Tyler
Sep 3 2008, 11:27 PM
QUOTE(Me Too @ Sep 2 2008, 05:59 PM)

About the fancy, schmancy K&N intake systems...the OEM cold air system is more than adequate for your engine--it flows, with the stock air filter, around 560cfm which is enough to feed around 400hp or more--
I cant say I totally agree with that. My car dropped .2 with a CAI alone. I'm sure it was partially the filter but the smoother flow definitly helps.
Me Too
Sep 4 2008, 12:56 AM
QUOTE(Tyler @ Sep 4 2008, 08:27 AM)

I cant say I totally agree with that. My car dropped .2 with a CAI alone. I'm sure it was partially the filter but the smoother flow definitly helps.
Tyler,
You already had a CAI on your car--each and every Firebird, V6 or V8 comes free with one right from the factory. All that is needed is a K&N Filter. Organizing the air before the MAF doesn't do much. I ran the bench flow test with the stock sytem and with a K&N, the airflow numbers speak for themselves. Now, if you compare the OEM system with a Ram Air, that's an entirely different story. You can get .2 difference in runs, just by inflating your tires, a change in barometric pressure, temp of the air, temp of the engine, etc. ...or maybe your eyeballs were crossed.
I ran my car thru the traps only twice and got times that were .5 second difference between them, the fastest was a 12.54 still using the stock cam and still using the stock air intake except for a K&N filter.
Tyler
Sep 6 2008, 10:41 PM
The flow numbers might say one thing but I'd be willing to bet that anyone on here that removed the stock air intake and replaced it with an aftermarket CAI will tell you thier cars went faster afterward. Mine went from a 14.33 stock to a 13.96 with only that mod. A K&N filter in the box would never make that much differance.
SiberianFirestorm
Sep 7 2008, 01:36 PM
I am all for numbers on flow benches, but without posting the actual print out, I am still skeptical.
Glad to hear you got better numbers this time.
Stacey David from GEARZ TV went to K&N for a show. I think they stated that the advertised HP ratings were at the wheels, but I do not have access to my DVR to pull it up for sure.
Matt
Me Too
Sep 7 2008, 09:52 PM
Don't have the sheets, you'll have to take my word for it. I have nothing to gain or lose by making the statement. Think about it like this....the engine doesn't care what the filtering medium is or the tube size is, as long as it gets enough air through the throttle body. The choke for the engine is the throttlebody. If the air intake system was the choke, then the engine would simply run out of air and shut down. It doesn't do that, it will run up till it explodes and it wouldn't do that unless it is given enough air. In most cases, people see or feel what they want to see or feel, and in many cases, they tend to justify what they have purchased. Once the engine has enough air to feed it, it doesn't really matter what is done with the air intake system, unless it is a ram air system. If a ram air is installed, that is some real hp, but understand this...get on the websites that cover ram air, talk to the people that actaully own them and look at dyno figures done by GM, they found no hp gains until the car, not the engine, the CAR, was at speeds above 70 mph! And that was becuz the air was being rammed into the intake by the fwd speed of the car. That goes against everything I know except for one thing--the stock air intake system works just fine and there is no way to improve it, unless a K&N filter is added and that is all that is needed.
The OEM paper filter is a choke for the engine, but only when it gets dirty. It tends to clog up fast, and the hp loss by this filter is only becuz it is too small for the engine once it gets dirty. Most cars with smaller engines, the filter in my Civic is about twice the size of the OEM Firebird and is still bigger than any aftermaket filter fitting in the stock location that is available for the Firebird, that's what I mean by choking off with the OEM filter. Add a K&N OEM replacement and the engine gets more air if needed, but only when the K&N is clean, but still allows more air even when dirty than a dirty OEM filter, becuz the cloth gauze has bigger holes, after that...all bets are off.
I'll repeat, don't buy the fancy schmancy air intakes unless you just want the freedom from replacing a clogged paper filter about every 2,000 miles--the K&N flows better when dirty.
I was astounded to see the air flow figures on my intake system, it went against everything that the advertisers say. If GM had designed an air intake that choked off the engine, during the smog tests, the engine would go rich and would fail the test. It would have been against their own interests to build a system like that.
Tyler
Sep 7 2008, 11:32 PM
Alot of what you say makes sense but think of this to. If the stock exhaust manifolds were perfect there would be no hp improvement from adding headers. If the muffler were perfect there would be no hp to gain from a cat-back system. If the air intake system were perfect people would see no hp improvements from adding an aftermarket CAI. But,they do see hp gains. Timeslips dont lie. Mine is not the only one either. All the numbers might be there but real world accounts mean there is more to it than just numbers.
Me Too
Sep 8 2008, 12:34 AM
3/10ths of a second is the equivalent of removing 300 lbs from your car-preferably off the front end, or increasing hp by around 30 or more. The numbers don't add up. Sorry buddy, but all that stuff is just hearsay and urban myths. K&N makes a claim for an increase of 18 hp but says that is an "estimate" and they say in several places on their website that your results will vary. Also, I checked their dyno run--it was done in 2nd gear. Anybody who is anybody knows that the runs must be done in 4 th gear, and from the flywheel is the best, after that, at the hub and not the tire. The bottom line is this. Look at the diameter of the piping--its the cross section that determines what the flow will be as long as the intake isn't choked off from the air filter design. Nothing else matters. And the OEM system is big enough, but the filter really sucks (literally), so adding more square inches to the filter can really help the breathing, esp with a high hp, and heavily modded engine.
You should accept that the new ET is based on a lot of things and not just one--consider it a new best, but to say it is all due to the air intake can't be substantiated.
On the exhaust manfifolds, the stock ones do a pretty good job...Extrude Honing them makes an additional 10 hp by GM's claim. The very best headers, which are made by SLP, make only 7 more hp.
On the CAT back exhaust system--huge gains can be made there--the OEM system is very restrictive. An aftermarket exhaust system is probably the best bang for the buck there is, anywhere from 15 to 30 hp can be gained, and probably more if the entire breathing system, including the heads is reworked.
Tyler
Sep 8 2008, 01:16 AM
Sorry"buddy" but my results speak for themselves. Sure,there are other factors to consider.It may have been alot cooler on the quicker run. I could tell a seat-of-the-pants differance as soon as I installed the CAI,mosty at the top-end. If you never had one on your own car and tried it you really dont know for sure.
Me Too
Sep 8 2008, 08:35 AM
QUOTE(Tyler @ Sep 8 2008, 10:16 AM)

Sorry"buddy" but my results speak for themselves. Sure,there are other factors to consider.It may have been alot cooler on the quicker run. I could tell a seat-of-the-pants differance as soon as I installed the CAI,mosty at the top-end. If you never had one on your own car and tried it you really dont know for sure.
Oh, now I get it. You didn't allow the PCM to retune--that takes about 200 miles. This is a common problem with everything that is advertised for the Firebirds, Corvettes and Camaros. Your engine ran lean for a bit. Lean always makes more hp, initially, then the PCM tunes for a stochiometric 14.6:1 and that is the end of that. Nope, unless your engine was running up against an air starvation problem, and your times don't reflect it, then it's not your air intake that was the problem.
I think what you are feeling is a dead computer. Mine always did that till I figured it out. Make one change, go out and drive the car...HOLY COW that was it! It's fixed, give it a few weeks and it was back to the same old thing. Your engine was running against the Integrator and not the Block Learns. You need to change the PCM.
Tyler
Sep 8 2008, 04:46 PM
Actually,it stayed the same well after the install of every mod I've done. It never ran good then lost the benefits of whatever mod was done to it.
Me Too
Sep 8 2008, 09:24 PM
QUOTE(Tyler @ Sep 9 2008, 01:46 AM)

Actually,it stayed the same well after the install of every mod I've done. It never ran good then lost the benefits of whatever mod was done to it.
Sorry, Tyler...don't understand this last. If you are saying what I think you are saying, then I think you are saying what I thought you said or typed. Or....
I'd really check out that PCM. Problem is, when PCMs fail, they usually are incopable of self-diagnostics. That means you have to take a chance on a new one and then hope the "new" one is working correctly. I've come to think that the PCMs are the real weak point in the entire engine mgmt system (except for the 93's). The OBDII is more reliable than the OBDI.
If there was a way of installing a 93 ECM in a Firebird, I'd do it in a heart beat and eliminate the MAF entirely. There is not much benefit to the MAF, anyway, esp. in a performance situation. The replaceable EEPROM could be considered a pain, but reprpgrammed chips are available and your mods are easily compensated for. Your mods are not that different from what a lot of owners have done and all have proved that they are good, solid changes. Your car should run like a graped ape and I really feel it lays down. The addition of the aftermarket CAI system did more than it should have and that is a trademark of a failed PCM in my experience.
SassySue09
Sep 9 2008, 03:30 AM
From what Tyler wrote, I think what he's saying is that his results at the track and with the numbers he put down, that they didn't change no matter how many miles he put on the car after he done the installs and that his car didn't run good then crappy after he put the miles on it after each install he did. In other words, his results didn't go from good to bad with the addition of miles on his car after the installs, they stayed good the whole time no matter the miles.
Tyler
Sep 9 2008, 04:42 AM
Thats what I meant to say,did it not come out right?
I'd love to try another PCM if I can find one just to test that theory. I'd hate to pay for one and it not be an issue.
Me Too
Sep 9 2008, 05:19 AM
QUOTE(Tyler @ Sep 9 2008, 01:42 PM)

Thats what I meant to say,did it not come out right?
I'd love to try another PCM if I can find one just to test that theory. I'd hate to pay for one and it not be an issue.
Oh, is that what was meant. Wasn't sure that I understood what was meant and that I meant what was maybe understood. Or, something like that.
Sorry, you gotta take a chance on the PCM. There is no other way to find out if the OEM is bad. However, a clue to this whole problem is also to be found in why didn't the AFR Hydra Rev system work the way it should have? It could be that installing it, put the computer over the brink of what it could adjust for, that would imply a weak computer. Heck, mine ran better than it ever had, and when the 1.6 rr's were installed, it ran even better than before that! In each case, the PCM responded by making the adjustments. However, when the PCM started getting really bad, my car had the same symptoms that you have been describing.
All I can do is guess, and this is my best guess. You gotta decide to spend the extra mulah and take a chance. At the very worst, you will have an extra computer that maybe can be sold to somebody else someday, or loaned to a friend if diagnostics need to be done. But, if I'm correct, you are gonna see a horendous increase in hp and that new CAI will really pay for itself. Used my old one as a weight in the garbage can.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.