theslerg
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 21, 2014
- Threads
- 13
- Messages
- 270
- Reaction score
- 581
- Location
- Ofallon Missouri
- First Name
- Darren
- Vehicle(s)
- 2011 California Special GT
- Thread starter
- #121
Sponsored
Looks good
Looks good
I also noticed the honeycomb yesterday but I guess didn't pay too much attention that it was an insert and not built in. I speculated the honeycomb was to straighten the airflow in a more laminar fashion since the carbon trap may be altering it now. So thinking about it, the '22 MAF area is slightly (1-2mm) smaller as well. Wondering if Ford is restricting the '22-23s in order to show a sizeable "gain" in the '24s.
If all these things are true (and Iām not saying they arenāt) then it has taken Ford a LOT more effort than originally reported to scare off a measly 10 hp. So far there are what, 6-7 changes being talked about when in reality any one of them alone would have probably done the trick. Why would they need all the cascading changes? And IMO it wouldnāt be logical for them to go to this much trouble (and expense) just to make the 2024 bump seem more impressive.I also noticed the honeycomb yesterday but I guess didn't pay too much attention that it was an insert and not built in. I speculated the honeycomb was to straighten the airflow in a more laminar fashion since the carbon trap may be altering it now. So thinking about it, the '22 MAF area is slightly (1-2mm) smaller as well. Wondering if Ford is restricting the '22-23s in order to show a sizeable "gain" in the '24s.
I was thinking about taking advantage of the vacuum reading ability. This should help in figuring out if these additions/changes are an actual restriction. Going WOT and keeping a log while deleting the carbon trap, then the housing for it and finally the insert. Got to keep an eye on the AFR as well but doubt the changes are sizeable enough to throw the ECM off to compensate for fueling changes.
If you do that, let me know! I'm currently tuned.I also noticed the honeycomb yesterday but I guess didn't pay too much attention that it was an insert and not built in. I speculated the honeycomb was to straighten the airflow in a more laminar fashion since the carbon trap may be altering it now. So thinking about it, the '22 MAF area is slightly (1-2mm) smaller as well. Wondering if Ford is restricting the '22-23s in order to show a sizeable "gain" in the '24s.
I was thinking about taking advantage of the vacuum reading ability. This should help in figuring out if these additions/changes are an actual restriction. Going WOT and keeping a log while deleting the carbon trap, then the housing for it and finally the insert. Got to keep an eye on the AFR as well but doubt the changes are sizeable enough to throw the ECM off to compensate for fueling changes.
Wait your 22 is tuned? Please tell us about it and what difference the tune has made.If you do that, let me know! I'm currently tuned.
Youāre exactly right and I pointed this out a short while back. Most ātestersā just use 2021 figures.Track times and syno sheets are tough to find for the 22. There are tons on the 21. I've been hoping to go to the strip but woth the heat at 100 plus for the past several weeks it would be a waste.
Has anyone 1/4 or dynod theirs or has links to see someone who has?
That's right you did. Can you post your slips again? What tires and pressures of the runs as wellYes, sir. Ran a 12.50 @ 114 stock. Incredibly bad wheel hop.
Did a subframe lockout kit and E85 tune. Ram 12.00 @ 117.5. I'm disappointed actually.