CL intake vs Tunable Induction intake
well we recently recieved a JTI cold air intake to test ..
THIS IS THE TUNABLE INDUCTION INTAKE not the JLT
our shop car is prety radicle and would not be much of a setup for this so we had been waiting on our chance.
just the thing happened today.
a customer came in with his 05 mustang.
his mods were cold air intake by c@l cmrc delete plates by steeda and a magnaflow cat back.
the c @ L with the suplied tune that came with it was not so hot so we retuned the car and came up with the following best numbers after about 10 pulls
305.4 horsepower 313.35 torque.
this was with a decent air fuel but there was a troublesome bump between 4000 and 5500 wich was a real pain to work out.. the transfer function was not very linear.
after a lot of messing with it the result was a air fule or aproc 12.9-1 from 5000 up to redline and 4000 and bellow but that bump stilled showed its head betwween 4000 and 5500 dropign air fule in that range to 12.7-12.6
however any atempt to raise that small dip would cuase the upper end to raise a bit and be a bit to lean for best power.
Almost any shop would accept this air fuel curve and send a customer out the door with it as it is very safe and works very well as the numbers show.
Well we then replaced the intake with the JTI system.
after 12 pulls with the JTI
< remmeber we started from scratch with the jti and were just FINE tuning the c @ l >
306.94 horsepower 317.05 torque.
now the numbers are not that much of a difference but it was repeatable .. changeing the tunes back and forth with the cold airs always resulted in similar power changes regardles of how much heat soak the motor had..
the pulls above were at conditions withing 1 degree of each other and 2 percent humidity.. so they are consistant.
the engine temperature was kept at a constant 190 degrees via data loging from the obd2 port for consistancy.
The thing I foujnd most impressive about the jti was how linear the mass air transfer function was.. it was easy to map out and consistant across the rpm range..
It did not require anything funky or fiddleing like the c @ l did to get a nice flat air fuel ..
the air fuel with the JTI unit was a rock steady 13.1-12.9-1 never going leaner then 13.2 or faster then 12.8 in any part of the pull it was a smoother curve that was easier to setup and more consistant.
were as the curve on the c @ l seemed to change slightly pull to pull.
over all across the entire rpm range the jti was aproc 1.5 horsepower and 3-5 foot pounds of torque better then the c @ l .
the c@l lost power when run lean as the JTI unit .. it wanted to be aproc 12.7-12.8for best power numbers while the jti wanted 13.1-12.9
Considering the price advantage the JTI has over the c @ l ..
and that i sell both and make a similar margin on each i would have to lean towards the jti as beeing more consistant..
however these two are so closely matched that it will realy come down to price where the jti is the leader and wich look you prefer.
carbon fiber .. or aluminum.
DEAN @ murillo motorsports.
well we recently recieved a JTI cold air intake to test ..
THIS IS THE TUNABLE INDUCTION INTAKE not the JLT
our shop car is prety radicle and would not be much of a setup for this so we had been waiting on our chance.
just the thing happened today.
a customer came in with his 05 mustang.
his mods were cold air intake by c@l cmrc delete plates by steeda and a magnaflow cat back.
the c @ L with the suplied tune that came with it was not so hot so we retuned the car and came up with the following best numbers after about 10 pulls
305.4 horsepower 313.35 torque.
this was with a decent air fuel but there was a troublesome bump between 4000 and 5500 wich was a real pain to work out.. the transfer function was not very linear.
after a lot of messing with it the result was a air fule or aproc 12.9-1 from 5000 up to redline and 4000 and bellow but that bump stilled showed its head betwween 4000 and 5500 dropign air fule in that range to 12.7-12.6
however any atempt to raise that small dip would cuase the upper end to raise a bit and be a bit to lean for best power.
Almost any shop would accept this air fuel curve and send a customer out the door with it as it is very safe and works very well as the numbers show.
Well we then replaced the intake with the JTI system.
after 12 pulls with the JTI
< remmeber we started from scratch with the jti and were just FINE tuning the c @ l >
306.94 horsepower 317.05 torque.
now the numbers are not that much of a difference but it was repeatable .. changeing the tunes back and forth with the cold airs always resulted in similar power changes regardles of how much heat soak the motor had..
the pulls above were at conditions withing 1 degree of each other and 2 percent humidity.. so they are consistant.
the engine temperature was kept at a constant 190 degrees via data loging from the obd2 port for consistancy.
The thing I foujnd most impressive about the jti was how linear the mass air transfer function was.. it was easy to map out and consistant across the rpm range..
It did not require anything funky or fiddleing like the c @ l did to get a nice flat air fuel ..
the air fuel with the JTI unit was a rock steady 13.1-12.9-1 never going leaner then 13.2 or faster then 12.8 in any part of the pull it was a smoother curve that was easier to setup and more consistant.
were as the curve on the c @ l seemed to change slightly pull to pull.
over all across the entire rpm range the jti was aproc 1.5 horsepower and 3-5 foot pounds of torque better then the c @ l .
the c@l lost power when run lean as the JTI unit .. it wanted to be aproc 12.7-12.8for best power numbers while the jti wanted 13.1-12.9
Considering the price advantage the JTI has over the c @ l ..
and that i sell both and make a similar margin on each i would have to lean towards the jti as beeing more consistant..
however these two are so closely matched that it will realy come down to price where the jti is the leader and wich look you prefer.
carbon fiber .. or aluminum.
DEAN @ murillo motorsports.