might have won all the races even if the CAI was good for 15HP.

The A-B-A test needs to be done at the track with a car that has dead solid traction. An auto car would make the results easier to understand by ensuring consistent launches and shifts:
No CAI
CAI
No CAI
repeat

 

[try03venom]

Cool, again we agree.

have you done any testing on a JLT intake with 90mm tbody?? if so what gains over the stock tbody

 

[TheCPE]

I just wanted to bring this back up since we got super derailed and either new people or people are forgetting about these very consistent runs made by wbt.

Results:
JLT CAI
11.34@122 60' - 1.62 DA 1,880
11.35@122 60' - 1.64 DA 1,671

Stock CAI
11.49@119 60' - 1.74 <-------I loaded the car up too much on the converter and spun terribly DA 1,208
11.31@119 60' - 1.61 DA 1,208

 

[Tucker]

have you done any testing on a JLT intake with 90mm tbody?? if so what gains over the stock tbody

No, we don't sell or condone throttle bodys larger than the opening behind it.
Not to mention the intake in front of it is smaller as well.

I just wanted to bring this back up since we got super derailed and either new people or people are forgetting about these very consistent runs made by wbt.

Good idea, bring up testing done with a broken track timing system. ;-)

Consistant 11.30's with the JLT
Inconsistant times with the stock box.

Question never answered from page 1 or 2.
The run he spun...Shouldn't the MPH be higher? Spinning results in higher MPH nearly 100% of the time.

This is the most inconclusive test done to date.

There are some pretty smart people here, but I think some are over analizing it.

You can not test a product worth 10-15 RWHP at the track and get conclusive results.

The fastest N/A 5.0 uses a JLT CAI!!:rockon:

 

[Impetuous]

No, we don't sell or condone throttle bodys larger than the opening behind it. Not to mention the intake in front of it is smaller as well. :shrug:

You can not test a product worth 10-15 RWHP at the track and get conclusive results. :??:

I don't know what to make out of this two comments. You are shooting yourself in the foot. The same analogy should be used for the CAI. If the throttle has a smaller opening or flow less cfms than the CAI, why bother? How much the stock OEM throttle flows? How much your intake flows? I'll venture to say that 95% of the people won't touch the throttle body.
Also, why bother with a modification that you can't see the gains at the track? That's where it matters.

 

[Tucker]

I don't know what to make out of this two comments. You are shooting yourself in the foot. The same analogy must be used for the intake. If the throttle has a smaller opening or flow less cfms than the intake, why bother?
Also, why bother with a modification that you can't see the gains at the track where it matters?

Your not reading the info in this thread.

The 90mm TB has been tested with 0-4 RWHP gains in in one of the magazines a few months back.

You can open the air way all you want, but it doesn't make cense to me, to go bigger on a TB that bolts to a smaller hole.

Air will hit a wall...

 

[JerryC]

You can not test a product worth 10-15 RWHP at the track and get conclusive results.

So when a bracket racer can run his dial in to within a couple of hundredths, adding 10-15 HP wont make a difference?

With an auto car and enough tire, this test should be easy.

 

[mastwolf]

Your not reading the info in this thread.

The 90mm TB has been tested with 0-4 RWHP gains in in one of the magazines a few months back.

You can open the air way all you want, but it doesn't make cense to me, to go bigger on a TB that bolts to a smaller hole.

Air will hit a wall...

How much bigger is the JLT intake than the stock TB?

I have installed a few, just never done any measurements.


Chris

 

[Tucker]

So when a bracket racer can run his dial in to within a couple of hundredths, adding 10-15 HP wont make a difference?

With an auto car and enough tire, this test should be easy.

10-15 RWHP = .1-.15 and 1 mph which tons have got, but it can always be argued as inconclusive due to the variables at the track.

How much bigger is the JLT intake than the stock TB?

I have installed a few, just never done any measurements.


Chris

The JLT intake is designed with a taper to match the throttle body (about 83mm). All intakes are about the same size at the TB, that's why you need a step coupler to run the 90mm TB

 

[JerryC]

10-15 RWHP = .1-.15 and 1 mph which tons have got, but it can always be argued as inconclusive due to the variables at the track.

If you do back to back runs three times that should be all you need to know, if you are using a car that nails down consistent runs.

Each run with CAI should be faster than the run before it without the CAI.

In the days before computers that's how I tuned my carb and timing.

 

[Impetuous]

Your not reading the info in this thread.

The 90mm TB has been tested with 0-4 RWHP gains in in one of the magazines a few months back.

You can open the air way all you want, but it doesn't make cense to me, to go bigger on a TB that bolts to a smaller hole.

Air will hit a wall...

Hmmm that's strange. The air flows the same path, so the dyno gain is basically from the bigger maf area? MAF transfer function changes? Initial gulp of air that's less restrictive with the bigger filter and open hood? I still want to know how much the stock OEM throttle body flows and your intake. If you are really interested in helping the community I assume that you made those tests before the intake was designed.