We Are in the middle of the largest dyno testing we have ever done on a single vehicle. Every mod, every configuration, every option we can think of. All tests are run at least twice to ensure no flukes.

Anyway, we wanted to test our intake and a theoretical perfect intake to see what potential gains are. We picked up 8WHP with the ZZP 3" intake (http://www.zzperformance.com/cobalt_ion/products1.php?id=921&catid=174)over stock and lost 1WHP with the injen over stock.
http://www.zzperformance.com/miscftp/CAI-stock-ZZP-Injen.jpg

Test car was originally a stock 2006 cobalt. We tested it as received and then after wheel alignment. We picked up 4 WHP at 100mph from the alignment. We are using the after alignment results as all stock baselines. ECT was brought to 180 deg for all pulls.

Dyno for intakes was done with 2.8" pullley, 60# injectors, ZZP 1.0 PCM, NGK 4644 plugs .035 gap. Front end of car is open for easy access and part swapping and maximum cooling on the rollers. Air temps are ~50 deg in the bay. This test parameters will change depending on what were testing but for camparisons parameters will remain the same.
http://www.zzperformance.com/miscftp/IMG_7410.jpg
http://www.zzperformance.com/miscftp/IMG_7411.jpg

We then changed intakes to a 45 deg elbow, MAF tube, straight pipe and filter. We lost power over the ZZP intake. This made no sense and we later learned that the filter was smaller and caused the HP loss. Changing filter to the same K&N that the ZZP intake uses made that 'pefect intake produce about .5 more HP than the ZZP intake. We are currently leaning towards the filter being the restriction and feel that the injen would perform better with a larger filter. I'll update as we get more info.

Also interesting to note. When we ran the stock intake we found that not clamping down the boot to the throttle body, we could pickup a consistent 4WHP. This was due to the car running a little leaner and being able to get air without drawing it through the intake. Pretty crazy....

move this to the dyno section right below road tales. Good job getting actual data though.

wow an alignment made a hp difference?

Interesting, I didn't realize you guys were doing an intake as well. Is is 2.5" or 3"? Stainless or Aluminum? One piece or two piece design?

wow an alignment made a hp difference?

I found that interesting as well, it does make sense though.

wow an alignment made a hp difference?

i suppose it has something to do with rotational inertia, but yea kinda hard to believe.

why do you guys think the alignment caused it to dyno higher?

and just to clarify, the tests were done on the same day correct?

We Are in the middle of the largest dyno testing we have ever done on a single vehicle. Every mod, every configuration, every option we can think of.

Anyway, we wanted to test our intake and a theoretical perfect intake to see what potential gains are. We picked up 8WHP with the ZZP intake over stock and lost 1WHP with the injen over stock.
[IMG]http://www.zzperformance.com/miscftp/CAI-stock-ZZP-Injen.jpg[IMG]

Test car was a stock 2006 cobalt. We tested it as received and then after wheel alignment. We picked up 4 WHP at 100mph from the alignment. We are using the after alignment results as all stock baselines.

Dyno for intakes was done with 2.8" pullley, 60# injectors, ZZP 1.0 PCM, NGK 4644 plugs .035 gap. Front end of car is open for easy access and part swapping and maximum cooling on the rollers. Air temps are ~50 deg in the bay. This test parameters will change depending on what were testing but for camparisons parameters will remain the same.
[IMG]http://www.zzperformance.com/miscftp/IMG_7410.jpg[IMG]

We then changed intakes to a 45 deg elbow, MAF tube, straight pipe and filter. We lost power over the ZZP intake. This made no sense and we later learned that the filter was smaller and caused the HP loss. Changing filter to the same K&N that the ZZP intake uses made that 'pefect intake produce about .5 more HP than the ZZP intake. We are currently leaning towards the filter being the restriction and feel that the injen would perform better with a larger filter. I'll update as we get more info.

Also interesting to note. When we ran the stock intake we found that not clamping down the boot to the throttle body, we could pickup a consistent 4WHP. This was due to the car running a little leaner and being able to get air without drawing it through the intake. Pretty crazy....

explain the contradiction in the bold please....

also wouldnt it only make sense that your intake performed better with your tune?

explain the contradiction in the bold please....

also wouldnt it only make sense that your intake performed better with your tune?

reading>you

Should have thrown the ABM in the comparison.

reading>you

really where??

i dont see an explanation anywhere in there...maybe im misunderstanding something...

i am not a nutswinger coming in here soley to bust ZZP to the ground...i was just wondering the 2 questions i asked...i thought they were reasonable questions

What was interesting is that all 3 intakes had the exact same AF ratio on the dyno. This meant we didn't have to interpret AF ratios affect on HP. We were suprised, pleasantly.

No contradiction. Please reread. Any time you dyno a car you want a stock baseline but you have to establish what that 'stock' is. What ECT, what ambient temps, what gas, has ANYTHING been done to the car, etc. This is the only way to obtain precise data.
I didn't post the baseline dyno. We have already done about 100 dyno tests on this car. We've done spark plugs, PCMs, rev limiters, pulley sizes, intakes. We'll be doing dual pass, HE, TB, and lots of our own personal goodies shortly. I'll be posting more as we reach the topics but I was trying to keep this one about intakes. Here's the stock file vs. our 1.0 PCM. http://www.zzperformance.com/miscftp/stock-vs-1_0-cobalt-file.jpg

Wheel alignment is nothing new. ZZP generally runs much, much faster than anyone else can with the same cars. This is done with highly specific testing and use of many small tools that add up to give us tremendous advantages over others. We regularly get acused of running nitrous, secret fuel, secret motors, etc. Truth is that we just take our time to obtain information that others overlook. Alignment is just one of dozens. Almost all the cars we've tested have had gains from alignment. The optimum alignment will change based on what you're doing, what kind of power you are making and if you have rubber or poly mounts. We did a standard toe alginment, we could probably get a bit more power from adjusting toe but that wouldn't be the kind of 'stock' we are looking for.

Soon we expect to be easily hitting 300WHP with the stock M62. Seems nearly impossible but take this alignment thing most people don't know about. That's one thing that gave 4HP. Some cars would be little or none. Add 20 little things like that each netting 1/2 a HP up to 4HP like this one. Add that to your dyno and it's easy to see how 300WHP comes quickly...

What was interesting is that all 3 intakes had the exact same AF ratio on the dyno. This meant we didn't have to interpret AF ratios affect on HP. We were suprised, pleasantly.

No contradiction. Please reread. Any time you dyno a car you want a stock baseline but you have to establish what that 'stock' is. What ECT, what ambient temps, what gas, has ANYTHING been done to the car, etc. This is the only way to obtain precise data.

Wheel alignment is nothing new. ZZP generally runs much, much faster than anyone else can with the same cars. This is done with highly specific testing and use of many small tools that add up to give us tremendous advantages over others. We regularly get acused of running nitrous, secret fuel, secret motors, etc. Truth is that we just take our time to obtain information that others overlook. Alignment is just one of dozens. Almost all the cars we've tested have had gains from alignment. The optimum alignment will change based on what you're doing, what kind of power you are making and if you have rubber or poly mounts. We did a standard toe alginment, we could probably get a bit more power from adjusting toe but that wouldn't be the kind of 'stock' we are looking for.

Soon we expect to be easily hitting 300WHP with the stock M62. Seems nearly impossible but take this alignment thing most people don't know about. That's one thing that gave 4HP. Some cars would be little or none. Add 20 little things like that each netting 1/2 a HP up to 4HP like this one. Add that to your dyno and it's easy to see how 300WHP comes quickly...

ok in that case i misread...what you are referring to as stock i would refer as a baseline...the fact that you threw the word stock in there is what is confusing to me and i am sure other....

also my question about the tune and the intake working better???

nice! I'm interested in seeing what happens with the injen intake with a k&n filter. Keep us posted!

all your parts are gonna be superior right?

ok in that case i misread...what you are referring to as stock i would refer as a baseline...the fact that you threw the word stock in there is what is confusing to me and i am sure other....

also my question about the tune and the intake working better???

You didn't misread.... Stock is stock. If you add more parts and tunes to a car you cannot call it vs stock. Certain performance mod's i.e. intake or exhaust will have greater gains due to what supporting mods are already on the car. Yeah you may have taken a "stock" baseline but that is prolly not the gains you will see when installing them on a "factory stock" car.

also my question about the tune and the intake working better???

No, we based our tune on a stock intake. The ZZP and injen intakes didn't change AF ratio. This was suprising but it made the job much easier.

all your parts are gonna be superior right?

If they are not, we'll report back honestly and then change them.

This testing isn't just about ZZP stuff. dual pass, a HE, pulley size, etc have nothing to do with brands. Quit hating.

You didn't misread.... Stock is stock.

I agree. Stock is totally stock. Perhaps I misworded my first post.

The "stock" intake doesn't mean the car was stock. The car has been dyno'd stock and I have edited to add that chart. OUr dyno will only let us overlay 3 graphs and I don't see the point of comparing a bone stock car to one with all the mods and then talking about the intake. We were isolating the fuction of the intake system on the 3 lines in the first dyno graph.

To compare different parts, you need to change as little as possible and just redyno changing only the intake. We felt that a test using common parts was best suited for testing the intakes. We do not personally have interest in what a bone stock Cobalt will do with 2.75" intake vs. a 3". We don't plan on ever running like that and most people buying mods don't either.

When we did our spark plug test we just changed plugs and nothing else. Then we redid the test with a stock pulley, 3.1" pulley, 3.0", 2.9 and 2.8. That way we could see when it's worth doing plugs, what plugs are best and what the gains are with different pulleys.

When we did the pulley size test, we didn't change anything. Just dropped pulley size .1 at a time and ran two or three dynos for each size. That way we isolate the performance of each size. Then we monitor KR, temps, etc. In this way we learn the characteristics of each pulley. For example, we generally gained 3 ft/lbs of torque by dropping .1 in pulley size. We gained HP until we went to a 2.9, there we didn't gain HP. But more on that in another thread. This is just about intake systems and the components effect on the engine.

No, we based our tune on a stock intake. The ZZP and injen intakes didn't change AF ratio. This was suprising but it made the job much easier.



If they are not, we'll report back honestly and then change them.

This testing isn't just about ZZP stuff. dual pass, a HE, pulley size, etc have nothing to do with brands. Quit hating.

ok thank you for the answer....

i have another question why only compare stock, injen, zzp? why not add in rebel, aem, OTTP, K&N, or anyother intakes out there?

What was interesting is that all 3 intakes had the exact same AF ratio on the dyno. This meant we didn't have to interpret AF ratios affect on HP. We were suprised, pleasantly.

No contradiction. Please reread. Any time you dyno a car you want a stock baseline but you have to establish what that 'stock' is. What ECT, what ambient temps, what gas, has ANYTHING been done to the car, etc. This is the only way to obtain precise data.
I didn't post the baseline dyno. We have already done about 100 dyno tests on this car. We've done spark plugs, PCMs, rev limiters, pulley sizes, intakes. We'll be doing dual pass, HE, TB, and lots of our own personal goodies shortly. I'll be posting more as we reach the topics but I was trying to keep this one about intakes. Here's the stock file vs. our 1.0 PCM.

Wheel alignment is nothing new. ZZP generally runs much, much faster than anyone else can with the same cars. This is done with highly specific testing and use of many small tools that add up to give us tremendous advantages over others. We regularly get acused of running nitrous, secret fuel, secret motors, etc. Truth is that we just take our time to obtain information that others overlook. Alignment is just one of dozens. Almost all the cars we've tested have had gains from alignment. The optimum alignment will change based on what you're doing, what kind of power you are making and if you have rubber or poly mounts. We did a standard toe alginment, we could probably get a bit more power from adjusting toe but that wouldn't be the kind of 'stock' we are looking for.

Soon we expect to be easily hitting 300WHP with the stock M62. Seems nearly impossible but take this alignment thing most people don't know about. That's one thing that gave 4HP. Some cars would be little or none. Add 20 little things like that each netting 1/2 a HP up to 4HP like this one. Add that to your dyno and it's easy to see how 300WHP comes quickly...

can you guys show me 1 single timeslip from a cobalt with your mods? mods, that is not an attack it is a legit question.

No, we based our tune on a stock intake. The ZZP and injen intakes didn't change AF ratio. This was suprising but it made the job much easier.



If they are not, we'll report back honestly and then change them.

This testing isn't just about ZZP stuff. dual pass, a HE, pulley size, etc have nothing to do with brands. Quit hating.

Why would you run a test on the worst intake out there vs yours?

DO you plan on running a test against rebel,ott,k and n and aem?

No, we based our tune on a stock intake. The ZZP and injen intakes didn't change AF ratio. This was suprising but it made the job much easier.



If they are not, we'll report back honestly and then change them.

This testing isn't just about ZZP stuff. dual pass, a HE, pulley size, etc have nothing to do with brands. Quit hating.



I agree. Stock is totally stock. Perhaps I misworded my first post.

The "stock" intake doesn't mean the car was stock. The car has been dyno'd stock and I have edited to add that chart. OUr dyno will only let us overlay 3 graphs and I don't see the point of comparing a bone stock car to one with all the mods and then talking about the intake. We were isolating the fuction of the intake system on the 3 lines in the first dyno graph.

To compare different parts, you need to change as little as possible and just redyno changing only the intake. We felt that a test using common parts was best suited for testing the intakes. We do not personally have interest in what a bone stock Cobalt will do with 2.75" intake vs. a 3". We don't plan on ever running like that and most people buying mods don't either.

Do you want to take a poll on how many people actually have 60's in their car? I would say that approx 70% of people on this forum started with either stg 2 or a cai when starting their modding. If I am wrong I am wrong but not everyone has the money to rock a tune 60's a tune and 2.8 pulley.

Do you want to take a poll on how many people actually have 60's in their car? I would say that approx 70% of people on this forum started with either stg 2 or a cai when starting their modding. If I am wrong I am wrong but not everyone has the money to rock a tune 60's a tune and 2.8 pulley.

do you just like to find things to bust their balls? What do you have against them? Read what the fuck he said, most people that are modding are not going to throw a 3 inch intake on their car, unless they are modding their car a little more heavily. Can people please get off of ZZP's back, its like they try and do one thing, and then people want 40 more from them. So chill the fuck out, before they decide to quit doing everything with our cars and then you will have more to complain about because you can't find anywhere to buy mods.

I am just waiting on a response. Not hating.

do you just like to find things to bust their balls? What do you have against them? Read what the fuck he said, most people that are modding are not going to throw a 3 inch intake on their car, unless they are modding their car a little more heavily. Can people please get off of ZZP's back, its like they try and do one thing, and then people want 40 more from them. So chill the fuck out, before they decide to quit doing everything with our cars and then you will have more to complain about because you can't find anywhere to buy mods.

I had legit questions and responses if you can't handle that then that's your problem...

what? Where are your questions? All I see are comments? Or are you referring to your "60's poll" question? Because that one really is a great one!!

do you just like to find things to bust their balls? What do you have against them? Read what the fuck he said, most people that are modding are not going to throw a 3 inch intake on their car, unless they are modding their car a little more heavily. Can people please get off of ZZP's back, its like they try and do one thing, and then people want 40 more from them. So chill the fuck out, before they decide to quit doing everything with our cars and then you will have more to complain about because you can't find anywhere to buy mods.

Yes you should

At he speaks as an adult not a child. there is nothing wrong with questions?

OP interesting i always wondered about changing the "style" and weather it would effect dyno numbers

what? Where are your questions? All I see are comments? Or are you referring to your "60's poll" question? Because that one really is a great one!!

my question is pretty simple. What kind of times in cobalts does zzp have to claim to be the fastest?

my question is pretty simple. What kind of times in cobalts does zzp have to claim to be the fastest?

i was not referring to you, sorry I should of quoted

Do you want to take a poll on how many people actually have 60's in their car? I would say that approx 70% of people on this forum started with either stg 2 or a cai when starting their modding. If I am wrong I am wrong but not everyone has the money to rock a tune 60's a tune and 2.8 pulley.

No, I don't care what the poll says nor what most people are running. It makes no difference to this testing. We could run a 2.66 pulley with custom crank pulley and the results would still be perfect. You're misunderstanding what we're trying to do.

Let me explain how this testing works:

Any time you want to test a system, you need to tax it as hard as can be. It's reasonable to assume that whatever setup for induction is the best with a 3.35 pulley or 3.1 pulley is also the best for a 2.8. The 2.8 will show the differences much better in intake systems though. This is why we tested the way we did.

Similarly if you wanted to test a radiator, you could test on a bone stock car in 60 deg weather but the test would be meaningless. It would also be meaningless to take a poll and find out what temperature most people live in and what % of throttle they use. Instead you want to setup the vehicle for worst case scenario, then try your different radiators and whichever is best is best for all environments (assuming same material, just design testing)
can you guys show me 1 single timeslip from a cobalt with your mods? mods, that is not an attack it is a legit question.
Did I claim to have one? You put in bold a statement I made saying that we generally run faster than anyone else. Did I say we are currently running faster than you? No. I said that we generally do something. I'm not sure how that can be disproved when it's not making much of a claim.

This summer we'll have slips and videos and yeah, we'll be running much faster than others.
Why would you run a test on the worst intake out there vs yours?

DO you plan on running a test against rebel,ott,k and n and aem?

We had one laying around and it's the most common intake.

We do not plan on retesting because there isn't a reason to. If one was here, we'd test it but there isn't much point. The limiting factor seems related to the filter. If you read my post you'd see that a "perfect" intake didn't make significant gains.

A big part of being good means getting through an enormous amount of data. To do this, you need to know what to test and what you don't have to. If you have a product that is working within 1/2 a HP of perfect, you're testing is done. You then move to the next limitation and test more. you never need to return to the intake tube until that becomes the limit again.

I did read Matt and I am taking objection to some of the things he said. There is nothing wrong with that and I am not swearing unlike someone in here....

i was not referring to you, sorry I should of quoted

fanboi go away alreay and let the guys ask there legitamate questions.

Will the 3inch intake hit the wheel well,i cant believe the injen lost 1 hp over the stock,but i do like the 3 inch if it doesent rub the fender lining i might get one.

Did I claim to have one? You put in bold a statement I made saying that we generally run faster than anyone else. Did I say we are currently running faster than you? No. I said that we generally do something. I'm not sure how that can be disproved when it's not making much of a claim.

This summer we'll have slips and videos and yeah, we'll be running much faster than others.


You dont claim to have a slip, but you do claim to generally be faster than anyone else. If you dont have any times, then you cant claim this. Its pretty simple. That is a false claim.

You dont claim to have a slip, but you do claim to generally be faster than anyone else. If you dont have any times, then you cant claim this. Its pretty simple. That is a false claim.

The Cobalt market is new. No point in arguing with you so you can hate me later when we rip off times. When I said generally I was refering to anything we race. Obviously we haven't been racing Cobalts. If I said "Our Cobalts are faster than anyone else's" then you'd have a point. But this thread isn't about paper racing with you. it's about some dyno numbers. It seems that people around here just can't take it when I post no matter what gets said. You just can't stand to see me know something...

Will the 3inch intake hit the wheel well,i cant believe the injen lost 1 hp over the stock,but i do like the 3 inch if it doesent rub the fender lining i might get one.
Our intake doesn't rub. It's well designed.
We will test the injen again. We tested it before the info on the filter came to light. We tested multiple filters. The ZZP intake uses a 3.5" intlet, the injen 3" IIRC so we have to find a good size 3" inlet filter. I suspect the power will come up. If so, it would make for a quick injen mod for more HP.
im not a fanboi, i am not saying I love zzp. But I am tired of everyone bashing them everytime they make a thread with information in it. People are never satisfied and always want more. But if OTTP posts, people open their mouths and await for their cocks.
My posts are highly technical. This seems to bother many people, especially people who want to believe ZZP doesn't know what we're doing. They resort to any tactic they can to change the subject from a technical discussion to senseless bickering and bashes.

Keep it up! This is a great way to test. I'm sure some of the comments your getting are making you want to rip your hair out, but, keep the good info coming.

I'd love to see a 2.5 in exhaust vs a 3 in exhaust. I am running a 2.5 with my turbo setup right now. I'd love to see what would happen if I installed a 3in exhaust.

Or maybe the airbox mod with a good filter vs intakes.

No, I don't care what the poll says nor what most people are running. It makes no difference to this testing. We could run a 2.66 pulley with custom crank pulley and the results would still be perfect. You're misunderstanding what we're trying to do.

Let me explain how this testing works:

Any time you want to test a system, you need to tax it as hard as can be. It's reasonable to assume that whatever setup for induction is the best with a 3.35 pulley or 3.1 pulley is also the best for a 2.8. The 2.8 will show the differences much better in intake systems though. This is why we tested the way we did.

Similarly if you wanted to test a radiator, you could test on a bone stock car in 60 deg weather but the test would be meaningless. It would also be meaningless to take a poll and find out what temperature most people live in and what % of throttle they use. Instead you want to setup the vehicle for worst case scenario, then try your different radiators and whichever is best is best for all environments (assuming same material, just design testing)


I understand testing it at the extreme but wouldn't the extreme boost the numbers to be unrealistic for most the cars out here? Wouldn't you want to test at many different intervals? Instead of calling it a stock test it would probably work better to list the mods the car had (which you did) and call it a baseline test. I would like for you to test other more common cai too. I feel the results and claims can be misleading if you don't.

The Cobalt market is new. No point in arguing with you so you can hate me later when we rip off times. When I said generally I was refering to anything we race. Obviously we haven't been racing Cobalts. If I said "Our Cobalts are faster than anyone else's" then you'd have a point. But this thread isn't about paper racing with you. it's about some dyno numbers. It seems that people around here just can't take it when I post no matter what gets said. You just can't stand to see me know something...


Our intake doesn't rub. It's well designed.
We will test the injen again. We tested it before the info on the filter came to light. We tested multiple filters. The ZZP intake uses a 3.5" intlet, the injen 3" IIRC so we have to find a good size 3" inlet filter. I suspect the power will come up. If so, it would make for a quick injen mod for more HP.

My posts are highly technical. This seems to bother many people, especially people who want to believe ZZP doesn't know what we're doing. They resort to any tactic they can to change the subject from a technical discussion to senseless bickering and bashes.

I got an infraction for "insulting" you but knowing how this will get un-noticed makes me feel soo good.....

So what is the intake made out of? My concern is also with design/durability. The intakes for these cars have many different places to rub and get holes in them. Was this addressed in the design?

Sounds like you got a good intake.I will get back with you all on the intake,i might just go for it .Thanks for the testing.

i suppose it has something to do with rotational inertia, but yea kinda hard to believe.

why do you guys think the alignment caused it to dyno higher?

and just to clarify, the tests were done on the same day correct?

put 155/70/15 hard summer tires on it you will pick up another 5 hp. its all about the rolls , friction and stuff like that and means not a whole lot...a long time ago Ford produced a Pinto "mpg" with hard narrow tires, cheated the epa rollers and got better certified goverment mpg numbers. meh.
\
Mr. Zoomer: Questions: Is your test matrix designed to show that the results are repeatable or are they stand alone?
Does the distance of the MAF from the TB influence the results in any way?

thank you.

well props to zzp for dynoing their stuff and researching rather than relying on fanboys swinging from thier nuts like some other vendors on here

Lets just hope it holds up better than the flex pipes....

well props to zzp for dynoing their stuff and researching rather than relying on fanboys swinging from thier nuts like some other vendors on here

Lets just hope it holds up better than the FLEX PIPES....

:lol::lol:flex pipes:lol::thumbsdow

Nobody has said they are full of crap here. Simply questioning controversial points of their post.

Pay careful attention. If you claim to "generally run faster with the cars they have," on a COBALT forum, you better be able to prove you generally run faster. If not, dont claim it.
You do realize that we are in Michigan, right? There are no dragstrips open anywhere near us until April. If we go to the track in April and beat your best time, will you please stop questioning everything we say?

As far as testing multiple intakes, if someone wants to send one for dyno testing, we will gladly test it. As Zoom said, we already had an Injen sitting in the corner.

Any other suggestions for dyno tests or comparisons will be considered as well.

We had one laying around and it's the most common intake.

We do not plan on retesting because there isn't a reason to. If one was here, we'd test it but there isn't much point. The limiting factor seems related to the filter. If you read my post you'd see that a "perfect" intake didn't make significant gains.

A big part of being good means getting through an enormous amount of data. To do this, you need to know what to test and what you don't have to. If you have a product that is working within 1/2 a HP of perfect, you're testing is done. You then move to the next limitation and test more. you never need to return to the intake tube until that becomes the limit again.

THANK YOU

this seems to be gone over like 15 times an effin week here.

Thank you ZZP , Zoomer, Matt and crew, I myself do alot of work with a chassis dyno, tuning and plain old messing around I really appreciate what you are doing and fully understand how you are doing it. Please continue the good work!! These are the best and most informational posts around.

I found when testing the stock air box vs. the air box mod and the injen, the Injen made the most power by a significant margin!! However, the injen put the maf out of range and set a lean code ses light. So after re-calibrating the maf in all fairness is when I saw the hp jump the most. I am now curious as to trying a larger filter on it and seeing what happens. I also want to upgrade to a 3" though.

Keep up the good work and keep us posted!!!

Lets just hope it holds up better than the flex pipes....

touche. the flex pipe issue was resolve and the problem was posted about here. We then raised the warranty to 2 years and offered replacements to all those affected. it sucks to deal with issues but we did correct it.
put 155/70/15 hard summer tires on it you will pick up another 5 hp. its all about the rolls , friction and stuff like that and means not a whole lot...a long time ago Ford produced a Pinto "mpg" with hard narrow tires, cheated the epa rollers and got better certified goverment mpg numbers. meh.
\
Mr. Zoomer: Questions: Is your test matrix designed to show that the results are repeatable or are they stand alone?
Does the distance of the MAF from the TB influence the results in any way?


There are ways to cheat the dynos for the sake of bragging rights. I knew a guy who warmed the oil and cooled the motor. Matt told me a story 1/4 mile racing where they purposely ran out of oil at the 1/8 cause it would free up power for the back 1/2 and the motor wouldn't blow in that short of a time.

The alignment gains on the dyno are reflected in 1/4 mile times though, so it's worthwhile. to those that already knew about this...cool stuff huh? you should have posted;) to those that this is new info to, hope it helps you out. We've got dozens more. We hope to show this with our upcoming track runs.

The data was very repeatable, not just in raw form but in cross reference as well. To verify results we crossed gm/s with HP and extrapolated numbers compensating for MAF change with AF graph correction (if it wasn't the same we calculated) Then when we used the data to make an interpolation if needed for some things we didn't want to test. We would redo the runs if it wasn't spot on. This did allow us to catch some errors. It was nice having the intakes so close in MAF reading, the room consistent and the car quite consistent as well.

The length of the MAF tube doesn't affect much unless you're making size trasitions. Of course you need some length but when you have a filter on, it doesn't need to be long. A bend in the tube before or after the MAF will change the numbers a lot though. This was an issue with the so called 'perfect intake' we rigged up. The car run .8 richer which lowered power quite a bit. We saw that the MAF was the highest of the bunch. This led us to believe the intake had huge gains until we ran the math (as described above). Then we found we were actually flowing less despite the high MAF readings. This is how we first got put onto filter restrictions. A PCM flash and another dyno confirmed our math was right on. We then changed the filter and tried some other things.

You do bring up a good topic though. One I've tried to touch on before. You cannot use one parameter to make a judgement. If you did have a bend in the MAF tube and didn't know any better, you might interpret the results of a scan as having gained airflow. This of course would be totally inaccurate but you'd need a wideband to know what to divide the gm/s by in order to get a true number for comparison.

While were on the subject, bends typically hurt airflow more than anything you can do in an intake system. Back in 2003 I wrote a tech blub on this after some flowbench work on intakes when trying to sqeeze some extra power out of my car. It's a little dated but here's the link: http://www.zzperformance.com/grand_prix/articles1.php?id=22
Having that information I was suprised to see the filter make more of a difference than the intake tube in our testing.

Keep it technical and mature or keep out...

good to see a vendor doing extensive research on something like this. id love to see a 2.5 vs 3.0" exhaust, aswell as a shorty vs midlength header.

"extensive" research is not typically defined as testing the worst intake on the market vs. your own. "extensive" should include and "extensive" list of products. if zzp could show they out perform all the intakes, or even half of them, on the market, i would be interested.

most companies make a peice of pipe with a filter and if it fits on the car it goes into mass production. its good to see a company dyno testing not only their product, but at least one other on the market, and throw in the theoretical best in for good measure.

most companies make a peice of pipe with a filter and if it fits on the car it goes into mass production. its good to see a company dyno testing not only their product, but at least one other on the market, and throw in the theoretical best in for good measure.

Yea this should have been done a while ago. At least someone has stepped their game up. Zoomer thanks for the pm replies :twothumbs

most companies make a peice of pipe with a filter and if it fits on the car it goes into mass production. its good to see a company dyno testing not only their product, but at least one other on the market, and throw in the theoretical best in for good measure.

yea its awesome for trying to say "look how badass our stuff is" ....


and not testing other competitors. i understand they had the injen laying around already though. i would LOVE to see a balls out comparison between many different intakes, and would actually gain alot of respect for zzp conducting such a comparison

Oh look! A typical CSS.net thread!
This place gets more pathetic by the day.

Zooomer, keep up the good work! I'm interested to see the results.

Wait, did you compare intakes/maf housings on the same MAF cal?

Wouldn't common sense say to unplug the MAF and run speed density for comparison's sake?

Wait, did you compare intakes/maf housings on the same MAF cal?

Wouldn't common sense say to unplug the MAF and run speed density for comparison's sake?

I am thinking how glad i am to have an obsolete Redline with an awesome OEM trailblazer air cleaner, the only mod is reflective insulation. Out performs ALL the Cobalt iterations. (GM test data) :lol::lol:

Short of moving brake lines, or sheet metal, its hard to fit anything larger in the inlet tract on a Cobalt. It takes care, intelligent installation work and some superior fabrication skills. I am hard pressed to get excited by the skill sets shown here by some posters (Oh I stripped the oil change drain plug/crushed the laminova tubes/broke my wheel studs/) or the "test results support existing prejudice" zoomer posts
Then I look at the time attack car and realise that the inlet tube was not changed, the filter housing was with a K&N in the stock location. No filter box. Hopeless for everyday use.
-T/A in 05: 312 whp with stock inlet tube without nitrous. (TVS)
-Area47 in 07: 300+ with stock bottom end and inlet tube. (TVS)
Then i re-read the zoomer posts.

Then some of the rodimus prime posts. O darn why did i sign on this am? well bro' at least your car runs now.

So what is the intake made out of? My concern is also with design/durability. The intakes for these cars have many different places to rub and get holes in them. Was this addressed in the design?

now this is a good post! add water intrusion to design requirements...

yea its awesome for trying to say "look how badass our stuff is" ....


and not testing other competitors. i understand they had the injen laying around already though. i would LOVE to see a balls out comparison between many different intakes, and would actually gain alot of respect for zzp conducting such a comparison
Testing the Injen was important because it is by far the most common Cobalt intake on the market. As I said before, we will gladly test more intakes if someone would like us to. Send them over and we will get it done. And before anyone says that we will automatically claim our intake as the winner, I can assure you that we don't work like that. A few years ago, when we were testing 3800 intercoolers on our supercharger dyno, our intercooler significantly outperformed all others that we tested- until we had a customer ask us to test his Thrasher intercooler. We tested it head to head with ours and found theirs to cool 4 to 5 degrees more than ours under the same conditions. We have no problem reporting that another product outperforms ours if it actually does.

...As I said before, we will gladly test more intakes if someone would like us to. Send them over and we will get it done..

Matt, any chance next time you guys could test them in speed density? Not bashing but my concern is with whp of each intake so close to each other and being that you are changing the MAF housing each time its easy to have jumped a cell/row in the spark table on one of the intakes tested since the spark table's one axis is airflow calculated from the MAF. In my own tests I've found that a single degree of spark added 5whp on stock supercharger cars and could explain the differences in intake pipes that you are testing.

Matt, any chance next time you guys could test them in speed density? Not bashing but my concern is with whp of each intake so close to each other and being that you are changing the MAF housing each time its easy to have jumped a cell/row in the spark table on one of the intakes tested since the spark table's one axis is airflow calculated from the MAF. In my own tests I've found that a single degree of spark added 5whp on stock supercharger cars and could explain the differences in intake pipes that you are testing.

We monitored spark and correlated AF ratio with gm/s to eliminate what you're saying could be an issue.

I think most of you are missing the point of this thread and I don't think it should have been moved to the ZZP section. We did not do a test to see if our intake was the best. I do not believe there to be significant performance differences in the tube of same diameter. The injen is 2.75 so it makes for a good test of all intakes that are 2.75 and ours is 3" so it does the same for 3" intakes.

Stock intake was only 8 WHP less than ours and 8.5 less than perfect. We consider the testing on intake tubes to be complete at this point and testing other brands wouldn't make much sense to me unless they were right there. People here would interpret the results wrong anyway. Once we saw the pipe wasn't the restriction anymore, we moved to filter and TB and blower inlet. That is where the data is more important currently.

Everyone here just wants a simple test of intakes to see 'what's the best' and you can't do a test like that. If we did the AF ratio would change, then we could test like Witt said w/o the MAF but then people would complain about it not being how they run it. All the dyno info wouldn't apply anyway to their car and we'd get into discussing one intake better than another depending on if you tuned it or not.

Go dyno a tvs with a gmpp exhaust and a 3inch exhaust and tell me the difference in hp.

Go dyno a tvs with a gmpp exhaust and a 3inch exhaust and tell me the difference in hp.If someone wants to loan a TVS, we will do it. We already have the GMPP exhaust and 3" exhausts here. Otherwise, if someone is installing a TVS on their own car and wants to come out for some dyno testing, we can do that too. I'm very pleased with our dyno testing so far. With an LS4 TB and our adapter, we are up to 262whp still running a stock exhaust. I'm thinking that 300whp should come fairly easy with single pass IC, headers, DP, exh, 2.6, and 100 octane + timing.

I'd like to add that I have personally made over 250 dyno pulls in cobalts in the last couple months. My job is fun, and it's going to be more fun in a couple months when we dial in Ryan's twincharge setup. :)

with no cooling mods?

with no cooling mods?
Sorry, I added in single pass IC, which I forgot to mention. Good call. We will be testing the stock IC, dual-pass, and single pass against each other.

If someone wants to loan a TVS, we will do it. We already have the GMPP exhaust and 3" exhausts here. Otherwise, if someone is installing a TVS on their own car and wants to come out for some dyno testing, we can do that too. I'm very pleased with our dyno testing so far. With an LS4 TB and our adapter, we are up to 262whp still running a stock exhaust. I'm thinking that 300whp should come fairly easy with single pass IC, headers, DP, exh, 2.6, and 100 octane + timing.

I'd like to add that I have personally made over 250 dyno pulls in cobalts in the last couple months. My job is fun, and it's going to be more fun in a couple months when we dial in Ryan's twincharge setup. :)

Zoomer said you guys have a tvs i guess he was lying.

Zoomer said you guys have a tvs i guess he was lying.
Where did he say that? I know he has a larger blower, but not a TVS. Perhaps you have that confused. Or maybe he picked one up and I don't know about it.

glad to see this is staying civil ish..

i'd like to get some numbers like that for the 2.4 with intakes and the T upgrade..

Where did he say that? I know he has a larger blower, but not a TVS. Perhaps you have that confused. Or maybe he picked one up and I don't know about it.

HMM right here?

I don't know how to say this without being a dick but here goes.

I don't know what you are trying to say Area but Tim was correct and you seem to not understand how the PCM works.

For one, the PCM moves the fuel in chunks. In other words 9000hz is no different than 9030hz. The PCM only has a set number of cells to use for fueling and although the MAF is basically infinitely variable, the PCM is not.

2nd, the last cell in the PCM is the last cell. Once you hit it fueling is set to an exact point.

This right here "it plays into each other. the 11k cell is used to carry the rest of the load perse' above this. it get's done all day every day on turbo lsj's with a good sized turbo. hell i am close to the end of it with the tvs, and will be over this mark with new parts coming.

log maf vs error % or maf vs afr which ever you chose to do. do the usual maf scaling. then set the 11k cell to a desired air flow number and run with it. you are stuck at this, and it's not a bad thing. 500whp can be made, and has been made doing this. if the wastegate freaks, or boost controller freaks. hold on, because you have no built this level of error compensation into it, and can't. so you are at the mercy of these two things to work right and make life happy."

is a bunch of shit. I'm not even going to comment on it's accuracy. I'm just saying it makes not sense. It's a bunch of words and quotes from PCM tables that have nothing to do with the subject. You're posts bother me because you overcomplicate very simple ideas seemingly to come accross as knowing something that others don't. This is followed by people who don't understand what-so-ever posting pics bowing. This isn't a good thing. The readers are now less intelligent for having read the post.

But back to the PCM. So say the 2nd to last cell is 10,800 and the last one is 11,100.

The PCM doesn't use hz in 1 hz increments as I stated above. In 1/2 meg PCM boxes (used to 2004) the PCM saw frequency in 125hz increments. So it would 'click' more duty cycle every time the hz were 125 higher. If it was in between it rounded to the nearest 125 hz increment. Newer 1 meg boxes I'm guessing have more resolution. So maybe they round in 75 or 50 hz increments but I can assure you they round.

Now using above if you are at 10,800 or 10,830 it's going to give the same amount of fuel. It will round to 10,800 and use what you have in that table. If it's in between 10,800 and 11,100 it will round to some increment (whatever it's resolution is) and extrapolate from that point a number in between what you have loaded in the 10,800 and 11,100 tables. Once you get to 11,100 the PCM is done adding fuel. Doesn't matter if you flow more air, it will not add any more fuel EXACTLY as Tim indicated. There is no PCM work around, despite the rumors. You cannot program the PCM differently. You cannot change the MAX MAF. There is nothing you can do to 'fix' the problem in the PCM. You have to use an external solution to change the MAF itself and how it reads.

Now there is a slightly ghetto way to help the situation. You can program the last cell in the PCM too high. This means that once you pass 10,800 the car will run too rich with peak richness being at 11,100. Then as you pass 11,100; say 11,300 when the car is flowing more air the car is leaning out because you're moving more air without adding more fuel. Eventually you get to the right AF ratio again and then as you flow even more air you go lean. This lets you sqeak a little more out of a maxed MAF situation but nothing that would let you get to 500WHP on a MAF maxed below 400WHP.



see he said I MEANING he has one

actually, I think that is a quoted post of Area 47s IIRC saying that he will be at the end of the scale right away here with his new parts.

actually, I think that is a quoted post of Area 47s IIRC saying that he will be at the end of the scale right away here with his new parts.

yea...x this is what that was....he quotes people and post different from the way he is supposed to...

omfg

If someone wants to loan a TVS, we will do it. We already have the GMPP exhaust and 3" exhausts here. Otherwise, if someone is installing a TVS on their own car and wants to come out for some dyno testing, we can do that too. I'm very pleased with our dyno testing so far. With an LS4 TB and our adapter, we are up to 262whp still running a stock exhaust. I'm thinking that 300whp should come fairly easy with single pass IC, headers, DP, exh, 2.6, and 100 octane + timing.

I'd like to add that I have personally made over 250 dyno pulls in cobalts in the last couple months. My job is fun, and it's going to be more fun in a couple months when we dial in Ryan's twincharge setup. :)

Matt, I have talked w/ Tim about my TVS, as soon as it shows up I plan on bringing it in to you guys. You can test w/ it if you want. As long as you work w/ me on my dyno tune. I will be running ZZP shorty header, downpipe, and QTP electric cutout 3". Dual pass, cobra H/E, LS4 and 3" intake. I ordered the TVS w/ 80mm and 75mm pullies to add more variables. PM me if you have any ?'s.

Subscribed.

HMM right here?





see he said I MEANING he has oneHe also addressed Area, then put it in quotations. He was obviously referring to Area's TVS statements, yet you somehow conclude that he's a liar afterwards.

Zoomer said you guys have a tvs i guess he was lying.

Engrish owz u

Matt, I have talked w/ Tim about my TVS, as soon as it shows up I plan on bringing it in to you guys. You can test w/ it if you want. As long as you work w/ me on my dyno tune. I will be running ZZP shorty header, downpipe, and QTP electric cutout 3". Dual pass, cobra H/E, LS4 and 3" intake. I ordered the TVS w/ 80mm and 75mm pullies to add more variables. PM me if you have any ?'s.Sounds good. I'll have Tim keep me updated.

do u guys hav an intake for the redline yet

do u guys hav an intake for the redline yetNot yet, but we should have our Saturn back in the shop soon. We've just been very busy lately with a full shop.

Any luck with finding a bigger filter for the injen that fits?

Good Thread Keep Up The Research.
A Buddy Of Mine Told Me About A Bunch Of Little Secrets To Making Hp !!
Zzp Ftw

Are these intakes all stainless steel?

Are these intakes all stainless steel?

aluminum

Did anyone ever buy this intake just curious

Did anyone ever buy this intake just curious
They have been selling very well lately, but I'm not sure how many buyers are on this forum.

wow nice cheap 3" intake I'm def getting this when I order my ls4 tb, now is it possible to only get the intakecomponents minus the filter? I already have a filter I got with my knn intake, has luke 2k on it so I'd like to reuse it, and I know those filters r easily 50 bucks...