So who thinks their intakes are messing up their car??
08-18-2009, 11:27 AM
#26
Senior Member
08-18-2009, 11:41 AM
#28
Senior Member
08-18-2009, 11:59 AM
#29
New Member
Join Date: 09-03-08
Location: Michigan
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Am I the only one who feels a little cheated by going back to the stock airbox? I bought an aftermarket intake that was advertised to increase performance. We need to start looking into WHY the intakes are causing issues, instead of turning our back on them. Like someone said before, on paper they should allow us to push MORE air, but instead we're seeing a loss in midrange power, and in some cases a massive skewing of fuel delivery.
People have mentioned that it's the position of the MAF in relation to the filter, has anyone tried to modify their aftermarket intake to relocate the MAF? I might be willing to give it a try.
I'm fairly happy with my setup, but the idea that I could be getting more out of my engine by REMOVING one of my mods really bothers me.
People have mentioned that it's the position of the MAF in relation to the filter, has anyone tried to modify their aftermarket intake to relocate the MAF? I might be willing to give it a try.
I'm fairly happy with my setup, but the idea that I could be getting more out of my engine by REMOVING one of my mods really bothers me.
08-18-2009, 01:02 PM
#32
Senior Member
Am I the only one who feels a little cheated by going back to the stock airbox? I bought an aftermarket intake that was advertised to increase performance. We need to start looking into WHY the intakes are causing issues, instead of turning our back on them. Like someone said before, on paper they should allow us to push MORE air, but instead we're seeing a loss in midrange power, and in some cases a massive skewing of fuel delivery.
People have mentioned that it's the position of the MAF in relation to the filter, has anyone tried to modify their aftermarket intake to relocate the MAF? I might be willing to give it a try.
I'm fairly happy with my setup, but the idea that I could be getting more out of my engine by REMOVING one of my mods really bothers me.
People have mentioned that it's the position of the MAF in relation to the filter, has anyone tried to modify their aftermarket intake to relocate the MAF? I might be willing to give it a try.
I'm fairly happy with my setup, but the idea that I could be getting more out of my engine by REMOVING one of my mods really bothers me.
08-18-2009, 01:13 PM
#34
08-18-2009, 01:16 PM
#36
Senior Member
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: 08-10-08
Location: Florida
Posts: 876
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't want to have to put the stock box back in. I like having the intake. I don't want to have to justify to myself spending close to 300 to just use the silicone piece. There has to be something
08-18-2009, 01:17 PM
#37
New Member
Join Date: 09-03-08
Location: Michigan
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
08-18-2009, 01:21 PM
#39
Senior Member
Join Date: 06-08-08
Location: Minneapolis
Posts: 1,816
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
08-18-2009, 01:21 PM
#40
Senior Member
Maybe. It can also be an issue of distance between the sensor and the engine. The air takes more or less time to reach the engine resulting in either a transient lean or rich condition.
08-18-2009, 01:29 PM
#42
Senior Member
Join Date: 07-11-05
Location: Houston
Posts: 2,533
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Adding a K&N drop has netted me 33-34lb/min and 29lb VE on stock charge-piping, intercooler and exhaust. That's plenty of flow for my application.
08-18-2009, 01:30 PM
#43
New Member
Join Date: 09-03-08
Location: Michigan
Posts: 147
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it was an issue with distance from MAF to manifold, wouldn't we see skewing with the different charge piping options available? I don't think I've seen reports of that.
My Injen CAI does a pretty good job of keeping the MAF equidistant in relation to the turbo inlet. I can't speak for other intakes on the market.
08-18-2009, 01:30 PM
#44
Taking off the snorkel with the stock filter threw my LTFT's off around -5. It's not worth it to me. I logged it for two weeks and decided to put it back in. It showed that it pulled in more air, but the snorkel acts as a velocity stack and smooths out airflow approaching the intake tract and up to the MAF. The car ran much better (part throttle accel esp) with the snorkel, was more responsive and less finicky with AFR's.
Adding a K&N drop has netted me 33-34lb/min and 29lb VE on stock charge-piping, intercooler and exhaust. That's plenty of flow for my application.
Adding a K&N drop has netted me 33-34lb/min and 29lb VE on stock charge-piping, intercooler and exhaust. That's plenty of flow for my application.
08-18-2009, 01:32 PM
#45
Senior Member
Taking off the snorkel with the stock filter threw my LTFT's off around -5. It's not worth it to me. I logged it for two weeks and decided to put it back in. It showed that it pulled in more air, but the snorkel acts as a velocity stack and smooths out airflow approaching the intake tract and up to the MAF. The car ran much better (part throttle accel esp) with the snorkel, was more responsive and less finicky with AFR's.
Adding a K&N drop has netted me 33-34lb/min and 29lb VE on stock charge-piping, intercooler and exhaust. That's plenty of flow for my application.
Adding a K&N drop has netted me 33-34lb/min and 29lb VE on stock charge-piping, intercooler and exhaust. That's plenty of flow for my application.
08-18-2009, 01:34 PM
#46
08-18-2009, 01:39 PM
#47
Senior Member
Okay, now we're getting somewhere. What can we do to confirm that theory?
If it was an issue with distance from MAF to manifold, wouldn't we see skewing with the different charge piping options available? I don't think I've seen reports of that.
My Injen CAI does a pretty good job of keeping the MAF equidistant in relation to the turbo inlet. I can't speak for other intakes on the market.
If it was an issue with distance from MAF to manifold, wouldn't we see skewing with the different charge piping options available? I don't think I've seen reports of that.
My Injen CAI does a pretty good job of keeping the MAF equidistant in relation to the turbo inlet. I can't speak for other intakes on the market.
Drop a K&N in there and mod your airbox and it will flow just as much air.
Last edited by Terminator2; 08-18-2009 at 01:55 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
08-18-2009, 01:39 PM
#48
Senior Member
Join Date: 07-11-05
Location: Houston
Posts: 2,533
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
08-18-2009, 01:42 PM
#50
All I can say is that I have never seen any reports of compressor surge issues with Hahn's intake, Injen's intake, or Dejons. All skew the fuel trims. That I can easily fix but this surging the AEM ntake causes is not so easy to get rid off. The only real big difference between Hahn's intake and AEM's is the MAF placement.
Drop a K&N in there and mod your airbox and it will flow just as much air.
Drop a K&N in there and mod your airbox and it will flow just as much air.