No Tune CAI's

I just picked up a used S&B CAI for $110 shipped, and I believe they run around $200 new........just another option for ya. As far as performance gains....well....don't expect to much without a tune. I felt a slight SOTP gain in the uppers and it did definitely change the exhaust tone. Hope this helps you

-James

I bought the WMS and SCT tuner at the same time so I can't say how well the CAI performs on its own(loaded the tune first). I'd suggest a tuner anyway for better performance from your car and the ability to change just about anything( tire size, gear ratio, spark advance, shift points/firmness for autos, redline RPM and more)!

I have somewhat of a install write up on the WMS buried in the tech forum from last year.
http://forums.stangnet.com/showthread.php?t=682981

Just get one with a tuner. I got a JLT/SCT tuner combo brand new for $525. No sense in spending 200 for 5 hp when you can spend $500-600 for 30+hp with the tuner. Plus the tuner gives you so many more options at your finger tips as someone else mentioned.

I agree, get a tuner too.

The tune really wakes the car up. Like others said, I would recommend getting the tuner.

I have the Granatelli intake. It threw a check engine light when I installed it so needless to say I took it off the car after a week or so. I've been debating on whether to sell it or just get a tuner and run it. Had I known more about it when I bought it I would have got another intake. It looks nice but the claim that it will run without a tune is false. It's a well known problem if you search for it. That being said, I'll sell you mine if you want it.

I've had my WMS on for nearly 29K miles and haven't had one issue with the car or CAI...EVER! I'm very pleased

I have the K&N (no tune), and let me tell you its not the difference you're looking for. I would recommend getting a tune. Honestly I didn't feel a thing as far as performance.. it just makes a neat noise now when I floor it.

otis said:

Thanks for all of the input guys. I am looking at a no tune CAI because of the initial cost and will likely get the tune later. So far I am leaning towards the WMS since I have heard great things with and without the tune. My only concern now is how it will fit and the filter placement with the scoops being open on the front of the Cervinis Type IV (08 Shelby KR style) hood I am installing. I am worried about debris and rain hitting that front mounted filter.

Click to expand...

With the WMS, I don't think you need to worry about debris unless you drive in tornados. Now moderate to heavy rain would pose a problem with the KR hood unless you blocked the openings completely.

I have a K&N FIPK no tune. I have to disagree with gashog, it definately added some ponies along with the cool sound. I also picked up 2mpg on the highway. MMFF did a comparison story on cold air intakes a year or two back and found 18 hp and 15 lb/ft of tq with it. It compared closely with the tuned intakes plus I picked mine up on eBay for only $150. Which is a steal compared to the prices of the others. They also tested it with a tune and it made 21hp and 18lb/ft tq. But you should read about it. The link is below. If the link doesn't work just do a google search for "mustang magazin cold air kit".

http://www.mustang50magazine.com/techarticles/m5lp_0601w_cold_air_intake_comparisons/index.html

Redfire 05 said:

I have a K&N FIPK no tune. I have to disagree with gashog, it definately added some ponies along with the cool sound. I also picked up 2mpg on the highway. MMFF did a comparison story on cold air intakes a year or two back and found 18 hp and 15 lb/ft of tq with it. It compared closely with the tuned intakes plus I picked mine up on eBay for only $150. Which is a steal compared to the prices of the others. They also tested it with a tune and it made 21hp and 18lb/ft tq. But you should read about it. The link is below. If the link doesn't work just do a google search for "mustang magazin cold air kit".

http://www.mustang50magazine.com/techarticles/m5lp_0601w_cold_air_intake_comparisons/index.html

Click to expand...

I agree that a K&N CAI will produce some hp without a tune, but it will not be anywhere near 18 hp. The following show the reasons why.
A research of MMFF's archives failed to yield any test results that show a K&N CAI producing an 18 hp/15 lb-ft gain when installed on an S197 without a tune. However, those numbers are an exact match for the gain produced by the K&N CAI in the 5.0 Mustang "Cold Score" link in your post. So evidently that article is the one you're referring to. But it should be noted that the K&N's 18 hp gain in that test included a 10 hp gain from a 91 octane generic tune, and its 21 hp gain included a 13 hp gain from an SCT tune. Hence, the net gain for the K&N CAI was only 8 hp.
Also, the dyno results on K&N's site show a 15 hp gain for their CAI without a tune. But according to the "Cold Score" test, a 6 hp gain was produced by simply removing the stock intake's hydrocarbon trap. And since the stock intake must be removed to install any CAI, then that means the K&N's net gain for their dyno test was only 9 hp.
Plus, Horsepower TV showed a gain of only 10 hp with a K&N CAI without a tune. That's only a 4 hp net gain after subtracting the 6 hp gained by removing the stock intake and its hydrocarbon trap.
Can someone feel an 4-9 hp gain? Possibly, but it's not going to even be close to the SOTP feeling that a 20-30 hp gain from a CAI/tune produces. And when that amount of gain is added to a tune's ability to eliminate the stock tune's throttle lag, the difference in the S197's performance is like night and day.

why cai?

How well will a tune do with stock air minus that vapor trap and add a K&N panel?:SNSign:

DokterD said:

How well will a tune do with stock air minus that vapor trap and add a K&N panel?:SNSign:

Click to expand...

There was a VERY noticeable difference in performance running just the 87 octane tune with the stock box/filter! I do believe the aftermarket CAI does take it to another level, but clearly more power from the tune in the CAI/tune combo.

ski said:

I agree that a K&N CAI will produce some hp without a tune, but it will not be anywhere near 18 hp. The following show the reasons why.
A research of MMFF's archives failed to yield any test results that show a K&N CAI producing an 18 hp/15 lb-ft gain when installed on an S197 without a tune. However, those numbers are an exact match for the gain produced by the K&N CAI in the 5.0 Mustang "Cold Score" link in your post. So evidently that article is the one you're referring to. But it should be noted that the K&N's 18 hp gain in that test included a 10 hp gain from a 91 octane generic tune, and its 21 hp gain included a 13 hp gain from an SCT tune. Hence, the net gain for the K&N CAI was only 8 hp.
Also, the dyno results on K&N's site show a 15 hp gain for their CAI without a tune. But according to the "Cold Score" test, a 6 hp gain was produced by simply removing the stock intake's hydrocarbon trap. And since the stock intake must be removed to install any CAI, then that means the K&N's net gain for their dyno test was only 9 hp.
Plus, Horsepower TV showed a gain of only 10 hp with a K&N CAI without a tune. That's only a 4 hp net gain after subtracting the 6 hp gained by removing the stock intake and its hydrocarbon trap.
Can someone feel an 4-9 hp gain? Possibly, but it's not going to even be close to the SOTP feeling that a 20-30 hp gain from a CAI/tune produces. And when that amount of gain is added to a tune's ability to eliminate the stock tune's throttle lag, the difference in the S197's performance is like night and day.

Click to expand...

I'm not trying to get into a big fight over this and I don't want to make anyone mad. First, sorry your right, it was 5.0 mustang, not MMFF my mistake. But please go back and read the article I posted a link to carefully. I've pointed out a few things you missed below.

From the article the baseline numbers with the tune and without. Notice the 6hp increase from the hc trap removal is factored in so you shouldn't subtract it from the K&N test.
"Our baseline numbers were made with the car in stock trim, then we pulled the hydrocarbon trap from the inlet and got 261 rear-wheel horsepower and 282 lb-ft of torque."
and with the tune
"with a modest 91-octane tune, the car's baselinewas established at 271 rwhp and 289 rwtq."

And the following from the K&N Test. Notice they give two numbers, the first is without a tune (so they removed the tune for the K&N test), the second is with the 91 octane tune.

"Some of our participants didn't want any tune for their cold-air intake.Not only does this flaunt their engineering skills, but it also pointsout what a cost savings these systems are when a full dyno session witha custom computer flash can cost $200-$500, depending on the hourly ratefor your speed shop. We followed these manufacturers' wishes, and haveprovided rear-wheel horsepower measurements with just the cold-airbolted into position. But we also gave Ken Bjonnes the creativeopportunity to see what he could do; so you'll also see a dyno numberthat resulted from the CAI and an MD Motorsports tune."

So finally the numbers.
"Peak Horsepower: 279 (18hp gain)/(282 with SCT tune)
Peak Torque: 297 lb-ft (15-lb-ft gain)/(300 lb-ft with SCT tune)"

If you subtract the baseline for the car with the 91 octane tune from the tests on the other intakes most come up with around 18hp from just the CAI. So if they yield 18hp alone why is it so hard to believe the K&N would yeild 18hp? As for why HP TV only got 10hp? I think maybe the simple answer is that HP TV left the hc trap in. That accounts for ~ 6hp. Plus every car is different, not everyone will see 18hp. The 15hp claimed on K&N's site is probably an average of several dyno runs on different cars. Finally, maybe HP TV used a mustang dyno and 5.0 mag used a dynojet. Mustang dynos yield slightly lower numbers.

As they point out in the article the main problem with the K&N is that it is pretty much maxed out before the tune (as evidenced by the meager gains from adding the tune). So if you plan on adding a tune you should probably go with a different intake with a larger diameter tubing.

Redfire 05 said:

I have a K&N FIPK no tune. I have to disagree with gashog, it definately added some ponies along with the cool sound. I also picked up 2mpg on the highway. MMFF did a comparison story on cold air intakes a year or two back and found 18 hp and 15 lb/ft of tq with it. It compared closely with the tuned intakes plus I picked mine up on eBay for only $150. Which is a steal compared to the prices of the others. They also tested it with a tune and it made 21hp and 18lb/ft tq. But you should read about it. The link is below. If the link doesn't work just do a google search for "mustang magazin cold air kit".

http://www.mustang50magazine.com/techarticles/m5lp_0601w_cold_air_intake_comparisons/index.html

Click to expand...

Your right, it probably added some ponies no doubt, but not enough to feel that much of a difference like gashog said. I believe him because I have ridden in his car after each mod he has put in and after the K&N CAI install, I honestly didn't feel any major difference besides the sound.

fobra559 said:

Your right, it probably added some ponies no doubt, but not enough to feel that much of a difference like gashog said. I believe him because I have ridden in his car after each mod he has put in and after the K&N CAI install, I honestly didn't feel any major difference besides the sound.

Click to expand...

It's difficult to argue the seat of the pants dyno because there is no evidence to back it up. For instance, My buddy and I both felt a difference with the K&N but you and gashog didn't. So we are back to square one. Except that there is dyno evidence, unless the magazine and K&N are lying, that it makes decent power. Furthermore, everyone knows that UD pullies make power, but I hontestly didn't feel any difference when I installed them. That's because the butt dyno is inaccurate. That is why I posted the link to the article with actual numbers. That way someone can make an informed decision based on facts.

Redfire 05 said:

It's difficult to argue the seat of the pants dyno because there is no evidence to back it up. For instance, My buddy and I both felt a difference with the K&N but you and gashog didn't. So we are back to square one. Except that there is dyno evidence, unless the magazine and K&N are lying, that it makes decent power. Furthermore, everyone knows that UD pullies make power, but I hontestly didn't feel any difference when I installed them. That's because the butt dyno is inaccurate. That is why I posted the link to the article with actual numbers. That way someone can make an informed decision based on facts.

Click to expand...

Maybe our butt dyno's aren't working right Like I said, I agree that it adds hp no doubt but I felt the butt dyno was very little. I know you felt the difference, were you stock at the time when you installed the K&N? My buddy gashog was stock with just gibsons and a K&N maybe that's didn't make much of a difference to him much at all

Yeah, I was stock. The K&N was the first mod I made.