FIGS

iTrader: (11)

UPDT:
I had a chance to redyno the Injen this past week after about 1K miles on it. and the results were more reasonable. 25% correction and the day was much warmer and dryer. It is perhaps an indicator that the dyno grease was a little fluid that day or there was something else to skew the readings.



This being said, after all this intake testing I ran into an issue with my stock drop-in configuration and the removal of the charcoal screen. Keep in mind I had been running this previously for over a year with no issues.

I got two CEL's for lean conditions and decided to take it in to the dealer. After 16 hours of diag, fuel analysis and testing they determined that the screen removal was causing turbulent conditions around the MAF and it was reading about .6 gm/s lower than it did with a stock airbox. Luckily my dealer and tech were very cool and only charged me the $110 diag fee plus the cost of a can of 44K.

The lesson to be learned though was that Long Term Fuel Trims cannot be erased by ECU reset or power cycle. The tech said there is not method other than driving that he could use to recal this table. So the fact of the matter is that the ECU will keep this value regardless of how the STFT is reset. Mine had walked out over 30% which is why I got the CEL's. Both times it was hotter than average days for what it is worth.

I guess I will retest the Takeda as well, but my impression of the Takeda is that is runs a lot richer since I experienced as least one backfire-like pop during testing.

I was able to log AFR on this dyno run and the post cat reading was around 13 for the run with the Injen. This is derated about .7 based on the post cat. Anyway, uncorrected values for these runs were 300WHP at 5K feet and 84 degrees. Not too bad.

Fig

FIGS

iTrader: (11)

and again the previous dyno day runs for curve comparisons. correction factor was different as well 1.3 vs 1.25 the second curve is the previous injen

slvrboolet

so the injen had the best dyno results?

darbs242

iTrader: (5)

Yea^^ so which one was the best after everything was all said and done

DS2k

iTrader: (5)

^that and how do they compare to JoeZ's intake with a drop-in filter??

ilv1004s

iTrader: (8)

So wats the best? Intake

Bulls23337

iTrader: (2)

Looks like stock + drop in is the best? Or Joe Z + drop in? Hmmmm....

FIGS

iTrader: (11)

I got the best numbers with the stock and no charcoal, but later on down the line my LTFT when over 30% hitting the CEL. So my conclusion is that I would need to retest with a completely stock intake. Since I spent close to $800 on the experiment and results were within 20 HP of eachother, I decided it was not worth continuing the experiment. Maybe I will revisit at a later date. Focusing on suspension now.

Beachtyme

iTrader: (1)

I read through this whole thread last night and went to bed thinking about it.

I am wondering if the filter on the injen and takeda was the restrictive part?

I wouldn't think the metal part of the intake would have that much of an effect on the air flow?

hanscj

just recently had the takeda intake installed, loving it! i wonder how the injen does compared to the takeda though. anyone had any experience with both?

Twotwo

I want to see the videos

Justind27

iTrader: (6)

I got the takeda, haven't experienced anything else, I'm happy the way I got it and the things I have done to it.

H1_OFICR

Hey guys,

So I read about 10 of the pages and didn't see anyone mention this..

http://www.motoiq.com/MagazineArticl...ir-Intake.aspx

They are saying you get a 25 plus hp.. I'm not saying figs isn't correct as he has no reason to lie... But I'm just baffled at the huge inconsistencies.. Any ideas? I have a Joe Z intake and am pleased but I was just curious.

Thanks

MileHIFcar

Interesting thanks for the article All I heard and read from this forum is that the gains that K&N published were not in fact true, and that after a while the ECU readjusts and the gains go away

Here is a quote: "The peak to peak numbers don’t tell the whole story. The K&N intake made more power across the board from low to high rpm and from 5300 to 6800 made a huge difference in power. In the range of 6000 rpm, the gain hovers at around 30 more whp for several hundred rpm which backs up K&N's claim. Past the torque peak the K&N delivers 7-11 more lb/ft of torque. That is awesome area under the curve. K&N has scored with what is perhaps the all time greatest bang for the buck mod."


Why the same results with both dynos (2 different ones actually) 20+ whp and this intake has such a bad rep with members here???

Sean

iTrader: (3)

As far as I remember, nobody has been able to reproduce those gains with the K&N with some actually losing power. MotoIQ must have had some magic intake. Bottom line now is, whatever intake anybody chooses, the gains (or losses) are very minimal. The benefit of changing is more cosmetic than performance.