Exactly why I questioned the value of a CAI for my car. I didn't want to spend a fortune (even if just a few hundred $'s) on a product that was unproven. There are a lot of goodies available in the aftermarket. Much of it is "snake oil" or "eye candy" that does little to actually improve performance.
A lot of the aftermarket goodies are subjective in their benefit, though. A CAI isn't hurting performance vs stock in most cases, and if it looks cool then it may be worth buying on looks alone. Same is true of axle-back exhaust systems. While they don't really add any performance, they do change the sound to many peoples' likings, which in itself is enough reason to buy them.
For anyone out there looking for a CAI for the performance gains, get a tuner and take it to the track to see if it actually gives you any real improvements. If it does improve your car's performance, tell the world so that we can all be better informed. If it does not, then don't pretend it did so that you don't feel foolish for buying a worthless mod for your car (oh yeah, and tell the world so that others don't get suckered into buying something that doesn't work as advertised).
In summary, a CAI is of little or no benefit to an otherwise stock S197 GT. A modded engine that requires more air (bigger cams, ported heads, forced induction, etc.) can benefit a lot from the extra air that a CAI (and upgraded exhaust) can provide.
This is my plan next time I go to the track:
- Put 91 Octane fuel in the car and make a few passes on the stock tune.
- Install my X-Cal 2 and make a few passes on the 87 Octane tune.
- Change the tune to the 91 Octane tune and make a few passes.
- Analyse and post the data.
I agree with you that exhaust will help on a modified car, disagree with you on the intake side of it. My 96 TBird is why I disagree.
I see that I may have been a tad strong in my rant. I had not intended to offend and apologize if I did. Your experience is greater than mine and all I was trying to convey was that decisions should not be made without thorough research.
I had a run of bad info on some photography boards and saw somebody spend a fortune after getting some bad advice. Your advice was based on actual experience so it is of great value to the members on the board.
You are correct, research is the best thing to do. Asking questions on forum boards is doing that research but it not necessarily enough. Ask the question on multiple boards and analyse the data you get.
When you are researching performance parts like CAI's think about a few very important questions. People will argue that more air equals more power in car engine. They are not technically wrong but not correct either. For example if your air filter/induction tube flows 700 CFM, your intake manifold flows 650 CFM and your heads flow and your heads flow 240 CFM on the intake side. How is adding an air filter that flows 1000 CFM going to help you? It won't as it is not changing the velocity of the air and is not correcting a restriction. Your largest restriction is your heads. Putting better breathing heads *should* make more power but this is not always the case. There is ways to mess up the heads even though they flow more air.
I already pointed out earlier about the location of the CAI's. Question to be asking is how is the CAI different in gathering air compared to the stock box? How is it an improvement over the stock setup?
How are the gains being measured from where you are getting them from. People who are seeing gains in the 1/4, are the times from the same track same day or are they comparisons from different days? Slight weather differences can be the reason a car sees a gain or loss so if the info is corrected or run on the same day, roughly the same time, that data is better to go off than those that are comparing data from different days that are not corrected.
Where is the info you are looking at coming from? Is it possible the data may be misleading? For example a TV show or magazine article. It is very possible that the stock dyno run is done at the hottest point of the day, the CAI/Tuner dyno run is done at night and the numbers are not corrected. There are other tricks that can be done, this is just another example. How is the test done, the comparison most refer to for CAI's used a tuner as well. Is it possible the gains are coming from the supporting mods?
Ideas that these parts require a retune so it must be working better than stock. Again not necessarily true. I explained that earlier. Also note that many CAI's made for the 4.6 2V and 4V crowd also required retuning of the EEC. I know that most of the CAI's for the 96 - 98 Mustang GT 2V will work on a 96 - 97 4.6 2V TBird. Using a CAI on a TBird required a retune. So this is not something new that applies to just the 4.6 3V crowd.
I am not telling you not to buy a CAI. If there is a CAI you like, buy it. However do not be lead to believe it is doing miracles and adding power to your car. I do believe and from what I have seen, a CAI is more of an appearance mod than it is a performance mod. I haven't seen anything substantive to change my thoughts on that regarding most CAI's for the 05+ Mustang. I pointed out which one I think does show some promise.
I run SLP LM's on my 05 GT. I bought them strictly for the sound and nothing else. If there was a HP gain, yay or if there was a HP loss, oh well, I like the sound of them. That is why they are on my car.
The other 05 GT that I referred with the Predator/Steeda CAI and X-Cal 2 was run at the same track, the same day. In case anybody was wondering.
I am telling anybody to research the parts they want. Proper research will lead to you buying parts that will satisfy your what you are looking to achieve.
