densecharger opinions wanted
- Thread starter turboscrew
- Start date
-
Sponsors (?)
I have the full length system, which replaced a drop in K&N with the silencer removed. I didn't realy notice a difference and most people say that there are too many 90 degree bends in the system for it to be effective, but I can grab the the intake right after I turn the engine off from driving and it is not hot.
pony_vert02
New Member
I have one as well. I don't have the inlet tube as I also have a Steeda Tower Brace Bar and it won't fit. I guess any gains are prolly minimal at best. It looks good and adds a nice touch to your car's engine bay. 
mpcv2000
Active Member
I don't know if the people who has one on their car really put the car on the dyno before and after but I did and the result was not good at all.
I put my car on the dyno ( Mustang Dyno ) so my car makes , 227.9 rwhp and 322.3 ft-lbs torque.
I put the dense charger reset battery etc. I get on the dyno , 225.3 rwhp and 321.3 not a big lost but the A/Fuel curve gets all screwed up cause of the Elbows .
Over that if you guys look at it carefully where the kit bolts to the MAFlow adaptor there is a big lip like the Dense charger adaptor is ( guessing ) 4 1/2" inside diameters and where it bolts it's like 4" so you get this big lip blocking the air flow and doing more turbulence , so elbows + this = very bad A/Fuel reading so this was where my lost came from .
Look here , I even had to port the Densecharger adaptor to make it smoother.
So what I learned from this is : The filter has to be as close as possible of the Mass air sensor and in straight lines ( like the factory ) to get the max from it.
I kept the tubing from the Throttle body to the MAF and bolted the filter right there. That way I got my numbers back and the fuel curve became nice and smooth.
I don't want to start a pissing contest but this is what I got from this modification.
I was like you , reading ( searching ) on Stangnet what people were saying about it and I thought : What about buying one and get it dynoed just to see what will be my gain. I was very dissapointed.
It does make me laugh when I read that someone put one on his car and he can feel the difference , common guys , even if the guy got 3 rwhp from a mod , how the heck can he feel the difference on a 3600 LBS car..
Maybe someone will have a different opinion with some dyno sheets to show us what it did to his ( her ) car.
I have more stories like that ( pulleys , chip , etc. ) always ( most of the time ) you have to cut in half what you read in the magazine ( horspowerwise )..
I put my car on the dyno ( Mustang Dyno ) so my car makes , 227.9 rwhp and 322.3 ft-lbs torque.
I put the dense charger reset battery etc. I get on the dyno , 225.3 rwhp and 321.3 not a big lost but the A/Fuel curve gets all screwed up cause of the Elbows .
Over that if you guys look at it carefully where the kit bolts to the MAFlow adaptor there is a big lip like the Dense charger adaptor is ( guessing ) 4 1/2" inside diameters and where it bolts it's like 4" so you get this big lip blocking the air flow and doing more turbulence , so elbows + this = very bad A/Fuel reading so this was where my lost came from .
Look here , I even had to port the Densecharger adaptor to make it smoother.
So what I learned from this is : The filter has to be as close as possible of the Mass air sensor and in straight lines ( like the factory ) to get the max from it.
I kept the tubing from the Throttle body to the MAF and bolted the filter right there. That way I got my numbers back and the fuel curve became nice and smooth.
I don't want to start a pissing contest but this is what I got from this modification.
I was like you , reading ( searching ) on Stangnet what people were saying about it and I thought : What about buying one and get it dynoed just to see what will be my gain. I was very dissapointed.
It does make me laugh when I read that someone put one on his car and he can feel the difference , common guys , even if the guy got 3 rwhp from a mod , how the heck can he feel the difference on a 3600 LBS car..
Maybe someone will have a different opinion with some dyno sheets to show us what it did to his ( her ) car.
I have more stories like that ( pulleys , chip , etc. ) always ( most of the time ) you have to cut in half what you read in the magazine ( horspowerwise )..
pony_vert02
New Member
"I kept the tubing from the Throttle body to the MAF and bolted the filter right there. That way I got my numbers back and the fuel curve became nice and smooth."
If you don't mind me asking is that the filter you got with the kit? I have been thinking of doing this with my system cause I recently had my car on a dyno and was not happy with the baseline.
If you don't mind me asking is that the filter you got with the kit? I have been thinking of doing this with my system cause I recently had my car on a dyno and was not happy with the baseline.
mpcv2000
Active Member
mpcv2000
Active Member
Laser98 said:
No it did not fit, if I remember , you'll need a 4 1/2" inside diameter filter to bolt to the Densecharger adaptor.
I spoke with the owner at Demolet today and he said after you put the full length kit on, you need to disconnect the battery for 20 mins, then drive the car fairly hard for about 4-5 days. The computer takes a couple days to compensate for the extra air and tune itself for this setup. If you dyno right after the install the car will be too lean and will retard the timing causing the drop in hp. These computers arent like the ones in the late 80s and early 90s that adapt quickly. He also said that if you use the stock mass air to turn the filter in the down position so it will have 2 turns to calm the turbulence down.
mpcv2000
Active Member
turboscrew said:
Mine became too rich...
turboscrew said:
This was exactly what I did !
For the same price you should buy some pullies .
I went from 223.9 rwhp to 227.9 rwhp and 303.2 ft-lbs torque to 323.3 ft-lbs torque so it was a gain of 4 rwhp & 20.1 ft-lbs torque , again it was dynoed before and after.
Another good mod is a custom tuned chip but this is a bit more money.
In case if you want to know I went from : 217.1 to 223.9 rwhp and 278.7 to 303.2 ft-lbs torque so a gain of 6.8 rwhp & 24.5 ft-lbs torque.
Don't forget that a Mustang dyno shows slightly different numbers then a Dyno jet !
Here's my Dynojet numbers !
245.6 rwhp & 286.8 ft-lbs torque N/A SAE on a Dynojet = 227.9 rwhp & 323.3 ft-lbs torque N/A SAE on a Mustang Dyno .
Funny to see how off they are...
mpcv2000
Active Member
Similar threads
