That's pretty funny. I'd say you're pretty right on. However, I'm not sure I'd equate a apples to apples before and after dyno showing a 22hp difference to a sasquatch sighting. Sure it's a little fuzzy, but a 8% difference has got come from something more than just the dyno taking offense at how your looking at it.

And how about a little holiday spirit from you two guys. Maybe turn the other cheek and not get so bent out of shape at the intial brusque comments.

 

It's all good, I think we're both taking each other the wrong way. I'm sorry and Merry xmas to all.............................

 

Dallas, I've been sitting and watching this argument unfold. There's no way to bring you guys together.

You have a good track record here. jmschris is a relative newbie (by number of posts) and on this occasion appears to be a little troll like, even if that's not his intention (his other posts have been fine). You two are not on the same wavelength and it's best just to let it go.

I will say that if your newfound friend continues in this vein, then he probably will not earn too many friends here, as the word combative is a little bit of an understatement - just the observation of an unconnected observer.

Peace!

 

I was fortuante that on both of the days I dynoed the conditions were almost identical. Both days in the upper 90's and 60% humidity. The correction factor on my baseline day was 1.04. On my follow up with the intake and exhaust it was 1.03. The difference is actually greater if you look at raw numbers. The raw numbers were 259.7 (99 deg heat) and 283.6 (97 deg heat) for a difference or 23.9 hp. Considering the slight variance in the conditions, I only accept the difference in the SAE corrected numbers. Both sets of runs were done on my race wheels on MPSCs with the same tire pressure.

I put no value in these speed tests. On a dyno many factors are isolated. On a road you also have to deal with wind (cross wind effects both directions), surface friction and weight fluxuations (the difference in weight between an empty tank and a full tank can be significant). Even changes in humidity (the moisture saturation in air) can drastically effect air and the amount of air resistance applied to the vehicle.

The most accurate form or power measurement in the world is an SAE corrected engine dyno. After that comes a chassis dyno. A chassis can't tell you the loss in power through the drivetrain, but it will isolate most of the differences listed above.

 

02 Carrera, those are all fine statements. And I'm glad that you saw some benefit from the air intake. Indeed, if you'll do search on the forum for past intake threads, you'll see that I definitely fall in the should offer some benefit than the they don't do squat camp as a result of my experiences with my motorcycles. To sum up, the whole notion of a freer flowing intake and exhaust (the latter being critical for anyone considering an intake in my opinion) makes good sense. Frankly, those two combined with a remapped ECU makes sense, too. FWIW, I already have a Ruf exhaust and am very seriously considering the EVO cold air intake (I just like the design way better than the K&N version, which looks flimsy and exposed to the elements and hot air of the engine more). So let's put that aside for a moment.

To address your post a bit more, I'm saying that the dyno readings can be flawed more than you think. There's a ton of reports on the web that validate my claim. Click on this link, for example. More interestingly, even Dinan recognizes that there is a lot of variability, and look at the dyno setup at those guys are using: it's awesome looking!

What I'm trying to say with the speed trials is NOT that it's more ACCURATE per se; rather, it'll give you a better GAUGE of whether or not your modifications (be it with a dyno-registered and proven gains of 20hp) are ACTUALLY providing any noticeably and measurable gains on the road. If you're only improving by 0.1 seconds (or worse, not improving at all), then what was the point of the upgrade if other than bragging rights in the horsepower wars by year? And yes, I appreciate better throttle response and what not, but that wasn't the point of the dyno discussion. Frankly, dynos weren't even really the subject of this thread, so I apologize for distracting from the topic.

So yes, based on the topic, if I had to go with a CAI, Evolution Motorsports would be my choice hands down. Indeed, it's NOT that much more money what with their holiday sale.

 

While I don't have experience with the K&N, I can say the ABS/PSM light can come up as an issue on the EVO intake as well...I experienced this a while back where I hit 5K RPM and the car went into limp mode. ABS/PSM lights stayed on.

Next day, just cleaned the MAF by following instructions on this forum and the car runs fine again. I'm NOT saying one intake is better...I'm just saying the issues with the MAF getting strange readings is probably game to both intakes.

 

Russ, Thanks for getting us back on track. Too much digression and unnecessary bashing. I apologize to all and hope I didn't offend anyone.

Dallsboats...no hard feelings, were both entitled to our opinions and I'm sure our points of view vary based on our personal experiences. I think we both probably got a bit carried away.

Happy Holidays!

 

Jmchris01 and Dallasboats - your posts were much more entertaining when you were pissed at each other. These latest posts are really boring....

 

K&N intake update. I've had it on my car for 7 months and I finally pulled the filer to clean. It was extremely dirty with a lot of small debris along the outside. I've had K&N filters on several of my previous cars, so I always have a cleaning kit. It took a while to wash it out. I Only put about 4K on the car in those 7 months, but I would now recommend cleaning the filter every 2K. I heavily oiled the filter when I reinstalled it and guess what...I am still having no problems. In fact the car feels a bit more responsive since cleaning the filter.

 

I finally got my K&N Cold Air Intake last week and got it installed on my 2000 C2 Cab (33k miles).

It just took about 100 miles until the check engine light came up. Will bring the car to the shop tomorrow and expect the MAF to be the issue.

If you read the installation instructions carefully, K&N talks about: "WARNING: ...The Aircharger Intake System is a performance product that can be used safely during mild weather conditions. During harsh and inclement weather conditions, you must return your vehicle to stock OEM airbox and intake tract configuration. Failure to follow these instructions will void your warranty."

Is this a joke? Who changes his intake every now and then? My P car is a weekend toy but I can not predict the weather, so are I'm supposed to carry the OEM part around with me and change it on the road? This is just ridiculous.

I read that some of you install the filter without the net? I believe the net is supposed to keep harsh dust away.

My personal performance experience: The typical "lawnmover" sound of my car starts now already at 4k RPM and not at 5k RPM as with the OEM part. I imagine to recognize a better trottle response already at 3k RPM e.g. cruising on a highway with 70mph in 5th gear and with the better sound I tell myself that the acceleration above 5k RPM is a better (I do always tell myself that there's a positive difference after each mod).

Harold

 

I still have yet to see any dyno results in my 7+ years experience with the 996 intakes that show any real difference in HP by adding an intake versus the stock paper filter.

You get three things by changing anything on the intake side:
1. A lighter wallet
2. A louder car
3. A blown MAF

There's three valid cases for swapping the intake:
1. You're building a race car and go with a cone filter setup like in the GT3 Cup cars
2. You want a louder car, and swapping the intake is cheaper than the exhaust
3. You're convinced it'll give you more HP and you have money to burn

 

What is your definition of "real difference in HP"?

 

what made you want to get rid of you Fabspeed?

 

Who are you asking about the Fabspeed?

 

As you guys re-activated this thread, I'll complete my recent K&N CAI experience.

So I got the K&N for my 2000 CAB back in December 06 for $250 and had it installed by my indie ($150). After a misleading CEL, it finally turned out to be the famous blown MAF that needed to be replaced. I surely blamed the indie and we agreed that I pay the MAF but at his purchase price, so the "upgrade" to the 2002 MAF did cost $360. All together $760 ($610 excl. installation) which is about the price of the EVO. However, the EVO can also blow your pre-facelift MAF.

Since then I put about 700 miles on my car and recognize that the electronic "learns" more and more about the CAI, so my performance develops. I personally think it's worth the money as I like the sound, changed trottle response and feeling that I'm faster > 4K RMP OK I admit, no proof for that.

One thing that I recognize is that the acceleration string is not as even anymore between 5.5K RMP and redline. There are very very short but recognizable interruptions. Has anyone else experienced this?