My ISF and K&N Intake Test Are On Super Street Website
10-31-16, 08:20 AM
#31
Driver
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Florida
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'll wait for isfscotts new et's before I pass judgement. I will add however that the isf is the first car I've come across that seems to loose power with an intake mod, supposedly. I think now that tuning is available, many of us are finding out how sensitive this motor is to octane, heat, and kclv's. Perhaps all of the intakes should be re-looked at now and compared to kclv.
like many on here I've been a believer in the stock intake but with new information circulating, maybe we were wrong. Anyway, let's wait for some track times. Thanks for sharing Scott
like many on here I've been a believer in the stock intake but with new information circulating, maybe we were wrong. Anyway, let's wait for some track times. Thanks for sharing Scott
You are welcome. I will replicate the same run to get a good comparison. Half tank of 93 octane, rear tires at 30 psi, fronts at 36 psi, and take nothing out of the car for weight reduction. The weather should be almost the exact same too.
10-31-16, 08:22 AM
#32
Driver
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Florida
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nice! I remember this was the only other article I read a while back showing that the k&n kit did actually show a good increase in power, but all dyno pulls were done in 3rd gear: http://www.motoiq.com/MagazineArticl...ir-intake.aspx
Now with tuning available, I wonder what tweaks can be made to fully utilize the typhoon setup.
Now with tuning available, I wonder what tweaks can be made to fully utilize the typhoon setup.
This is the exact article my brother and I used as our basis for a new test because they made their pulls in third and not sixth. We made one pull in third before the intake install and it showed 22 less hp and 17 less tq than the sixth gear pull, stock vs. stock.
10-31-16, 08:25 AM
#34
Driver
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Florida
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
20 ft lbs of tq under the curve and overall 18 more peak horsepower will absolutely show up at the track. I am guessing I will get to the high 12.6's. The sound is substantially better for sure.
10-31-16, 08:28 AM
#35
Driver
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Florida
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To the guy above who test drive several stock Fs the drove the one with the K&N intake and it felt faster, 2 thisng lead to this: the sound from the engine/intake is different/more aggressive, which can definitely make you think and feel you're going faster than you are (still not to say that you actually weren't faster than the others) and 2ndly, thus intake loses the 2nd flap....so the intake valve or whatever is always open, instead of opening at 3500-3800 rpm. There was a thread here in the forum showing a mod that you could do to make the 2nd intake flap remain open. EVERYONE reported that the car sounded better, had better acceleration from a dig/in lower rpms, and overall felt faster. Iirc, no one had proof in the 1/4 mile or dyno though.
Maybe someone can link us to that thread. I believe the k&n is somewhat giving us the same effects of the 2nd flap remain open all the time.
V.
Maybe someone can link us to that thread. I believe the k&n is somewhat giving us the same effects of the 2nd flap remain open all the time.
V.
You are correct that the trap door being gone and essentially always open now leads to the better sound as well as the performance. The part that gets missed though is the larger inside diameter and straighter shot the air now travels to the throttle body. Mine is absolutely more responsive in F manual mode with this new intake.
10-31-16, 08:33 AM
#36
Driver
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Florida
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How many pulls were done before the intake and after the intake? Was this all done in the same day? If only a few pulls were done for each, the test isn't accurate. If this was all done on the same day, the test isn't accurate.
I personally saw two ISFs go at it with the only difference being the k&n intake in one of them. The F with the stock intake was noticeably faster than the one with the k&n. Some others tested this intake letting the ecu properly learn and it lost power.
You have to realize that the RR intake has a bigger maf enclosure and it's tuned and that doesn't even make as much power as this post claims.
I hope that you can go to the track on a day with similar conditions to your baseline run.
I personally saw two ISFs go at it with the only difference being the k&n intake in one of them. The F with the stock intake was noticeably faster than the one with the k&n. Some others tested this intake letting the ecu properly learn and it lost power.
You have to realize that the RR intake has a bigger maf enclosure and it's tuned and that doesn't even make as much power as this post claims.
I hope that you can go to the track on a day with similar conditions to your baseline run.
Two pulls were done with the stock box and then two with the new cold air intake. Both sets a pulls were identical with a one rwhp because they were in the same weather conditions.
As far as you watching two cars run, a host of factors come in to play. Octane or quality of the fuel, miles on the two different motors, drivers ability, tires, etc..
10-31-16, 08:39 AM
#37
Driver
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Florida
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, don't drive your car between now and then and trailer it to the track. The KCLV values change greatly with a minimal amount of driving and I have always suspected that this is why my car (and others) make power immediately after the change but then as the computer learns and adjusts values, the gains are lost or minimized. It is my belief that both parties are right. It makes power now, but will slowly lose that power over the course of several drive cycles unless it is tuned with the intake on it and values can't change out of the tuned values range. It would be interesting to see the 'delta' between high and low intake temps during the VERY brief time they are in the intake path on modded ISFs vs. non modded ISFs. Does this data exist?
I am not trailoring it down there as that would not be a true comparison. Just like I am not taking weight out of the car either as I do not drive around town without a spare tire or passenger seat. lol Who out there actually has the equipment to tune an F ? Secondly I have driven probably 500 miles or more since the install and it spins the tires on the 1-2 shift hard in manual mode still when it did not before with the stock box. The car is not going to de-tune itself because it is getting a less restrictive airflow, it would be like saying the car would change its burn or spark cycle if you put headers on because there is less back pressure. This kit allow for a quicker path of of air to get to the motor where as it was not going through the restrictive stock airbox waiting for the trap door to open at 3,600. I will be dumbfounded if I do not pick up at least a tenth but expect two tenths. I made four runs last time, all very consistent as you will see from my timeslips so if I crack anything below a 12.82 @ 111 the K&N kit works.
10-31-16, 08:47 AM
#38
Driver
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Florida
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was just waiting for someone to say that, sad. I have zero affiliation with them, I am a property manager in Florida. I did this because the other tests I found were made in third gear which were inaccurate and I set out to prove those tests wrong. My brother does these articles for a living so I had him as the venue to get this article out. I was the first to tell him if the car lost power as so many claim it was coming off and the article would not be written. The difference here is all the keyboard jockeys with seat of pants tests and I saw two cars racing with and without the cold air intake don't like that I have actual data to make my point. So be it.
10-31-16, 08:58 AM
#39
Please tell me how doing the pulls on the same day makes it inaccurate ? This is the most accurate way to dyno a car as you are using the same barometric pressure, density altitude, and air temp. Doing pulls on different days is where data gets inaccurate. I have probably made 50 passes with my various cars over the years on this very dyno and the most accurate and consistent results were from same day pulls.
Two pulls were done with the stock box and then two with the new cold air intake. Both sets a pulls were identical with a one rwhp because they were in the same weather conditions.
As far as you watching two cars run, a host of factors come in to play. Octane or quality of the fuel, miles on the two different motors, drivers ability, tires, etc..
Two pulls were done with the stock box and then two with the new cold air intake. Both sets a pulls were identical with a one rwhp because they were in the same weather conditions.
As far as you watching two cars run, a host of factors come in to play. Octane or quality of the fuel, miles on the two different motors, drivers ability, tires, etc..
Also to get a good base dyno run in the isf you should do at least 6 pulls. Or do several pulls before going to the dyno.
10-31-16, 09:08 AM
#40
Driver
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Florida
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My runs at Bradenton in stock form, this was against a Pontiac G8 with heads, cam, and exhaust ! lol I ran him twice. I wanted as much actual data on this test as I have seen to many, " well my boys car ran xx.xx at the track". lol
-
-
10-31-16, 09:13 AM
#41
Driver
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Florida
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's inaccurate because the ecu learns and adjusts. As another member mentioned, you might gain a bit of power as soon as you switch the intakes but lose it as the ecu learns and adjusts. This is why I trust more a head to head of two cars fully cycled going head to head multiple times, as opposed to back to back dynos done on the same day without cycling the ecu.
Also to get a good base dyno run in the isf you should do at least 6 pulls. Or do several pulls before going to the dyno.
Also to get a good base dyno run in the isf you should do at least 6 pulls. Or do several pulls before going to the dyno.
And you are factually supporting this how ? I will do another dyno test after I go to the track just to see if there is any actual reasoning to the car's ECU adjusts over time theory that I keep hearing, no problem. Keep in mind of all the other cars I have owned and ran on this dyno none ever slowed up because of cold air intake. As far as six pulls, that's simply a number pulled from the air and not accurate. Where did you get that from ? I am not making six 160+ mph pulls on my car on the dyno so I can show what two pulls showed. The adjustment over six pulls would be +/- a few rwhp and not worth the load on the car.
10-31-16, 09:20 AM
#42
Let's just wait for our resident tuners to chime in.. Someone's probably mentioned it before but intakes are not supposed to net this kind of gain on this platform, hence the suspicious K&N contact at the end of the 'article'.
10-31-16, 09:34 AM
#43
Driver
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Florida
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Suspicious K&N contact ? They provided me the part. Is the dyno company, Coastal Chasis Dyno suspicious too since they did the testing and are mentioned ? lol
The proof is in the dyno sheets that are posted and soon to be time slips to see who is right here. Believe me if my car slows down after it " adjusts" to the intake it comes off when I get home and I will be the first to report it with videos and time slips. I have owned this car two months and have read this forum only a few times, if all these other test prove the car slows. Any other chiming in at this point is just that. I have seen a lack of time slips, dyno sheets, and videos from others on here saying the stock box is quicker or other intakes are quicker. Please someone post up some actual data., I would love to see it. After all we are all in here for the same reason, to go faster.
10-31-16, 09:52 AM
#44
If you had your hood closed like on road you'll then experience the heat soak. Plus what's wrong with several 6th gear dyno pulls? Many guys here in SoCal do 4 pulls 6th gear back to back 5 mins apart. If u redline 6th you're doing closer to 175-177, not just 160ish
10-31-16, 10:00 AM
#45
Driver
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Florida
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The hood has to be open during dyno pulls as you are not getting the same airflow for cooling as if you were on the street. I have seen zero actual info just speculation on the heat soak, someone please post something. Back to back multiple pulls will heat soak any motor of any kind and skew data plus it's hard on a car on a weighted dyno. We hit 162 on both runs as we cut it at 6700 rpm's. Would it go a little quicker, sure but why do it ? It's past peak power at that point.