PMAS Intake Systems from UPR Products. TUNE AND NO TUNE INTAKES

PMAS also makes a no tune version.

Since ive been following the PMAS thread since day one, i suppose i might as well subscribe to this one as well. I plan on buying and doing a before and after dyno session. I just need my shop to schedule me in, they're booked up about 6 weeks out. (Blankenship)

Supa LA said:

Since ive been following the PMAS thread since day one, i suppose i might as well subscribe to this one as well. I plan on buying and doing a before and after dyno session. I just need my shop to schedule me in, they're booked up about 6 weeks out. (Blankenship)

Click to expand...

Two of my friends test the PMAS on a Mustang Dyno last weekend.

One is a 2016 GT A6. The car best et is 11.57@120 with tune, stock airbox, BBK lth off road, Dynomax muffler and DR. On the dyno it gain 17hp and 21tq with the PMAS over stock airbox (back to back pull). The only modification is the incorporation of the table supply by PMAS for the mass.

The other car is a 2011 GT A6. Best et is 11.76@119 with tune, cat delete and DR (stock airbox, stock muffler). With the same method (back to back pull with only incorporation of the new mass table on the tune) it gain 16hp and 21tq over stock airbox.

The best is that the gain is from 2,500 to 6,500, not only at the peak.

Conclusion, I bought my third CAI (after the JLT and the Steeda) I hope this one is the good one. If not, my wife will kill me :doh: Next step track time!

Any memorial day sales on it? If i can save 10% I might be willing to try, after sitting on the CAI sideline for over a year.

pat5.0 said:

Two of my friends test the PMAS on a Mustang Dyno last weekend.

One is a 2016 GT A6. The car best et is 11.57@120 with tune, stock airbox, BBK lth off road, Dynomax muffler and DR. On the dyno it gain 17hp and 21tq with the PMAS over stock airbox (back to back pull). The only modification is the incorporation of the table supply by PMAS for the mass.

The other car is a 2011 GT A6. Best et is 11.76@119 with tune, cat delete and DR (stock airbox, stock muffler). With the same method (back to back pull with only incorporation of the new mass table on the tune) it gain 16hp and 21tq over stock airbox.

The best is that the gain is from 2,500 to 6,500, not only at the peak.

Conclusion, I bought my third CAI (after the JLT and the Steeda) I hope this one is the good one. If not, my wife will kill me :doh: Next step track time!

Click to expand...

I am assuming those gains are at the wheels, correct? That's insane gains from an intake alone, if so. If you could get your hands on a dyno sheet to upload, or have your friend join and share, that'd be great as well.

Ok guys and gals, the throttle body is not a flow limiting device and you are not flowing water through it. The flow is dictated by the pressure difference across it. If you decrease outlet pressure flow will increase. If you increase inlet pressure (decrease restriction) flow will increase.if it restricted flow, turbos and superchargers would be useless. Don't forget air is 14.5psia. If your intake has 28"h20 (1psi) pressure drop, your engine will only see 13.5psia. This is the same as turning down the boost.

Ford has a lot of design parameters they are stuck with. -40 to 125 degree temps. Noise, packaging, etc. they also need to enclose the entire airbox for the hydrocarbon trap to work correctly on the airbox lid. Yes they made a good airbox but for absolute performance, it's not perfect. The stock system is at 28"h20 (-1psi) at 430hp. There is a lot of room for improvement.

The maf. We do not trick the maf signal. This would be impossible anyway. The cars use wideband o2 sensors and fuel trims at 4 different points and would correct anything we tried changing tweaking for more power. If you put a stock maf in a larger tube the maf output would be lowered for the same amount of air. This is why you need a tune. Not because of increased power from the intake. The extended tables are already in the factory tune to accommodate more power than stock. We use a calibrated maf to correct the output that was changed because a maf was installed into a tube larger than stock. We calibrate it so it again has the factory output for the same about of air.

Here is a flow test of some of the popular intakes.

Blk2015GT said:

Equally if people didn't question things logically there would be a lot of suckers in the world from unscrupulous products.

While there is a bigger tube, the throttle body is the restrictor at a certain point. Is it in this case? Idk

It's like pouring water through a funnel, the bottom of the funnel (the throttle body) can only handle so much volume even with a larger cone top portion until the bottom of the funnel need to get bigger too.

There is no "ram air" effect here forcing the extra air to the opening of the throttle body either (the inlet in the grill is also stock size so the same volume) since it's an open box (no pressure).

Click to expand...

I'm sorry and I mean no offense but this is completely wrong. We work in mass not volume. Water is a non compressible fluid so that is not a good example.

Also, pouring water through a funnel, the funnel has equal pressure on both sides and you are using gravity and the mass of the water to make it move.

Flow through anything is from p1 p2. The pressure difference between the inlet and outlet. Free air you breathe has pressure and the engine is sucking. If the engine pulls more more will flow. If air is pushed harder into the inlet it will flow more. Restriction is not some amount of flowing air you hit and everything stops. There is always restriction. Is increases exponentially as flow increases. Look at the graph I posted. For all these reasons you can push 800hp worth of air through a 3" turbo pipe.

This is looking pretty promising for us that don't want to lose the warranty with a tune.

I like the data you have presented along with the detailed explanation of what was changed to get the results you have shown.

PMAS said:

Here is a flow test of some of the popular intakes.

Click to expand...

If I am reading this correctly, Y is AIR FLOW and X is PRESSURE DROP?

So according to the data, of the intakes tested--your unit has the highest amount of air flow and the stock unit loses the least amount of psi through the power band?

Please correct me if I misinterpreted.

SpeedLu said:

If I am reading this correctly, Y is AIR FLOW and X is PRESSURE DROP?

So according to the data, of the intakes tested--your unit has the highest amount of air flow and the stock unit loses the least amount of psi through the power band?

Please correct me if I misinterpreted.

Click to expand...

X and y yes. And no. It shows for any given flow our intake has the least pressure drop and out of all the intakes tested the stock has the greatest pressure drop (restriction) for any given flow.

In other words, it takes a lot more flow through our intake to get the same pressure drop as the stock intake.

PMAS said:

X and y yes. And no. It shows for any given flow our intake has the least pressure drop and out of all the intakes tested the stock has the greatest pressure drop (restriction) for any given flow.

In other words, it takes a lot more flow through our intake to get the same pressure drop as the stock intake.

Click to expand...

Ah thanks for clearing that up, I had a feeling it didn't make sense.

PMAS said:

X and y yes. And no. It shows for any given flow our intake has the least pressure drop and out of all the intakes tested the stock has the greatest pressure drop (restriction) for any given flow.

In other words, it takes a lot more flow through our intake to get the same pressure drop as the stock intake.

Click to expand...

But, but, but it can't be, the stock intake from Ford is perfect and tubes shapes, smoothness and bends don't have anything to do with restrictions...

Concrete GT said:

But, but, but it can't be, the stock intake from Ford is perfect and tubes shapes, smoothness and bends don't have anything to do with restrictions...

Click to expand...

Can we please have a normal discussion about intakes without people acting like kids? This is a good topic with hard data. Don't ruin this thread with the same nonsense the other one degenerated into.

So many "Ive worked on whatever for so and so years" who really need to just shut up and realize there working on something for so and so years is worthless compared to a 12 year old who understands physics.