MAPerformance: Ultimate R&D Thread | Air, Fuel, & Turbo Upgrades

[MAPerformance]

Looking forwards to the results!



That's how I'm feeling at this point too. I'm waiting to see who comes out with the most attractive package/stage "x" kit by year's end. It's going to be hard to wait but I think it will be smarter to do so in the long run.

As far as I know, we are the only company that are going to be offering full packages utilizing our own in house products. Our Phase 1 package (Intake, Downpipe, Catback, Accessport, and Custom Tune) will be released this week, granted everything goes wells on the dyno tomorrow!

Sponsored

 

[15svo]

I'm in no hurry to get the car back as cold as its been and know when the tune is finalized it's going to be amazing.

 

[NewSVO]

Should be finalizing on Tuesday.

Hope so. that's when my cai gets here!

 

[MAPerformance]

Hope so. that's when my cai gets here!

Plan on getting on the dyno tomorrow at 2:00pm and if everything goes according to plan I can use Wednesday to setup the release!

-Adam Brunson

 

[MAPerformance]

Update 2/25/15:


Alright, we made some headway this past week. Finalizing up some tunes for everybody (sorry, be patient!) and making progress on our Phase 2 upgrades. Here are some quick pictures, I will be talking about each picture to tell you what you are looking at.

Here is a look at our kit as a whole, minus the t-bolt clamps that will be included. Again, all 304 stainless steel and utilizing as little as weld joints possible.

Unfortunately the drivers side was too tight for us to make it one-piece. So we had to bend two pieces and do a single weld joint. Here is an up-close shot of the weld quality you all have admired in the past.

This picture showcases the two different valve options that will be available with our kit. We are huge fans of Turbosmart here at MAPerformance as they manufacturer some of the best valves and wastegates on the market.

We went with the Vee Port for customers that are looking to vent atmospherically , and the plumb back for customers looking to retain the factory configuration of recirculating back into the intake.

This setup will completely eliminate the factory diverter valve system! We will be offering a Cobb Accessport tune that eliminates the check engine light from the factory valve being deleted. We will also be looking into other methods of avoiding a CEL without the need for a tuner. A tuner is highly recommending at this stage however!

*Recirculation valve utilizes the factory return hose, doesn't not require a replacement hose. It will also work with factory and any aftermarket intake that has the recirculation connection in the factory location, such as the MAPerformance intake featured in our Phase 1 release.*

This picture shows the connection to the turbo outlet on the passenger side of the Mustang. We use a high quality Squirrelly Performance Products 4 ply smooth transition 90 degree transition coupler from the 2" compressor outlet to our 2.5" charge pipe.

This picture shows the Turbosmart Plumb Back valve in it's new home. Here you can see how the factory recirculation hose is utilized, and shows the BOV position in relation to a MAP intake. They play well with each other, and look great too!

Up close and personal shot!

Then a little bit further away shot you can see how everything is setup in the engine bay.

The factory charge pipe has a metal bracket that the engine harness snaps into. We incorporated a bracket to hold the engine harness in the factory location. This is something that others have missed when designing their product.

Shot of the 3" drivers side pipe. Connecting from the throttle body to the intercooler. You can see it has plenty of clearance with our intake and any other components in the engine bay.

A shot from underneath the car to show how everything is hooked up.

Picture of the passenger side pipe from underneath. Look at that BOV, she is a beaut!

This picture shows the hump hose connection we use at the passenger side of the intake to absorb the vibration and torque from the engine. When designing a product that connects the engine to anything hard mounted to the chassis you have to have a flex point. The hump hose has worked perfectly for us in other applications and will do the same for the Mustang.

You may ask, why we used a hump hose on the passenger side connection on the intercooler but not the drivers. Simple, the engine torques towards the passenger side and most of the load is put on that side of the intercooler. The drivers side has a reduction coupler to go from the factory intercooler's 2.5" outlet to our 3" charge pipe. Reduction couplers are longer than standard couplers and the space in between (at the reducing point) will absorb the less brutal torquing the engine will cause under load.


Now we are moving onto building our intercooler. As mentioned in the original post, our intercooler will work with stock charge piping as well as our charge piping kit shown above.

​

Just a quick glimpse at the core we chose, I will be updating this post tomorrow with more pictures and information!

Stay tuned!

-Adam Brunson

 

[Juben]

Looking great so far, Adam!!!

 

[LeonBorden]

I was pumped until I saw you guys using stainless. :( Looks like really great work again though, and the hump connector is a great idea. They should've had one from the factory. Can't wait to see what kind of numbers you guys pull off with the new tune.

 

[Juben]

I was pumped until I saw you guys using stainless. :( Looks like really great work again though, and the hump connector is a great idea. They should've had one from the factory. Can't wait to see what kind of numbers you guys pull off with the new tune.

Do you not like stainless?

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

 

[MAPerformance]

I was pumped until I saw you guys using stainless. :( Looks like really great work again though, and the hump connector is a great idea. They should've had one from the factory. Can't wait to see what kind of numbers you guys pull off with the new tune.

Read the original post, I mentioned why we are going with Stainless over aluminum. Our Phase 1 thread also outlined this with testing results.

 

[LeonBorden]

It's way too heavy. I absolutely can't go this route. May be fine for DDs, but adding 25lbs over the nose of the car is always bad, plus I can't see any logical benefits outside of being easier to manufacture. There's a reason AMS and everybody else use aluminum on their GTRs and why every Formula D car does as well. Don't mean to bash it Adam, I just wish you guys would've went a different route on this because I really want to give your company my money!

 

[LeonBorden]

I know you have your reasons on the CAI, and I'm with you a bit on them. I also saw where you have mention in your first thread abou weighing the pros and cons, but hoped you guys would go with the aluminum. Let's be honest, The only con to aluminum is it doesn't insulate better, and that can be remedied with coated aluminum.

 

[mtpavelka]

It's way too heavy. I absolutely can't go this route. May be fine for DDs, but adding 25lbs over the nose of the car is always bad, plus I can't see any logical benefits outside of being easier to manufacture. There's a reason AMS and everybody else use aluminum on their GTRs and why every Formula D car does as well. Don't mean to bash it Adam, I just wish you guys would've went a different route on this because I really want to give your company my money!

Adam - How much does all the hardware weigh?

 

[MAPerformance]

It's way too heavy. I absolutely can't go this route. May be fine for DDs, but adding 25lbs over the nose of the car is always bad, plus I can't see any logical benefits outside of being easier to manufacture. There's a reason AMS and everybody else use aluminum on their GTRs and why every Formula D car does as well. Don't mean to bash it Adam, I just wish you guys would've went a different route on this because I really want to give your company my money!

I almost had a heart attack when you said we are adding 25lbs over the nose of the car. I think you have the wrong idea when it comes to weight of quality steel.

Stock Intercooler Piping Weight

MAP Intercooler Piping weight WITH Turbosmart BOV, couplers, and clamps (Remember the factory uses a plastic divertervalve)

Aluminum Intake tube from our Phase 1 Testing

Stainless Intake tube offered in our Phase 1 package

So to recap:
Factory plastic intercooler piping with plastic valve - 6.55lbs
MAP stainless intercooler piping with turbosmart full alloy valve - 7.90lbs
Difference - 1.35lbs | 17.08%

Aluminum intake tube from phase 1 R&D - 5.9lbs
Stainless intake tube we have been selling - 7.5lbs
Difference - 1.6lbs | 21.33%


So, when you said 25lbs you can see why I was blown away and almost died. We have only added 1.35lbs over the factory. I think the benefits and gains are going to outweight that little bit of weight increase.

So, if the argument is weight for intercooler piping we can do some math to figure out how much weight we would of saved by going with aluminum. However if you just look at the intake comparison above, I would be able to predict a weight difference of roughly 1.69lbs based on the 21.3% difference in the intake tube.

 

[MAPerformance]

I know you have your reasons on the CAI, and I'm with you a bit on them. I also saw where you have mention in your first thread abou weighing the pros and cons, but hoped you guys would go with the aluminum. Let's be honest, The only con to aluminum is it doesn't insulate better, and that can be remedied with coated aluminum.

Aluminum doesn't insulate as well as steel, you are right. Aluminum does dissipate heat better than steel but not when constant heat is being applied. Aluminum absorbs more heat, so when it comes time to dissipate it has more heat to dissipate. Steel acts a a barrier against heat so it will take longer to heat up and when it comes time to dissipate it has to shed less heat. You can see that in actual data from the chart below.

Aluminum scratches easy, crushes easy, doesn't mandrel bend as tight as steel which requires more weld joints. More weld joints = more labor, more labor = more expensive part for the customer. Is that extra cost worth hardly any weight savings (in regards to the products mentioned), and the idea of it dissipating heat faster... when the car is off?

 

[LeonBorden]

That's pretty shocking. The 25 lb figure came from what I assumed to be a general rule of thumb: Aluminum will weigh 1/3 of stainless. I've built several competition race cars including two current ones I own, as well as discussed such topics with other pro teams and all pretty much agree on that. You're now making me question if the world is round. Haha.

Adam, if you re read my post you'll see that I said Aluminum DOESNT insulate as well but they can be remedied by being coated.

Thank you for taking the time to weigh the parts!

Sponsored