Ambient Thermal Management IS BACK! Celebrate With A Forum Discount!

[TheLion]

You're right. Why would companies SELLING intakes say their product is inferior. A little biased huh?

And stock motors are blowing too. Damn ford must not know a damn thing either! Crazy!

Any of the stock engines that failed, failed due to mechanical manufacturing defect. There is no 100% so that statement is quite absurd. And your implying all of these manufacturer's are faking their dyno data...interesting enough all of these manufacturers are using CAI"s that draw cold air from the front and not fender well CAI's.

Your welcome to use what ever tuner you like, doesn't matter to me. They all have their merits depending on your goal. But to suggest there are no benefits to higher flowing intakes is counter intuitive to the natural properties of a vacuum system...lol. Can't get around it. Did anyone consider it's possible that tuner made a mistake in his testing? Doesn't mean he isn't capable of making fast cars, but not EVERYTHING he says or does is necessarily true or the best way. CAI's would be one of them.

We could apply your statement about vendors wanting to sell CAI's to the above mentioned tuner, he wan'ts to get your business and may be willing to say or do what ever he needs to in order to maintain / promote that business, including going against the grain to stand out, refusing to admit an error to avoid looking foolish etc...I'm only playing devils advocate here for the sake of argument, I'm not suggesting he is actually doing those things.

Regardless of what any of us believe, air flow and air temperature matters as well as how testing is conducted. There are benefits to after market air boxes over the stock air box, mostly in the fact that the conical filters have lower restriction and higher dust capacity. They also provide better throttle response AND their true benefits will only been in real world testing, dynos can hid some of the benefits because of their limits. The same applies to inter coolers and radiators in terms of how they perform on a dyno vs. in the real world. Believe what you will, but for the sake of not hijacking ATM's thread here I"m going to stop this argument weather you agree with me or not.

Lets get back to inter coolers and charge piping, shall we?

Sponsored

 

[Ambient Thermal Management]

I'm thinking the same thing. It wasn't TOO badly corroded, you can tell it's seen some salt, but a coating would really help extend it's life.

From initial testing this morning driving to work, it hasn't affected the performance of it! It was warmer this morning by about 15 degrees over my last huge testing of the stock intercooler and this one stayed at roughly 40 degrees delta. It was 80 degrees. Cruising on the interstate showed about 87/90 degrees fluctuating but with 0 boost. City cruising seen about 91 average.

But the real magic is when you ever so slightly push down the gas, it drops like a brick. The HIGHEST delta I seen during a pull this morning was 6 degrees over ambient. Granted this is a small collection of data points, about 4 pulls, so 12 or so gears. But the entire pull the intercooler continues to drop temperature. you'd NEVER see that on the stock. Best part is on the one mile stretch up to my works driveway...Still had every ounce of power it had when I started it up this morning. Something I could never say on the stock.

*side note...Installation of this behemoth absolutely sucked lol. Do not do it at night.

You installed it at night?! You're a beast! Thanks for the honest and positive review

Yes you can use the factory charge pipes. Honestly I think the primary reason to replace the charge pipes is for reliability, especially if your running an aftermarket tune, including the FP Calibration as I've hit up to 25 psi on the FP Calibration.

That's why I replaced my charge pipes, because I had them loosen up on me twice in six months during the winter when the stock rubber couplers and plastic tubes shrink at different ratios, they become leaky where aftermarket silicone couplers or high end woven rubber couplers combined with aluminum or silicone charge pipes tend to be more temperature stable and stay clamped tight regardless of hot or cold.

If I did it again I'd go with ATM's silicone charge pipes IF they made it with a re-circulation option or Mishimoto's as they use t-bolt clamps and silicone couplers.

You guys asked so we are working on it We are developing a re-circ adapter now for our charge pipe kit. Stay tuned!

The ATM is supposedly one of the most efficient units out there, but I don't know how well it compares to the Evo 2. I think it would do quite a bit better than the Evo 1 due to the following design differences:

1. Evo 1 is tube and fin where the ATM is bar and plate
2. Evo 1 features 12 rows where the ATM has 21 rows
3. Evo 1 uses standard flat faced tubes where the ATM uses their proprietary rounded bar design that allows 15% better air flow (acts like a velocity stack, it's that whole air not liking 90 degree turns thing again).

By the way, the ATM uses the rounded bars inside the core as well, it's not just in the front where the ambient air is flowing through the fins, so the charge air is also seeing the benefits of the velocity stack internally. If you have an ATM, before you put it on, take a peek down inside the inlet or outlet and you will see the rounded bar design internally as well. This will lower the pressure drop a bit without sacrificing cooling capacity.

I'd bet the ATM's pressure drop is at least as low as the Wagner's but with much better cooling. The Evo 2 is massive though, so they may be on par but the price difference is over $300 as the Evo 2 is about $1k.

Regarding comparisons between our unit and the Evo 2, the Evo 2 has proven to be a good core, but the price and non-stepped design make it inferior to the ATM. One relative comparison I can share is our BMW stepped FMIC. A customer did back-to-back comparisons of our unit and the Wagner Evo 2 Competition. Same car and similar conditions. They were neck and neck, yet the Wagner is about $300 more. But keep in mind they were very similar dimensions......Our unit for the Ecoboost has much larger volume due to the stepped core which the Wagner does not have. So based on what we've seen on the BMW's the ATM will definitely outperform the Wagner and still costs hundreds less.

 

[Spykexx]

You installed it at night?! You're a beast! Thanks for the honest and positive review

Yup. At about 9 o'clock at night we started. Out in a pitch black driveway with flashlights.

Word of advice. DO NOT DO THIS. lol.

 

[Ambient Thermal Management]

Let's try to keep things civil and stay focused on the subject of the thread

I will say this regarding dyno testing, something TheLion made mention of.....testing intercoolers on a dyno tells a very, very limited story. It will tell you pressure loss differences, even moreso when pushing the envelope of airflow from an intercooler core. But unless a dyno has some ridiculous fans, or is done in a wind tunnel, that is about it. You will probably get some data for low speed cooling efficiency, but nothing can compare to the real world airflow that the car will see when driving, its that simple. We have seen so many tests on the dyno where the IAT's differ drastically from driving down the road. And especially with a core designed to be more aerodynamic at high speeds like ours, you just can't replicate this on the dyno.

 

[TheLion]

I started my install at about 5 pm but didn't get done until 12:30 am lol. Had to take some breaks being the sole care taker of my son, bike rides, dinner, played games with him for a bit so that drew out the process quite a bit.

Here are some observations during the install of the ATM and from my initial dyno run with the car BEFORE i installed the ATM which I did just a few hours prior to the install:

1. The ATM inter cooler, because of it's stepped design, sits much further back and away from the crash bumper, there is a good 4~6 inches of gap where the Levels Gen 3 sat nearly right up against it leaving little room for the pressure drop behind the crash bumper to produce any significant airflow, so a significant portion of the Levels FMIC surface area is being poorly utilized.

2. Glenn G. tested both the MAP Stage 1 and MAP Race inter coolers (not bashing their product, but testing shows what testing shows), he saw no meaningful difference in cooling capacity at 140 mph on the Autobhan. The Race unit from MAP is very similar in overall design to the Levels Gen 3. It appears that what is likely happening with the larger traditional FMIC designs is that much of the added surface area is not seeing enough additional air flow increase cooling capacity. Ss really your just adding thermal mass without adding actual capacity.

3. The quality of workmanship of the ATM is above the Levels Gen 3, which was already a very good quality unit. The ATM is a tad heavier, clocking in at 30.6 lbs vs. the Levels Gen 3 at 28.8 lbs.

4. The ATM uses it's unique rounded bars internally as well as at the front, so charge air will move through the inter cooler with lower resistance. Assuming there's enough dwell time for the air to transfer it's thermal energy, this would translate to a slightly lower pressure drop and possibly better cooling.

5. Note the Wagner Evo 2, since it was mentioned and is the top competitor to the ATM, is a Tube and Fin type, which works fine for race applications at constant speed but heat soaks easily in stop n go traffic (typical street applications) or in drag racing applications due to it's low density. It needs to be at speed all the time, there's little thermal momentum...and it's $300 more without providing any substantially better cooling...

6. The ATM's bottom thickness (or step) is 6 inches, the entire core is 20 inches wide (1 inch wider than the Levels). The top portion is 2 inches thick.

As noted from a flow standpoint, the geometry of the ATM alone makes more efficient use of the EB's intake air flow characteristics. Pressure drops create a vacuum relative to the surrounding air, so the area behind the crash bumper will have a pressure drop and pull in air from above and below to fill the void, which will then move toward the Inter Cooler, AC exchange and lastly the radiator, but at a reduce flow rate compared to right behind the upper and lower inlets at the front bumper.

The highest velocity air (and hence the highest flow areas) are going to be directly in front of the inlets (upper and lower) to the bumper. About 2/3 (maybe a bit less) of the ATM's surface area is concentrated at the lower region (like a stage 1 or stock location FMIC), while the upper 1/3 is behind the bumper in the low pressure zone that will see some air flow, but not as much.

Combine that with the higher efficiency rounded bar design (both externally and internally) and it makes the absolute best use of the car's air intake ducting at the front of the car. At least from an analytical standpoint. There's no magic here, just optimization at EVERY point as much as possible, from geometry to sizing to air flow characteristics.

Note that when I went to the Dyno this past weekend, I discovered I had the Ford Performance Rev A calibration which has their glitch they fixed in Rev B. The glitch causes the torque to drop significantly for several hundred RPM in the mid-range making the power curve feel very flat. It may affect peak numbers a bit as well. I re-flashed the ECU with their Rev B calibration while I was installing the ATM inter cooler.

The only differences between the initial dyno run with the Levels Gen 3 FMIC and the next one will be the ATM FMIC, the hot side charge pipe which I had to revert back to the stock one as the AEM one I had on there wouldn't fit properly (it was too short and the rubber AEM coupler's were a PITA to fit over the barbed end of the ATM FMIC) and the fixed Rev B Calibration of the Ford Performance.

I will post both dyno graphs side by side once this is all completed as well as a few temp log graphs of 4th gear pulls going up hill at the same location, one with the Levels Gen 3, the other with the ATM inter cooler. The Rev B calibration may change the peak power numbers by a small margin, so we will need to look at the over all curve. Regardless of weather we see a difference on the dyno, I would expect to see lower charge temps. The FP Calibration may be the limiting factor as it's more conservative than after market tunes from Lund, Livernois, Tune+ and many others which may be able to push the ATM further.

However, if your running something similar to the FP Calibration, with the ATM you'll NEVER run out of cooling so your Turbo 4 will make it's maximum power just about all the time. Which = more fun on back roads and faster times at the drag strip, auto cross or circuit track!

 

[TheLion]

Levels Gen 3 vs. ATM Max Power Runs

Levels Gen 3 vs. ATM Max Torque Runs

Levels Gen 3 Vs. ATM Max Torque and Power Combination


Data order is RPM, Boost and Temperature Differential (difference between IAT2 and Ambient).

ATM Run 3 (where it made the most power)
5046.25 22.77 10.8
5238.5 21.9 10.8
5373 22.77 10.8
5527.25 20.6 10.8
5696.75 20.89 10.8
5832.25 22.34 10.8
5978.25 20.89 10.8
6080.5 20.89 10.8
6193.75 20.31 12.6
6317.5 21.61 12.6
6449.5 21.47 12.6

Levels Run 2 (where it made the most power)
5004.25 20.02 7.2
5234 19.58 7.2
5364.5 20.31 7.2
5477.25 18.13 7.2
5617.5 18.27 7.2
5860.75 19 7.2
5962.25 20.31 9
6035.25 20.74 9
6146.75 21.18 9
6324.75 20.16 10.8
6419.75 19.29 10.8

ATM Run 2 (where it made the most torque)
4997.75 22.92 12.6
5159.25 22.63 12.6
5320.25 22.77 12.6
5452.5 22.92 12.6
5597 21.76 12.6
5745.25 20.89 12.6
5864.25 22.48 12.6
5984.5 22.48 12.6
6105.75 20.16 12.6
6217.5 22.63 14.4
6358.5 22.34 14.4
6459.5 22.05 14.4
6539.5 21.03 14.4
6634.5 17.69 14.4

Levels Gen 3 Run 4 (where it made the most torque)
4938.25 22.92 16.2
5173.75 22.34 16.2
5300.25 21.61 16.2
5456.75 22.63 16.2
5577.25 22.92 16.2
5789.5 21.03 16.2
5908.25 21.76 16.2
6020.5 21.03 16.2
6092.75 22.19 16.2
6196.75 21.76 16.2
6299.75 19.29 18
6387.25 19.29 18
6499 19 18
6588.75 17.26 18

If you look at the graphs it's clear to see the Levels Gen 3 inter cooler does a bit better at the low end of the spectrum but chokes off the top end of the torque curve where the 2.3L Ecoboost needs it the most. Both inter coolers perform about the same at the start of the mid-range up until about 4500 RPM. Things begin to change once we pass 4500 RPM and I believe the reason for the flip flop is due primarily to where the Turbo's efficiency island is located, centered more on the low end / mid band than the high end RPM range.

The ATM's rounded bar design acts like a velocity stack at higher flow rates and that is where it really shines and allows us to make the most of the stock turbo which is known to running out of steam in the last 1000 RPM. This is likely true of most factory turbo systems which are biased more towards drive ability (low / mid range) than high RPM power like a dedicated race engine. The benefits of the ATM's rounded bar design help to keep the pressure drop low, with the primary restriction being dependent almost entirely on the cooling fin density rather than adding pressure loss due to entry restriction into the passageways. This creates a lower pressure drop without having to sacrifice cooling capacity by using a lower fin density and the benefits are present in the tables above which show the ATM holding about 1~2 PSI higher boost on average but with a cooling capacity on par or better than a larger inter cooler.

As the turbo runs to the outer edge of it's efficiency island the slightly smaller internal volume of the ATM inter cooler combined with the higher efficiency rounded internal bars of the ATM become the dominating factor and we see the ATM hold torque better across the mid-band and top end, right where the 2.3L ecoboost I4 needs it the most.

The upper graph is where both inter coolers made the most power and this is where the ATM inter cooler really shines, holding around 10 to 15 ft-lbs more torque than the Levels from 4500 to 6000 RPM and around 20 ft-lbs more torque from 6000 to 6500 RPM.

I can tell you after spending a decent amount of time with each, I DEFINITELY prefer the ATM. The power is much more usable than with the Levels Gen 3. The response is far more predictable and there's no perceptible lag where with the Levels Gen 3 there was a noticeable lag, about a 1/2 second. This is especially true with partial throttle response which was even worse, especially on hot days. While the car made good power with the larger more race oriented Levels Gen 3, drive ability suffered the most due to the above mentioned reasons, but it did cool very well, as well as the ATM.

The ATM keeps torque up in the upper RPM range where we all run the engine for actual performance driving, be it auto cross, circuit track or drag strip, the car will simply be faster with the ATM than with the Levels Gen 3. It's also more enjoyable for daily driving because the partial throttle response at the low end and mid-range is lag free even if it makes a little less torque way down low where we only use the engine in that range for cruising. Lets face it, this car doesn't NEED more torque at the low end, but it certainly needs it at the top end and the ATM delivers right where it's needed the most, making a really nice, broad rainbow like power band!

Note the only other difference between the two days of the dyno runs were the -CJA and -CJB revision of the FP Calibration. So that torque drop out from 4800 to 5300 RPM in the Levels Gen 3 dyno graph is NOT due to the inter cooler but a glitch in the initial release of the Ford Performance Calibration. I confirmed with Ford Performance that bug fix is the ONLY difference between the -CJA and -CJB revisions of the calibration, nothing else was changed, especially since their software is warrantied and emissions certified, any significant changes would require re-testing.

The same car on the same dyno was used one week apart on a DynoJet dyno. The temperature difference between the two days was only 1 F, humidity for the Levels was 54% while it was 38% for the the ATM. SAE correction for the Levels was 1.06 and for the ATM test day 1.05. So the ambient and conditions were nearly identical. The same fuel from the same station was also used (a local speedway, where I used 93 Octane which is what I always run). The car had about 300 miles on it since the calibration update along with about 10 partial throttle pulls from 50 to 75 and many WOT runs to make sure the octane was fully learned before the second run. The first run had over 6,000 miles on the clock so we can be assured octane was fully learned for both runs.

The only engine related modifications on this car is of course the Ford Performance Calibration and their included CAI, the inter coolers of course and a DV+ diverter valve upgrade in the "stock" operation mode. The car is a 2016 Mustang Ecoboost 201A base model with an MT-82 manual transmission and 3.73 Torsen differential I swapped out from a wrecked GT. The car has approximately 26,000 miles on it and is only 1 year old. I run AMSOIL Siganture Series 5W-30 oil and change every 10,000 miles even though the oil is rated for a 15,000 mile service life under severe driving conditions so the engine is well maintained and lubricated. My particular engine is a May 2016 build, Cleveland assembled engine.

 

[metalhead79]

The car is a 2016 Mustang Ecoboost 201A base model

I'm pretty sure 201A is the premium with 12 speaker shaker sound system.

 

[TheLion]

I'm pretty sure 201A is the premium with 12 speaker shaker sound system.

What ever the base model equipment group is, ultimately it's irrelevant. It's a base model :-). I thought it was 200A, but maybe it's 100A. Doesn't affect the data though as it's not standard ecoboost optioned gearing.

 

[SleepyPony]

Installed my black ATM intercooler on Monday, and i'm pretty happy with it now that it's on. Install video was a little vague but it wasn't too hard to figure out what to do by myself. Also i'm not sure why, but my temperature sensor barely reached my intercooler after undoing some of the harness clips holding the entire harness to the body. Other than those little issues the intercooler has been nothing short of amazing.

Only took it out for a quick half hour test drive yesterday after installing the Steeda rear sway bar (car has major understeer and I can't wait to install the front one) but the car felt preppy as ever. I saw someone describe driving the stock intercooler by saying you could feel the power getting pulled every minute you drove it but with this ATM intercooler the car feels just as fast as when you just start driving.

I love the black color and the build quality of the intercooler looks amazing. The black intercooler blends in underneath my new MMD-V series grille and gives me that stealthy look i'm going for. Also put in some black Velossa Tech Air ram ducts at the same time and the car just feels so much better than with the stock intercooler. I'm not sure if I feel a difference in throttle response but it feels like I can keep doing back to back pulls without heat soaking the intercooler.

 

[Ambient Thermal Management]

Thanks for the positive reviews guys!

And special thanks to TheLion for the very comprehensive review and thorough data!!!

 

[TheLion]

Installed my black ATM intercooler on Monday, and i'm pretty happy with it now that it's on. Install video was a little vague but it wasn't too hard to figure out what to do by myself. Also i'm not sure why, but my temperature sensor barely reached my intercooler after undoing some of the harness clips holding the entire harness to the body. Other than those little issues the intercooler has been nothing short of amazing.

Only took it out for a quick half hour test drive yesterday after installing the Steeda rear sway bar (car has major understeer and I can't wait to install the front one) but the car felt preppy as ever. I saw someone describe driving the stock intercooler by saying you could feel the power getting pulled every minute you drove it but with this ATM intercooler the car feels just as fast as when you just start driving.

I love the black color and the build quality of the intercooler looks amazing. The black intercooler blends in underneath my new MMD-V series grille and gives me that stealthy look i'm going for. Also put in some black Velossa Tech Air ram ducts at the same time and the car just feels so much better than with the stock intercooler. I'm not sure if I feel a difference in throttle response but it feels like I can keep doing back to back pulls without heat soaking the intercooler.

Just a helpful note on the wiring harness, I have a 2016 Ecoboost Mustang and I had the same issue. The sensor needs to be where it needs to be, however there's a work around.

1. As you mentioned pull the harness off the chassis mounting tab (mine was a white plastic one more towards the font bumper.

2. Trim the spiral wrapped cloth tape at the Y split of the harness back about 1-2 inches so you can un-bind the harness a bit. That will give you slack to allow the pressure sensor harness to go the inter cooler and the rest of it to go to the turn signal / fog lights.

The pressure sensor and the lights are in opposite directions and the slack on my harness was really tight and I didn't want constant strain on the crimp pins. For long term reliability I'd suggest making sure you have enough slack on the harness by the above method.

Any loose wiring can be re-secured with some simple zip ties. Should keep everything nice and tidey without straining the wiring harness. Too much strain can also allow water ingress over time and corrode the connections leading to sensor issues that can be a PITA to trace the root cause.

 

[TheLion]

I did a little data mining to give us a better picture: Data order for the below tables is the following --> ATM RPM, ATM Boost, ATM Temp Differential, Levels RPM, Levels Boost, Levels Temp Differential, ATM / Levels Boost difference, ATM / Levels Temperature Deferential differences.

Positive values in the first of the last two columns (boost) denote an advantage of the ATM over the Levels where negative values denote an advantage of the Levels over the ATM in terms of boost differences at the given RPM. Positive values in the very last column denote a DISADVANTAGE of the ATM over the Levels in terms of cold side temperature differences.

On the Max Power Runs, we can see that on average (adding up all the boost differences and dividing by 8) the turbo was able to hold 1.77 PSI more boost and ran 2.9 F hotter with the ATM inter cooler from 5000 RPM to about 6500 RPM compared to the Levels Gen 3 inter cooler.

Levels Gen 3 Vs. ATM Max Power Runs
5046.25 22.77 10.8 5004.25 20.02 7.2 2.75 3.6
5238.5 21.9 10.8 5234 19.58 7.2 2.32 3.6
5373 22.77 10.8 5364.5 20.31 7.2 2.46 3.6
5527.25 20.6 10.8 5477.25 18.13 7.2 2.47 3.6
5696.75 20.89 10.8 5617.5 18.27 7.2 2.62 3.6
5832.25 22.34 10.8 5860.75 19 7.2 3.34 3.6
5978.25 20.89 10.8 5962.25 20.31 9 0.58 1.8
6080.5 20.89 10.8 6035.25 20.74 9 0.15 1.8
6193.75 20.31 12.6 6146.75 21.18 9 -0.87 3.6
6317.5 21.61 12.6 6324.75 20.16 10.8 1.45 1.8
6449.5 21.47 12.6 6419.75 19.29 10.8 2.18 1.8
Average Diff: 1.77 PSI 2.9 F

On the Max Torque runs the the turbo was able to hold on average about 0.69 PSI more boost and ran 3.47 F cooler with the ATM from 5000 RPM to about 6600 RPM compared to the Levels Gen 3 inter cooler.

Levels Gen 3 Vs. ATM Max Torque Runs
4997.75 22.92 12.6 4938.25 22.92 16.2 0 -3.6
5159.25 22.63 12.6 5173.75 22.34 16.2 0.29 -3.6
5320.25 22.77 12.6 5300.25 21.61 16.2 1.16 -3.6
5452.5 22.92 12.6 5456.75 22.63 16.2 0.29 -3.6
5597 21.76 12.6 5577.25 22.92 16.2 -1.16 -3.6
5745.25 20.89 12.6 5789.5 21.03 16.2 -0.14 -3.6
5864.25 22.48 12.6 5908.25 21.76 16.2 0.72 -3.6
5984.5 22.48 12.6 6020.5 21.03 16.2 1.45 -3.6
6105.75 20.16 12.6 6092.75 22.19 16.2 -2.03 -3.6
6217.5 22.63 14.4 6196.75 21.76 16.2 0.87 -1.8
6358.5 22.34 14.4 6299.75 19.29 18 3.05 -3.6
6459.5 22.05 14.4 6387.25 19.29 18 2.76 -3.6
6539.5 21.03 14.4 6499 19 18 2.03 -3.6
6634.5 17.69 14.4 6588.75 17.26 18 0.43 -3.6
Average Diff: 0.69 -3.47

The ATM allows the car to make more power, while absolute temperatures are nearly identical between the two, the ATM is also dealing with MORE heat as the car is making more power, especially at the top end where heat out put from the turbo and flow volume is at it's highest. These results fall very much inline with CP-e's testing of inter coolers on BMW's which showed power gains in the 15 to 20 HP range at the top end of the N54 engine during their testing. Power output of the N54 is similar to that of the 2.3L Ecoboost from Ford.

https://www.cp-e.com/tech/n54FMIC.pdf

 

[SleepyPony]

Just a helpful note on the wiring harness, I have a 2016 Ecoboost Mustang and I had the same issue. The sensor needs to be where it needs to be, however there's a work around.

1. As you mentioned pull the harness off the chassis mounting tab (mine was a white plastic one more towards the font bumper.

2. Trim the spiral wrapped cloth tape at the Y split of the harness back about 1-2 inches so you can un-bind the harness a bit. That will give you slack to allow the pressure sensor harness to go the inter cooler and the rest of it to go to the turn signal / fog lights.

The pressure sensor and the lights are in opposite directions and the slack on my harness was really tight and I didn't want constant strain on the crimp pins. For long term reliability I'd suggest making sure you have enough slack on the harness by the above method.

Any loose wiring can be re-secured with some simple zip ties. Should keep everything nice and tidey without straining the wiring harness. Too much strain can also allow water ingress over time and corrode the connections leading to sensor issues that can be a PITA to trace the root cause.

Thanks for the tip! I'm gonna go in make sure I give it a little more slack today. I have to pull the air box out to install my front swaybar so it's the perfect time to adjust that harness haha.

 

[Spykexx]

[MENTION=25093]TheLion[/MENTION] that's what I did as well. Just pulling it off the chassis clips wasn't enough it looked like it was about to rip the plugs off haha. So we split the wrap about 2 inches and gave it a quick tug and gave us plenty of space. It'll still be somewhat tight, but not nearly like it was before.

On a side note for those of us taking our bumper on and off...anyone else noticed the parts that do the actual holding starting to stress/fail? The side clips in the fender side are getting a bit loose/stressed, and the top portion has a few stress cracks from being tightened and loosened. I wish they would have put a point on the actual bar to secure it to, so it would take a bit of the weight off that flimsy ass plastic they use for the holders.

 

[EcoBOSS]

OK, who can do this for the ATM vs. Whipple Mega?

Sponsored