2010 JLT 101mm on a 05-09 GT??

[h8imports]

Wait a minute, I really am not saying the C&L doesn't make power. I am just saying this thread feels similar to the C&L stuff that has taken well over a year, started out as a 30+ hp mod, never any specific #'s or testing reveiled to us until now, only to find 7-10hp gained on what, 1 car? Maybe 2.
I guess my point is that the testing should be completed with documented results prior to hyping and promoting a product with inaccurate #'s and claims. Especially on an otherwise stock + bolt on car which is 95% of the market. This thread turned for the better with Tucker's findings and honesty about the product. Again... Kudos to you Tucker.
Now, that being said I personally believe that the 110mm maf and the C&L intake will make more sense and much more power for the niche market like myself.

Oh ok. Well I just wanted to make sure that you knew it did make power. I do agree that it needs to be documented.

Spending $799 (MSRP) to get 7-10 rwhp at the top of the rpm band does not sound like a good investment to me. $80-100 per hp is pretty steep. But you are correct, it does make power.

It is kind of high in price but look at it this way. The cheap delete plates are about all gone so all you can buy is the 300.00 Steeda Delete plates. My intake made 7 peak rwhp and 10 rwhp at 5700 rpms over delete plates. So like you said 80-100 dollars per hp. But it is basicly 66.00 per hp if you still had the stock intake with the cmrc plates still in. So basicly 300 for 5 hp over the stock intake and say 799 for 12 hp over the stock intake. If you want to stay N/A it is a good investment. (or to me) Because everything you do to the car after the intake it will make the Intake preform better. Cams, turbo, supercharger, etc. Thats my 2 cents worth anyhow.

 

[C&L Performance]

Cali HP Addict- The intake manifold that we developed for the 2005+ 3 valve engine DOES make power, and it does EVERYTHING that we have ever said that it does. We spent over 3 and a half years developing this item, and it has been dyno tested by numerous third parties to develop increases of MORE THAN 30 rear wheel HP in the upper RPM's. Livernois saw a maximum gain of 42 rear wheel HP at 6,700 RPM (the dyno chart is on our web site, and it has been posted online by Rick from Livernois) and HP Performance/Tony Gonyon/Tuners, Inc./Hurricane Performance recently tested one of the first production pieces on their white high HP naturally aspirated Mustang for a special edition 2005+ performance guide from Muscle Mustangs magaizine, which will be hitting the news stands some time within the next month or so. Because it is unpublished editorial, I am not able to provide details, but I have a suspicion that if you currently believe that our product does not perform as advertised, then you most certainly won't believe their results either. I urge you to call Tony Gonyon (HP/Tuners Inc.) at (904) 276-7223, Fred Cook (Evolution) at (610) 485-3596 or Rick at Livernois (313) 561-5500 and tell all of them that you don't believe that the C&L intake manifold for the 3V engine performs as advertised. They have ALL tested the product, and I am sure that they would be willing to share their results with you, since it obviously doesn't mean anything to you when we report their independent results.

Don't confuse any "supposed" results that were posted online prior to September of this year with the finished product, because ANY testing that was performed or posted before then is NOT what we are selling. We supplied a small number of pre-production samples to a number of businesses to get feedback from their testing on in-house vehicles. Evolution performance used one of these units on a bolt-on car that picked up 27 rear wheel HP, and MM&FF magazine published an article with these results. The dyno charts from this testing is on our website. Some of these manifolds were then sold to several individuals that "had to be the first" to try the item. This is not what we intended, but once they were out of our possesion, we had no control over how they were used. At the time these items were shipped out, we were unaware of a casting flaw in the thicker sections of the manifold at the bottom that could cause small leaks to effect the tip-in throttle response, as NONE of the manifolds that were were testing had this issue. Feedback from those who had higher HP applications indicated that they were only seeing gains of 25 to 27 rear wheel HP in the upper RPM's, which is a little bit less than we were expecting. After further refinement of the runner length, testing showed that these applications picked up an ADDITIONAL 15 rear wheel HP over the previous test results. We revised the tooling to eliminate gas pockets from the bottom of the castings (once we were made aware of the issue) and proceeded to adjust the runner length to deliver the best overall performance on everything from a totally stock engine to a fully modded 7,000+ RPM engine. All of this testing, adjustment of the tooling and revising/refinement of how the part was machined (to optimize fitment and finish) took quite some time, and is why the part was only recently put into full production.

The intake manifold makes a REALISTIC gain of between 11 to 14 HP on a totally stock engine. H8 Imports saw a maximum improvement of 10 HP over a DELETE PLATE equipped stock intake manifold on the same day and on the same dyno in direct comparison testing. If you were to believe what SOME people think the delete plates add, you might be led to believe that our intake is worth substantially more than what we are claiming. But the reality is that delete plates offer minimal gains for the cost, as H8 Imports pointed out. And his testing was performed using a PRE-PRODUCTION "Long Runner" intake, which is NOT what we are selling. On a stock engine, both the long and short runner intakes make the same power. On engines with ported heads and cams, however, the shorter runner version makes about 15 more HP in the upper RPM's on engines that can benefit from the extended RPM range that it provides. This intake was never billed as the "hot setup" for people with totally stock engines, but 11 to 14 HP over stock is respectable, given the fact that there are only so many mods that you can do and get results from without taking the engine apart. People with cylinder heads are the ones who benefit the most, as the intake runners flow between 325-332 CFM each, which is why we have developed ALL NEW 3V cylinder head castings. The tooling is finished and we already have cast samples.

With regard to the subject of this thread, the diameter of the MAF housing is not the primary determining factor for the flow capacity of the air intake assembly. We have proprietary test equipment that was developed SPECIFICALLY for measuring not only the mass airflow/air intake calibrations, but also the total airflow capacity of any system we wish to test. If you visit our 2010 page at the following link, it does an EXCELLENT job of explaining the differences between the 2005-2009 intakes and the 2010 intake assembly, as well as the computer callibration differences. It also shows flow comparison graphs as well as actual dyno test data.

http://www.cnlperformance.com/2010GT.html

All of the information is accurate, thorough and factual. And it also answers a lot of common questions that have been posed about the 2010 intake assembly.

Getting back to MAF diameter versus airflow capacity, I would like to submit the following: The "no tune required" version of our 2010 air intake assembly is 8% larger in diameter than the "tune required" version, and yet the air flow CAPACITY difference between the two different versions of the intake assembly is LESS THAN 2%. In real world testing of a vehicle that is making less than 350 rear wheel HP, it is not realistic to expect that an air intake assembly that flows 1,100 CFM will make more power than one that flows 1,030 CFM. You MIGHT see a small difference on a car making 400 or more rear wheel HP, but the "gain" will be so small that one would have to question if the 2-3 HP difference was simply within the realm of "repeatability". If you assume that your results can deviate by 1% from one run to another, which is not an unreasonable assumption, then a car making 300 to 400 rear wheel HP can see as much as a 3 to 4 HP swing during testing that is attributable to standard deviation rather than actual RESULTS...

Lee

 

[bolivianpimp]

in subscribing

 

[usafimj]

Didn't livernois show those gains on a big bore stroker and their stage III heads or something like. Nothing against them or the power the manifold made but how many people on the forums are running that kind of motor. Yes, I know not everyone is on the forums. I know it was to see how well it compares to the stocker. Usually nobody goes over a 298 stroker so it would be cool see what it would do on that since thats way more common than a big bore stroker.

What would be the point of comparing manifolds if your adding a TB in the after dyno's. Even though a TB doesn't had that much. Kinda defeats the purpose of comparing manifolds when one has a bigger TB added to it. Just my 2 cents. But other than that I'm ready to see how this new design does on differen't applications

 

[C&L Performance]

The throttle body test results were provided separately from the intake manifold results in the June Muscle Mustangs and Fast Fords article, and ALL throttle bodies (The stock, GT500 and the single blade) were tested separately for the upcoming article for the special edition MM&FF publication.

I can tell you this about throttle bodies: The GT500, even on a HIGH HP application, is not good for more than 4 HP over the stock throttle body. On a mildly modified or basically stock engine, with OR without the upgrade intake manifold, NO throttle body is worth more than 4 HP. Both the Accufab/FRPP and the Single Blade Whipple unit perform the best in testing, but are worth NO MORE than 10 to a maximum of 12 HP over the stock throttle body on a naturally aspirated FULLY BUILT stroker.

We don't reccomend a throttle body upgrade for most people, unless you are just "wanting" one. And in that case, we reccomend the Accufab/FRPP. It is high quality, has good driveability and (most of all) performs within 1 HP of the single blade. The biggest benefit to using a throttle body with the intake manifold for the "average" user is the fact that it reduces some of the loss that occurs between 3,400 and 4,800 RPM as a result of the elimination of the CMVC flaps and the shorter runner length. Below 3,400 RPM, the performance (with or without and aftermarket throttle body) is at least as good, or slightly better than the stock intake manifold...

 

[fdjizm]

In your opinion C&L Person...

Would a 110mm on a 05-09 make more power than our beloved 95mm maf with our racer intake? i already think the 95mm is slightly overkill but runs great. and good for future mods, but a beast 110 would make a difference on an otherwise sotck 05-09 s197?

 

[C&L Performance]

Absolutely, Positively NOT. This has already been answered earlier in this thread. Jay from JLT stated that their testing indicated that it didn't make an improvement over what he is already selling in testing on a modified car, and I touched on this a little bit when I provided an example and explained that increasing the MAF size does not guarantee an increase in the airflow capacity of the complete air intake assembly. No matter what, regardless of the diameter of the MAF housing (or it's flow potential), ALL airflow must be passed through the oval opening at the throttle body. That is TRULY what dictates the maximum possible amount of airflow that can be achieved for an air intake on these vehicles.

Take a look at the following dyno chart directly from our "Racer" intake page:
http://www.cnlperformance.com/images/C&L_Racer_Dyno.jpg

This shows both a "Racer" and "Street" intake assembly being dyno tested on the same day, with the same air/fuel ratio and timing level on a stock vehicle. The Racer flows 7% MORE than the Street intake, and yet they perform within ONE horsepower of each other. So, if a 95mm MAF housing does not make any more power than an 83mm housing on a stock engine, then why would anyone be led to believe that a 100+mm housing would perform better than a 95mm housing? It's all about AIRFLOW CAPACITY and NOT MAF housing diameter.

Using this particular test, consider that the Racer MAF housing has a diameter that is 14.4% BIGGER than the Street MAF, and yet the Racer, with it's BIGGER inlet tube and larger MAF housing only flows 7% more. This was touched on briefly using the 2010 intake as an example in a previous post. ANY perceived "gains" on your typical modded 2005+ Mustang when going from a 95mm housing to a even larger one are more than likely the result in an error in your testing procedure, or the deviation is within the realm of repeatability in testing (3-4 HP), which is of course NOT a real gain...

Lee

 

[rivercitypony]

For someone like me that wants to get max N/A results with Lts, cams and heads, it might be good to look at your manifold with an upgraded throttle body. How much more does the C&L manifold weigh compared to the stock intake manifold?

 

[Matt D]

For someone like me that wants to get max N/A results with Lts, cams and heads, it might be good to look at your manifold with an upgraded throttle body. How much more does the C&L manifold weigh compared to the stock intake manifold?

I just weighed the C&L I got in few days ago 32 pounds

stock intake with CMPDs attached with rails 15lbs

 

[fdjizm]

Absolutely, Positively NOT. This has already been answered earlier in this thread. Jay from JLT stated that their testing indicated that it didn't make an improvement over what he is already selling in testing on a modified car, and I touched on this a little bit when I provided an example and explained that increasing the MAF size does not guarantee an increase in the airflow capacity of the complete air intake assembly. No matter what, regardless of the diameter of the MAF housing (or it's flow potential), ALL airflow must be passed through the oval opening at the throttle body. That is TRULY what dictates the maximum possible amount of airflow that can be achieved for an air intake on these vehicles.

Take a look at the following dyno chart directly from our "Racer" intake page:
http://www.cnlperformance.com/images/C&L_Racer_Dyno.jpg

This shows both a "Racer" and "Street" intake assembly being dyno tested on the same day, with the same air/fuel ratio and timing level on a stock vehicle. The Racer flows 7% MORE than the Street intake, and yet they perform within ONE horsepower of each other. So, if a 95mm MAF housing does not make any more power than an 83mm housing on a stock engine, then why would anyone be led to believe that a 100+mm housing would perform better than a 95mm housing? It's all about AIRFLOW CAPACITY and NOT MAF housing diameter.

Using this particular test, consider that the Racer MAF housing has a diameter that is 14.4% BIGGER than the Street MAF, and yet the Racer, with it's BIGGER inlet tube and larger MAF housing only flows 7% more. This was touched on briefly using the 2010 intake as an example in a previous post. ANY perceived "gains" on your typical modded 2005+ Mustang when going from a 95mm housing to a even larger one are more than likely the result in an error in your testing procedure, or the deviation is within the realm of repeatability in testing (3-4 HP), which is of course NOT a real gain...

Lee

Thank you i suspected that, exactly what i wanted to know!

 

[Cali HP Addict]

Cali HP Addict- We spent over 3 and a half years developing this item, Yes, been a long time like I said and it has been dyno tested by numerous third parties to develop increases of MORE THAN 30 rear wheel HP in the upper RPM's. Fully built motors of course

... since it obviously doesn't mean anything to you when we report their independent results. Jeeze man.

Don't confuse any "supposed" results that were posted online prior to September of this year with the finished product, because ANY testing that was performed or posted before then is NOT what we are selling. Conflicting info. Aren't the tests you told us to look at the results prior to Sept.?

Some of these manifolds were then sold to several individuals that "had to be the first" to try the item. Don't bitch about your decision to release them now. This is not what we intended, but once they were out of our possesion, we had no control over how they were used. At the time these items were shipped out, we were unaware of a casting flaw in the thicker sections of the manifold at the bottom that could cause small leaks to effect the tip-in throttle response, as NONE of the manifolds that were were testing had this issue. Whew, good thing you sent some out to those that "had to be the first" then. Feedback from those who had higher HP applications indicated that they were only seeing gains of 25 to 27 rear wheel HP in the upper RPM's, Not bad. 25rwhp is very respectable, if it is over a stock intake w/delete plates. which is a little bit less than we were expecting. After further refinement of the runner length, testing showed that these applications picked up an ADDITIONAL 15 rear wheel HP Wow, even better over the previous test results.

The intake manifold makes a REALISTIC gain of between 11 to 14 HP on a totally stock engine. H8 Imports saw a maximum improvement of 10 HP over a DELETE PLATE equipped stock intake manifold on the same day and on the same dyno in direct comparison testing. Is that not what I said? If you were to believe what SOME people think the delete plates add, you might be led to believe that our intake is worth substantially more than what we are claiming. But the reality is that delete plates offer minimal gains for the cost, What???

This intake was never billed as the "hot setup" for people with totally stock engines, but 11 to 14 HP over stock is respectable, Does this take into account your 1% repeatability factor?

Lee

Sorry for jacking the JLT thread with this but I am glad to hear from C&L. I have a C&L Racer CAI and have been defending it already in this thread.
I do think the testing done on the Manifold is subjective and hard to decipher. Real world results are surfacing and will probably prove that your Manifold will produce your claimed 11 to 14 (or 8 to 11 with your own repeatability factor)rwhp on an otherwise stock car.
I would personally like to see a back to back, stock car with a CAI and delete plates -vs- same car with the C&L Manifold. Same AF ratio, timing, throttle body etc. Within the test I would like to see some IAT #'s when the car is hot. Just to see if there is any heat transfer/retention from the cast aluminum -vs- composite that would affect IAT's. If there is such a test out there, do you mind pointing it out?

 

[2L8IWON]

Isn't this thread about JLT's 101mm CAI and the potential is has on the 05 and up cars? NOT a thread for another vendor to come in and defend their unrelated product? Classy

 

[h8imports]

Sorry for jacking the JLT thread with this but I am glad to hear from C&L. I have a C&L Racer CAI and have been defending it already in this thread.
I do think the testing done on the Manifold is subjective and hard to decipher. Real world results are surfacing and will probably prove that your Manifold will produce your claimed 11 to 14 (or 8 to 11 with your own repeatability factor)rwhp on an otherwise stock car.
I would personally like to see a back to back, stock car with a CAI and delete plates -vs- same car with the C&L Manifold. Same AF ratio, timing, throttle body etc. Within the test I would like to see some IAT #'s when the car is hot. Just to see if there is any heat transfer/retention from the cast aluminum -vs- composite that would affect IAT's. If there is such a test out there, do you mind pointing it out?

http://s197forum.com/forum/showthread.php?t=23431&highlight=c&l+intake+dyno

Go there. I dynoed my car on the same dyno, same time, same tune (93 Race BamaChips) My car picked up hp to the wheels over the delete plates. I wasn't even going to dyno my car but people on here talked me into it. I'm glad I did so I could help and let people know that this intake makes power.

I drove my car on a long trip with our local mustang club. We was on the trip for about a hour or so and we all stopped to take a break and I got out and put my hand on top of my C&L Intake and I could hold my hand on top of it. It was hot but not hot enough where I had to move my hand off of my intake. I got my dad and some more guys from my mustang club to feel the intake and they could not belive it. It wasn't that hot. I've got a temp gun and one day I'm going to drive my 08 (with C&L) and get my Dad to follow me on a long trip and then check the temp of My C&L and his Stock plastic intake and find out the difference in the temps.

Isn't this thread about JLT's 101mm CAI and the potential is has on the 05 and up cars? NOT a thread for another vendor to come in and defend their unrelated product? Classy

They were going to compair the JLT to the C&L Race. So his Cold air was being talked about.

The C&L Intake came up in subject and he came in talking about the C&L Intake.

I'd like to get C&L in here to see what they have to say.

He was invited here. LOL

 

[Chris06GT]

Absolutely, Positively NOT. This has already been answered earlier in this thread. Jay from JLT stated that their testing indicated that it didn't make an improvement over what he is already selling in testing on a modified car, and I touched on this a little bit when I provided an example and explained that increasing the MAF size does not guarantee an increase in the airflow capacity of the complete air intake assembly. No matter what, regardless of the diameter of the MAF housing (or it's flow potential), ALL airflow must be passed through the oval opening at the throttle body. That is TRULY what dictates the maximum possible amount of airflow that can be achieved for an air intake on these vehicles.

Take a look at the following dyno chart directly from our "Racer" intake page:
http://www.cnlperformance.com/images/C&L_Racer_Dyno.jpg

This shows both a "Racer" and "Street" intake assembly being dyno tested on the same day, with the same air/fuel ratio and timing level on a stock vehicle. The Racer flows 7% MORE than the Street intake, and yet they perform within ONE horsepower of each other. So, if a 95mm MAF housing does not make any more power than an 83mm housing on a stock engine, then why would anyone be led to believe that a 100+mm housing would perform better than a 95mm housing? It's all about AIRFLOW CAPACITY and NOT MAF housing diameter.

Using this particular test, consider that the Racer MAF housing has a diameter that is 14.4% BIGGER than the Street MAF, and yet the Racer, with it's BIGGER inlet tube and larger MAF housing only flows 7% more. This was touched on briefly using the 2010 intake as an example in a previous post. ANY perceived "gains" on your typical modded 2005+ Mustang when going from a 95mm housing to a even larger one are more than likely the result in an error in your testing procedure, or the deviation is within the realm of repeatability in testing (3-4 HP), which is of course NOT a real gain...

Lee

Lee, glad to see you in here man!!!!.....

I met you at Trackmaster's the day Doug tuned the black Challenger a few months ago.....I have the white 06 Coupe, and my buddy had the white vert that was cammed....

It was good to meet you and glad you are here clearing things up!!!

Chris

 

[Freaknazty]

1

Were in the testing stages, this is what this thread is all about.

I'll test it ..... I have a built stroker , heads , cams , lt's , deletes , the works If any car would benefit from this intake it would be one like mine , I even have free access to a dyno ( mustang ) so that wouldn't be a problem . I am running your regular 05-09 intake now and could do before and after . Same everything just account for the larger maf housing .

 

[470 GT/CS]

Cali HP Addict- The intake manifold that we developed for the 2005+ 3 valve engine DOES make power, and it does EVERYTHING that we have ever said that it does. We spent over 3 and a half years developing this item, and it has been dyno tested by numerous third parties to develop increases of MORE THAN 30 rear wheel HP in the upper RPM's. Livernois saw a maximum gain of 42 rear wheel HP at 6,700 RPM (the dyno chart is on our web site, and it has been posted online by Rick from Livernois) and HP Performance/Tony Gonyon/Tuners, Inc./Hurricane Performance recently tested one of the first production pieces on their white high HP naturally aspirated Mustang for a special edition 2005+ performance guide from Muscle Mustangs magaizine, which will be hitting the news stands some time within the next month or so. Because it is unpublished editorial, I am not able to provide details, but I have a suspicion that if you currently believe that our product does not perform as advertised, then you most certainly won't believe their results either. I urge you to call Tony Gonyon (HP/Tuners Inc.) at (904) 276-7223, Fred Cook (Evolution) at (610) 485-3596 or Rick at Livernois (313) 561-5500 and tell all of them that you don't believe that the C&L intake manifold for the 3V engine performs as advertised. They have ALL tested the product, and I am sure that they would be willing to share their results with you, since it obviously doesn't mean anything to you when we report their independent results.

Don't confuse any "supposed" results that were posted online prior to September of this year with the finished product, because ANY testing that was performed or posted before then is NOT what we are selling. We supplied a small number of pre-production samples to a number of businesses to get feedback from their testing on in-house vehicles. Evolution performance used one of these units on a bolt-on car that picked up 27 rear wheel HP, and MM&FF magazine published an article with these results. The dyno charts from this testing is on our website. Some of these manifolds were then sold to several individuals that "had to be the first" to try the item. This is not what we intended, but once they were out of our possesion, we had no control over how they were used. At the time these items were shipped out, we were unaware of a casting flaw in the thicker sections of the manifold at the bottom that could cause small leaks to effect the tip-in throttle response, as NONE of the manifolds that were were testing had this issue. Feedback from those who had higher HP applications indicated that they were only seeing gains of 25 to 27 rear wheel HP in the upper RPM's, which is a little bit less than we were expecting. After further refinement of the runner length, testing showed that these applications picked up an ADDITIONAL 15 rear wheel HP over the previous test results. We revised the tooling to eliminate gas pockets from the bottom of the castings (once we were made aware of the issue) and proceeded to adjust the runner length to deliver the best overall performance on everything from a totally stock engine to a fully modded 7,000+ RPM engine. All of this testing, adjustment of the tooling and revising/refinement of how the part was machined (to optimize fitment and finish) took quite some time, and is why the part was only recently put into full production.

The intake manifold makes a REALISTIC gain of between 11 to 14 HP on a totally stock engine. H8 Imports saw a maximum improvement of 10 HP over a DELETE PLATE equipped stock intake manifold on the same day and on the same dyno in direct comparison testing. If you were to believe what SOME people think the delete plates add, you might be led to believe that our intake is worth substantially more than what we are claiming. But the reality is that delete plates offer minimal gains for the cost, as H8 Imports pointed out. And his testing was performed using a PRE-PRODUCTION "Long Runner" intake, which is NOT what we are selling. On a stock engine, both the long and short runner intakes make the same power. On engines with ported heads and cams, however, the shorter runner version makes about 15 more HP in the upper RPM's on engines that can benefit from the extended RPM range that it provides. This intake was never billed as the "hot setup" for people with totally stock engines, but 11 to 14 HP over stock is respectable, given the fact that there are only so many mods that you can do and get results from without taking the engine apart. People with cylinder heads are the ones who benefit the most, as the intake runners flow between 325-332 CFM each, which is why we have developed ALL NEW 3V cylinder head castings. The tooling is finished and we already have cast samples.

With regard to the subject of this thread, the diameter of the MAF housing is not the primary determining factor for the flow capacity of the air intake assembly. We have proprietary test equipment that was developed SPECIFICALLY for measuring not only the mass airflow/air intake calibrations, but also the total airflow capacity of any system we wish to test. If you visit our 2010 page at the following link, it does an EXCELLENT job of explaining the differences between the 2005-2009 intakes and the 2010 intake assembly, as well as the computer callibration differences. It also shows flow comparison graphs as well as actual dyno test data.

http://www.cnlperformance.com/2010GT.html

All of the information is accurate, thorough and factual. And it also answers a lot of common questions that have been posed about the 2010 intake assembly.

Getting back to MAF diameter versus airflow capacity, I would like to submit the following: The "no tune required" version of our 2010 air intake assembly is 8% larger in diameter than the "tune required" version, and yet the air flow CAPACITY difference between the two different versions of the intake assembly is LESS THAN 2%. In real world testing of a vehicle that is making less than 350 rear wheel HP, it is not realistic to expect that an air intake assembly that flows 1,100 CFM will make more power than one that flows 1,030 CFM. You MIGHT see a small difference on a car making 400 or more rear wheel HP, but the "gain" will be so small that one would have to question if the 2-3 HP difference was simply within the realm of "repeatability". If you assume that your results can deviate by 1% from one run to another, which is not an unreasonable assumption, then a car making 300 to 400 rear wheel HP can see as much as a 3 to 4 HP swing during testing that is attributable to standard deviation rather than actual RESULTS...

Lee

It's nice to finally hear about your 3v heads. Several months back, I heard these flow 320+ CFM. I'm glad you guys created your own casting instead of working over OEM heads.

Is there any way you can inform me on what kind of valvetrain upgrades will be in these heads?

 

[Freaknazty]

I'll test it ..... I have a built stroker , heads , cams , lt's , deletes , the works If any car would benefit from this intake it would be one like mine , I even have free access to a dyno ( mustang ) so that wouldn't be a problem . I am running your regular 05-09 intake now and could do before and after . Same everything just account for the larger maf housing .

 

[luillo]

Last dyno pull with my latest mod I made 326 rwhp at 322 torque SAE corrected.. std it was 336 @ 332 torque.

Im going to be pushings the limits with stock internals... If I gained another peak 3-5 hp I would be happy as hell. I figure this jlt will pick up to 8hp in some of the power range because of the huge maf

well, did you got any info on the new numbers for the JLT CAI. I just came across these thread and never saw any post of the difference in between the C&L CAI and JLT 110

 

[1fast05]

I love my new C&L intake manifold!!