What Air intake system without Re-map 4.6 3V

[06 T-RED S/C GT]

You're all making valid points about the stock airbox providing adequate airflow for a stock 05-09 GT making 300 crank HP, but there are a couple of factors that you're not taking into account:

1. The airflow becomes reduced as the filter accumulates more dirt.

2. Quoted airflow numbers are under 28" H2O depression. Would you really want your stock 05-09 GT intake system to generate that much vacuum in order to flow 550cfm? A CAI that flows, say, 1100cfm at 28" H2O depression would only need 7" H2O depression to flow 550cfm, resulting in sharper throttle response and improved gas mileage. It would also mean that the air filter assembly is no longer the choke point in the intake system, especially if you want to add more N/A HP.

3. The stock 10 GT airbox was a big improvement over the 05-09, and one could argue that you're better off keeping it even if you're chasing after more N/A HP. It also has the advantage of being a true CAI unlike some of the others that have an inadequate heat shield thus effectively making them a HAI. You could even swap a stock 10 GT airbox with intake pipe into an 05-09 GT, though it would require relocating the PS pump reservoir and a revised MAF transfer curve written into the ECU.

4. We've all seen dyno graphs showing HP & TQ gains across the rpm range from a CAI & tune, but increased airflow only accounts for a less than 10hp gain and even that would only become significant at higher rpm. Nearly all of the HP & TQ gains, especially at lower rpm, are a result of improved optimization of fuel and timing maps. In some cases, the cam timing may also be altered.

At the end of the day if your car is bone stock, a custom tune is a great starting point.
As to the question whether you should you swap in an aftermarket CAI, definitely don't bother if it's a no tune required CAI. If it requires a tune, then decide if there's going to be a worthwhile airflow improvement. In some cases the filter is too small to flow more air than stock so pick one that has the biggest filter that'll fit in the available space. Even then, you're more likely to enjoy the intake roar and sucking sounds as you get on the gas rather than any HP gain. For some, that alone may be worth it as well as being under hood eye candy.

As far as what factors you claim are not taking into account?

1. The airflow becomes reduced as the filter accumulates more dirt. This applies regardless of the stock air intake or running a huge cone filter air intake setup.

2. If the stock 3v engine is limited to 550cfm, then just how in the hell can it take in 1100cfm from a CAI when the stock heads aren't designed for it?

3. Other than relocating the intake pipe of 10 GT airbox to the front grill section, the airbox design itself was unchanged from 05-09.

4. As previously mentioned, the same HP&TQ gains can be achieved with the stock airbox and a performance tune by remapping the spark, fuel and timing parameters. Adding a larger MAF CAI for which the stock 3v engine cannot support is useless and won't gain a damn thing.

 

[Pentalab]

You're all making valid points about the stock airbox providing adequate airflow for a stock 05-09 GT making 300 crank HP, but there are a couple of factors that you're not taking into account:

1. The airflow becomes reduced as the filter accumulates more dirt.

2. Quoted airflow numbers are under 28" H2O depression. Would you really want your stock 05-09 GT intake system to generate that much vacuum in order to flow 550cfm? A CAI that flows, say, 1100cfm at 28" H2O depression would only need 7" H2O depression to flow 550cfm, resulting in sharper throttle response and improved gas mileage. It would also mean that the air filter assembly is no longer the choke point in the intake system, especially if you want to add more N/A HP.

Points well taken. You are correct. If you want to double the airflow, you have to quadruple the pressure (or vac). ( goes up to the square of the ratios). That applies to either gases....or liquids. Nobody is about to try and stuff 1100 cfm through a forced hot air heating system in a home...through a puny 5" diam pipe...vs large ducts. Well you can, but you require a stupid amount of pressure to achieve those results. You also require a lot of hp to drive a PD blower...vs a 1 hp electric motor for a home. The ducts in the home don't have large back pressures either.

In the case of my 2010 + M90 + LT's + bigger TB / 94 tune.... by replacing the oem restrictive upper grille with a 7 bar grille, it at least eliminated the 2 x 90 deg bends into the..'snorkel' that feeds the oem airbox. On the hwy, boost increased by almost 1/2 psi.

At least check the air filter once a year.

 

[Flusher]

In the case of my 2010 + M90 + LT's + bigger TB / 94 tune.... by replacing the oem restrictive upper grille with a 7 bar grille, it at least eliminated the 2 x 90 deg bends into the..'snorkel' that feeds the oem airbox. On the hwy, boost increased by almost 1/2 psi.

Is that 1/2 PSI with all the changes you listed? You don't have a bypass valve? Why did boost increase?

 

[Juice]

A dirty airfilter is a maintanance item.

 

[Dino Dino Bambino]

As far as what factors you claim are not taking into account?

1. The airflow becomes reduced as the filter accumulates more dirt. This applies regardless of the stock air intake or running a huge cone filter air intake setup.

2. If the stock 3v engine is limited to 550cfm, then just how in the hell can it take in 1100cfm from a CAI when the stock heads aren't designed for it?

3. Other than relocating the intake pipe of 10 GT airbox to the front grill section, the airbox design itself was unchanged from 05-09.

4. As previously mentioned, the same HP&TQ gains be achieved with the stock airbox and a performance tune by remapping the spark, fuel and timing parameters. Adding a larger MAF CAI for which the stock 3v engine cannot support is useless and won't gain a damn thing.

1. Your first point is correct but a higher flowing filter that's dirty could still flow more air than a brand new stock filter and never become an airflow restriction to the engine, whereas a dirty stock filter could become restrictive enough to cause an incremental loss of HP at higher rpm.

2. Your second point is also correct, and indeed the engine can't ingest ingest more than 528cfm (assuming a 6500rpm maximum & 100% VE), but a 1100cfm rated CAI will allow the engine to ingest 528cfm with much less restriction than a 550cfm intake. In essence the engine can fill its lungs without sucking as hard.

3. The intake pipe of the 10 GT airbox sweeps further forwards in a wider arc than the 05-09 GT and that, plus possibly a larger snorkel, may account for its higher airflow capacity. Is that enough to account for the '10 GT engine producing an extra 15hp & 5lbft? I seriously doubt it 'cause the '10 GT has more aggressive spark timing and may also have adaptive spark (perhaps someone can either confirm or refute that), so that probably explains most of the increased performance.

4. Agree in principle but then most people go beyond just a CAI & tune by adding further airflow-enhancing mods such as CMDPs, headers, and exhaust initially followed by cams, 62mm TB, and possibly a Ford Performance intake manifold later on (instead of delete plates). Would you do those mods and still keep the stock airbox? You're correct to say that adding a larger MAF CAI is essentially useless on a stock engine, and you could even argue that this mod could wait until you've done some of the other aforementioned mods, but a CAI is such an easy bolt on to add that most people will choose to do it anyway in combination with an email tune as their first performance mod.

 

[06 T-RED S/C GT]

You're all making valid points about the stock airbox providing adequate airflow for a stock 05-09 GT making 300 crank HP, but there are a couple of factors that you're not taking into account:

1. The airflow becomes reduced as the filter accumulates more dirt.

2. Quoted airflow numbers are under 28" H2O depression. Would you really want your stock 05-09 GT intake system to generate that much vacuum in order to flow 550cfm? A CAI that flows, say, 1100cfm at 28" H2O depression would only need 7" H2O depression to flow 550cfm, resulting in sharper throttle response and improved gas mileage. It would also mean that the air filter assembly is no longer the choke point in the intake system, especially if you want to add more N/A HP.

3. The stock 10 GT airbox was a big improvement over the 05-09, and one could argue that you're better off keeping it even if you're chasing after more N/A HP. It also has the advantage of being a true CAI unlike some of the others that have an inadequate heat shield thus effectively making them a HAI. You could even swap a stock 10 GT airbox with intake pipe into an 05-09 GT, though it would require relocating the PS pump reservoir and a revised MAF transfer curve written into the ECU.

4. We've all seen dyno graphs showing HP & TQ gains across the rpm range from a CAI & tune, but increased airflow only accounts for a less than 10hp gain and even that would only become significant at higher rpm. Nearly all of the HP & TQ gains, especially at lower rpm, are a result of improved optimization of fuel and timing maps. In some cases, the cam timing may also be altered.

At the end of the day if your car is bone stock, a custom tune is a great starting point.
As to the question whether you should you swap in an aftermarket CAI, definitely don't bother if it's a no tune required CAI. If it requires a tune, then decide if there's going to be a worthwhile airflow improvement. In some cases the filter is too small to flow more air than stock so pick one that has the biggest filter that'll fit in the available space. Even then, you're more likely to enjoy the intake roar and sucking sounds as you get on the gas rather than any HP gain. For some, that alone may be worth it as well as being under hood eye candy.

Points well taken. You are correct. If you want to double the airflow, you have to quadruple the pressure (or vac). ( goes up to the square of the ratios). That applies to either gases....or liquids. Nobody is about to try and stuff 1100 cfm through a forced hot air heating system in a home...through a puny 5" diam pipe...vs large ducts. Well you can, but you require a stupid amount of pressure to achieve those results. You also require a lot of hp to drive a PD blower...vs a 1 hp electric motor for a home. The ducts in the home don't have large back pressures either.

In the case of my 2010 + M90 + LT's + bigger TB / 94 tune.... by replacing the oem restrictive upper grille with a 7 bar grille, it at least eliminated the 2 x 90 deg bends into the..'snorkel' that feeds the oem airbox. On the hwy, boost increased by almost 1/2 psi.

At least check the air filter once a year.

So just how can the stock 3v heads take in double the amount of airflow thru a larger MAF CAI when their not able to make use of it? It would be like trying to force air from a larger diameter opening into a straw. Perhaps I'm missing something here, but I just don't understand how quadrupling the pressure or vacuum is going to make any difference being as the stock 3v engine is capable of only taking in the amount of airflow for which it was designed to support by the factory

 

[06 T-RED S/C GT]

1. Your first point is correct but a higher flowing filter that's dirty could still flow more air than a brand new stock filter and never become an airflow restriction to the engine, whereas a dirty stock filter could become restrictive enough to cause an incremental loss of HP at higher rpm.

2. Your second point is also correct, and indeed the engine can't ingest ingest more than 528cfm (assuming a 6500rpm maximum & 100% VE), but a 1100cfm rated CAI will allow the engine to ingest 528cfm with much less restriction than a 550cfm intake. In essence the engine can fill its lungs without sucking as hard.

3. The intake pipe of the 10 GT airbox sweeps further forwards in a wider arc than the 05-09 GT and that, plus possibly a larger snorkel, may account for its higher airflow capacity. Is that enough to account for the '10 GT engine producing an extra 15hp & 5lbft? I seriously doubt it 'cause the '10 GT has more aggressive spark timing and may also have adaptive spark (perhaps someone can either confirm or refute that), so that probably explains most of the increased performance.

4. Agree in principle but then most people go beyond just a CAI & tune by adding further airflow-enhancing mods such as CMDPs, headers, and exhaust initially followed by cams, 62mm TB, and possibly a Ford Performance intake manifold later on (instead of delete plates). Would you do those mods and still keep the stock airbox? You're correct to say that adding a larger MAF CAI is essentially useless on a stock engine, and you could even argue that this mod could wait until you've done some of the other aforementioned mods, but a CAI is such an easy bolt on to add that most people will choose to do it anyway in combination with an email tune as their first performance mod.

Then in this case, you just maintain your higher-flow drop in panel filter by cleaning it, problem solved lol. Also, would the stock Saleen airbox cover with built-in 98mm MAF be considered as restrictive when compared to the 10 GT airbox? as I'm not able to locate the cfm specs from Saleen

 

[Dino Dino Bambino]

So just how can the stock 3v heads take in double the amount of airflow thru a larger MAF CAI when their not able to make use of it? It would be like trying to force air from a larger diameter opening into a straw. Perhaps I'm missing something here, but I just don't understand how quadrupling the pressure or vacuum is going to make any difference being as the stock 3v engine is capable of only taking in the amount of airflow for which it was designed to support by the factory

It's like I said earlier. If you suck air through a bigger straw, you won't need to suck as hard to breathe in the same volume of air.

Then in this case, you just maintain your higher-flow drop in panel filter by cleaning it, problem solved lol. Also, would the stock Saleen airbox cover with built-in 98mm MAF be considered as restrictive when compared to the 10 GT airbox? as I'm not able to locate the cfm specs from Saleen

Yes you could indeed put a drop-in K&N panel filter into your stock 05-09 airbox and keep it serviced to ensure it doesn't become restrictive. I forgot about the 05-09 Saleen airbox cover with 98mm MAF and intake tube so I'm glad you mentioned it. I don't know how its airflow capacity compares to the 10 GT airbox but I'd say it's likely to be higher. They're pretty hard to find though but if you're lucky enough to come across one, it would be a great mod for an 05-09 GT (especially with K&N panel filter) and appear OEM. You'd need a tune though to correct for the bigger MAF tube diameter.

 

[06 T-RED S/C GT]

Yes! I agree, however, the size of the stock 3v heads intake/exhaust ports would nevertheless still be sucking air just as hard from their smaller openings

 

[Dino Dino Bambino]

Yes! I agree, however, the size of the stock 3v heads intake/exhaust ports would nevertheless still be sucking air just as hard from their smaller openings

The stock 3V heads theoretically have enough airflow capacity to be of little restriction until you reach a N/A ~450 crank HP so they won't become a choke point until you've done pretty much all of the bolt ons I mentioned earlier. That's why CNC ported heads are usually the last items on the list of N/A bolt-ons to be done. They're also the most expensive unless you're confident in your ability to DIY port your stock heads.

 

[Pentalab]

Is that 1/2 PSI with all the changes you listed? You don't have a bypass valve? Why did boost increase?

The..'snorkel' on the 2010 is routed to the extreme drivers side grille, oriented vertically. With the oem upper grille + fog lamps, etc, it's 80++ % blocked off. Only a small portion in the middle has open grates in the honeycomb...and even that had the black chrome pony blocking air. With the oem upper grille, you can't even see the snorkel. I doubt air is about to make 2 x 90 deg bends either.... not easily.. more like a venturi effect. Dumb setup. Stopped, at idle, the hot air under the hood gets sucked into the snorkel... (eng rad fan off). I don't have another logical explanation.

With the 7 bar grille installed, now you can see the snorkel. The airflow is straight into it, no pair of 90 deg bends. That's when I noticed the boost increased .5 psi ( blower on) with gas mashed, when on the hwy at 50 mph. Several other folks on the Roush forum with M90's noticed the same increase... right after the 7 bar grille got installed..go figure. Drawback was it's then a fog lamp delete.

Another benefit was more air through the myriad of radiators. Mine is an auto, so I have the 18" tall x 21" wide, M90 HE out in front, which gets hit by air from both upper and lower grilles. Behind the HE is the oem AC rad. Behind the AC rad is the horz mounted oem auto tranny rad. Below that, is a 2nd auto tranny rad,( B+M, bar + plate type). Behind that mess is the oem eng rad. Sandwiched between the roush HE and AC rad...(at the very bottom) is the cylindrical finned oem power steering rad. The entire ensemble cools a lot better with the 7 bar upper grille.

The LT's are JBA ceramic coated, with hi-flow cats. That combo reduced under hood temps by a huge
amount. Cats now reside below front seats...instead at base of eng bay. On a side note, when the LT's were installed, we put in steeda eng mounts..and lowered the eng by 1/4".

The 05-09 cars get the 9 bar upper grille...it's still available. The 05-09 upper grille is taller than the 2010. The M90 cai setup on a 2010 is a short affair, almost straight, and on driver's side..including blower elbow. The 05-09 M90 cai's are on pass side..and still use the oem airbox ( but with new lid). The cai is a mile long thing ( anaconda), with blower elbow also on pass side.

 

[Dino Dino Bambino]

Cats now reside below front seats...instead at base of eng bay.

Those will keep your ass warm on those freezing cold Canadian winter days.

 

[Norm Peterson]

3. The intake pipe of the 10 GT airbox sweeps further forwards in a wider arc than the 05-09 GT and that, plus possibly a larger snorkel, may account for its higher airflow capacity. Is that enough to account for the '10 GT engine producing an extra 15hp & 5lbft? I seriously doubt it 'cause the '10 GT has more aggressive spark timing and may also have adaptive spark (perhaps someone can either confirm or refute that), so that probably explains most of the increased performance.

The 2008 Bullitt, 2008 FRPP, and the 2010 GT tunes appear to be essentially the same thing.


Norm

 

[Norm Peterson]

So just how can the stock 3v heads take in double the amount of airflow thru a larger MAF CAI when their not able to make use of it? It would be like trying to force air from a larger diameter opening into a straw. Perhaps I'm missing something here, but I just don't understand how quadrupling the pressure or vacuum is going to make any difference being as the stock 3v engine is capable of only taking in the amount of airflow for which it was designed to support by the factory

It won't, not at any four-digit rpm without some sort of artificial help. Mass flow and pressure drop are interrelated, and filters are rated at some amount of flow at some specified pressure drop (I think typically 28" of water). If you're not pulling the full rated flow through a filter, it's because you aren't creating the full 28" pressure drop across the filter. Conversely, if you were creating a 56" of water pressure drop across the same filter, you'd be getting about 41% greater flow through it than it was rated to deliver at 28". The filter does not impose a hard upper limit either, short of achieving choked flow.



Let's say you have an engine that theoretically draws 450 cfm - but that's at zero pressure drop (IOW with no air filter at all). So your OE air filter flows 500 cfm @ 28". 450 cfm would require 28 x (450/500)^2, or 22.7 inches of water pressure drop across the filter. But now your engine isn't getting the full 450 cfm any longer, because that assumes it's got a 14.7 psi absolute atmosphere feeding the cylinders. But what you really have there is 14.7 minus 22.7" of water converted to psi (about 0.8 psi) for a total of 13.9 psi, and the engine is really drawing only 437 cfm.

Theoretical intake flow from the simplified cfm calculations is just that - theoretical. Reality differs a bit, by 13 cfm out of 450 in this case.


So now you put an 1000 cfm @ 28" filter in. 450 cfm now only needs a pressure drop of 5.7"/water, so the engine would now be seeing 14.7-0.2, or 14.5 psi and the flow would be about 444 cfm (compared to 437). That would correspond to about 4 HP if there were no other pressure drops along the intake tract, which we know to be false.


Norm

 

[RED09GT]

This is starting to remind me of all the talk back in the day about carb sizing. I don't know how many times I saw a car with "too big" of a carburetor leave a car with a properly sized one in the dust. My 650 Holley D/P was supposedly way too big for my H/C/I 302 according to the math but was 4/10th quicker and 3mph faster than the 600 Holley it replaced. All the math and talk on the internet and magazines failed me.

Bottom line, the CAI intakes with a larger MAF may not show up on the dyno on a stock car but the throttle response is definitely better. N/A engines are very sensitive to pressure drops so there is nothing wrong with using the largest MAF housing you can as long as you still have sufficient resolution.

I wouldn't bother with a stock MAF sized CAI myself but I can think of a lot worse things to spend money on than a CAI.

 

[Juice]

This is starting to remind me of all the talk back in the day about carb sizing. I don't know how many times I saw a car with "too big" of a carburetor leave a car with a properly sized one in the dust. My 650 Holley D/P was supposedly way too big for my H/C/I 302 according to the math but was 4/10th quicker and 3mph faster than the 600 Holley it replaced. All the math and talk on the internet and magazines failed me.

Bottom line, the CAI intakes with a larger MAF may not show up on the dyno on a stock car but the throttle response is definitely better. N/A engines are very sensitive to pressure drops so there is nothing wrong with using the largest MAF housing you can as long as you still have sufficient resolution.

I wouldn't bother with a stock MAF sized CAI myself but I can think of a lot worse things to spend money on than a CAI.

There are way to many variables with carbs to compare them based on flow. Your double pumper vs the 600 cfm vacuum secondary for example. Were the jets same? AFR same? Power valve same? Float levels set same? See what I mean?

As for CAI vs stock airbox. As I posted before, I will see if there is a laptime difference with no other changes. At two different tracks.

In the end, I could care less about dyno numbers. If the stock box makes, say, 20 less hp, but gives you faster laps...which is "better"? lol

 

[06 T-RED S/C GT]

There are way to many variables with carbs to compare them based on flow. Your double pumper vs the 600 cfm vacuum secondary for example. Were the jets same? AFR same? Power valve same? Float levels set same? See what I mean?

As for CAI vs stock airbox. As I posted before, I will see if there is a laptime difference with no other changes. At two different tracks.

In the end, I could care less about dyno numbers. If the stock box makes, say, 20 less hp, but gives you faster laps...which is "better"? lol

I'll be looking very forward to your CAI vs stock airbox results. I would also like to find out if anyone would happen know the amount of cfm flow the stock Saleen airbox lid with built-in 98mm MAF is with a drop in, high flow panel filter?

 

[RED09GT]

There are way to many variables with carbs to compare them based on flow. Your double pumper vs the 600 cfm vacuum secondary for example. Were the jets same? AFR same? Power valve same? Float levels set same? See what I mean?

I spent almost 2 years tuning the 600, the 650 was faster out of the box and only pulled away as I started tuning. It needed more airflow.

I set my float levels as per holley's specs, I use a power valve 1/2 the rating of idle vacuum, If I recall, it was a 6.5", jetting was definitely different as the venturi's are different-if I jetted the 650 the same as a 600 it would be way lean. 7.5 PSI dead-headed fuel system at the time. As for the AFR, widebands were over a grand at that time (1997-2003, got my first wideband in 2005 or 2006) so I could only go off of the faster/slower, 1 variable at a time type tuning. That's why it took me 2 years of Friday nights at the track to tune it.
We sure do have it easy these day.

 

[Juice]

Ran both, 1850 universal, vac sec. 650 & 750 dbl pmp.
The 1850 is a dd carb good economy.

Double pumpers always had a better throttle response and super shitty gas milage. lol

 

[RED09GT]

Most people have to aggressive of a cam on the secondary accelerator pump. Lots of people set it so that it comes in too early and squirts raw fuel onto a closed set of secondary throttle plates. I didn't have a significant difference in mileage between the vacuum secondaries and the double pumper. The key is to knowing where your throttle starts to open up the secondaries and make sure you do not cruise with your foot past that point.