Sponsored

F-150 Manifold Testing/Journey

alanpv

Active Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2018
Threads
2
Messages
37
Reaction score
13
Location
Central MA
First Name
Alan
Vehicle(s)
'17 Mustang GT Premium
Do you guys just have your engine cover just zip-tied on?
Sponsored

 

Mustang_Lou

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 1, 2016
Threads
13
Messages
1,817
Reaction score
773
Location
Toronto, Canada
Vehicle(s)
2020 Mustang Bullitt
So I finally got around to doing a 3rd gear datalog on my DashCommand app to see if the MAF airflow decreases at all above 6500 or so and here's what I got at a few top end rpm's:

6052 = 36.11 lb/min
6462 = 38.56
7010 = 39.62

I'll try and go to fuel cutoff next time but no drop in airflow which I THINK means a dyno would not also show a drop.

Timing maxed out at 23 degrees at 7010.

I believe people with CAI's are into the low 40's but I'm happy as is with the stock airbox and the AFE panel filter.
 

Dr. Norts

Banned
Banned
Banned
Joined
Nov 3, 2016
Threads
27
Messages
1,241
Reaction score
993
Location
Ontario, Canada
Vehicle(s)
2015 Race Red Mustang GT
So I finally got around to doing a 3rd gear datalog on my DashCommand app to see if the MAF airflow decreases at all above 6500 or so and here's what I got at a few top end rpm's:

6052 = 36.11 lb/min
6462 = 38.56
7010 = 39.62

I'll try and go to fuel cutoff next time but no drop in airflow which I THINK means a dyno would not also show a drop.

Timing maxed out at 23 degrees at 7010.

I believe people with CAI's are into the low 40's but I'm happy as is with the stock airbox and the AFE panel filter.
Thats a really low lb/min. Didn't even hit 40.

Did you apply correction factor for DA and your Fuel trims?
 

VooDooDaddy

Banned
Banned
Banned
Joined
Nov 22, 2017
Threads
9
Messages
602
Reaction score
623
Location
SW Iowa
Vehicle(s)
2016 GT Premium
So I finally got around to doing a 3rd gear datalog on my DashCommand app to see if the MAF airflow decreases at all above 6500 or so and here's what I got at a few top end rpm's...

...Timing maxed out at 23 degrees at 7010.
I'm seeing 29 degrees of timing at 7300rpm (WOT), but that was on E-85 w/LUND FF tune.
 

Sponsored

Mustang_Lou

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 1, 2016
Threads
13
Messages
1,817
Reaction score
773
Location
Toronto, Canada
Vehicle(s)
2020 Mustang Bullitt
Thats a really low lb/min. Didn't even hit 40.

Did you apply correction factor for DA and your Fuel trims?
I did not apply any correction factor … it logs a tons of stuff and trims are 1 of them so I can adjust if someone explains how to.

I did go back and look at a log back from when I had my GT mani and I just eeked past 40 (something like 40.2) … maybe a 0.5 increase from the F150. I may have a log from when I had my CAI on but I do recall that being the highest.

Having said all of that, I have absolutely no concern as like I've always said, the pros far outweigh the cons for me.
 

Dr. Norts

Banned
Banned
Banned
Joined
Nov 3, 2016
Threads
27
Messages
1,241
Reaction score
993
Location
Ontario, Canada
Vehicle(s)
2015 Race Red Mustang GT
Can you log on 93 at all to compare? The Livernois tune may be conservative there??
I see 28 on the livernois 93 tune running 94 octane fuel. Your max timing seems way low too.

Stock Mani I see

44.31 lb/min uncorrected

46.54 lb/min corrected @6600 rpm

I highly doubt the F150 Mani flows it's max flow @ 7k+ rpm
 

Mustang_Lou

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 1, 2016
Threads
13
Messages
1,817
Reaction score
773
Location
Toronto, Canada
Vehicle(s)
2020 Mustang Bullitt
I see 28 on the livernois 93 tune running 94 octane fuel. Your max timing seems way low too.

Stock Mani I see

44.31 lb/min uncorrected

46.54 lb/min corrected @6600 rpm

I highly doubt the F150 Mani flows it's max flow @ 7k+ rpm
You've got a CAI though … I actually have the same one sitting in my basement. I may just install it and the revised tune for comparison.
 

Type550

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2018
Threads
22
Messages
196
Reaction score
113
Location
Australia
Vehicle(s)
Absolute Black 2017 GT Fastback (Manual)
To be honest I rarely need to or go past 6500 rpm so I can't say for sure … the graphs posted earlier show it drops around then so I'll assume it does but the benefits of where I drive 99.9% of the time far outweigh the loss I'm experiencing on the 0.1%.

If your % split is skewed differently then you'll have to decide for yourself if it's worth the effort.
Nah I'm exactly like you, pure street car rarely exceeding 6.5K RPM. No drag-strip, Auto-X or road-coarse track events, although, I'd like to do some road-coarse track days at some stage, but that'll probably be once every 6 months or so.
 

Sponsored

VooDooDaddy

Banned
Banned
Banned
Joined
Nov 22, 2017
Threads
9
Messages
602
Reaction score
623
Location
SW Iowa
Vehicle(s)
2016 GT Premium
I just looked over my most recent data-log with the F-150 manifold. Here are my MAF numbers:

6500 rpm - 36.53 lbs/min
6800 rpm - 36.97 lbs/min
7000 rpm - 37.71 lbs/min
7200 rpm - 38.68 lbs/min
7300 rpm - 39.94 lbs/min

I think these numbers clearly show my combo of "truck intake" plus the GT350 CAI isn't gasping for air above 6500 rpm. I don't know how it would differ/compare to the '18 GT manifold, but these numbers show a very linear increase with RPM.
 

HISSMAN

Large Member
Joined
Jun 10, 2016
Threads
39
Messages
2,992
Reaction score
1,459
Location
West Virginia
Vehicle(s)
2016 Oxford White GT/PP Premium
I will need to dig up my logs, but iirc, I saw about 48 lbs/min with my Boss mani at 7600 rpms.
 

Dr. Norts

Banned
Banned
Banned
Joined
Nov 3, 2016
Threads
27
Messages
1,241
Reaction score
993
Location
Ontario, Canada
Vehicle(s)
2015 Race Red Mustang GT
I just looked over my most recent data-log with the F-150 manifold. Here are my MAF numbers:

6500 rpm - 36.53 lbs/min
6800 rpm - 36.97 lbs/min
7000 rpm - 37.71 lbs/min
7200 rpm - 38.68 lbs/min
7300 rpm - 39.94 lbs/min

I think these numbers clearly show my combo of "truck intake" plus the GT350 CAI isn't gasping for air above 6500 rpm. I don't know how it would differ/compare to the '18 GT manifold, but these numbers show a very linear increase with RPM.
It does show that it flows alot less air than even the stock intake though.

Should the intake not be flowing it's max flow @ where it's making peak hp?

The stock intakes reach peak flow around 6600 rpm which is also where the peak hp is, then the flow falls off after that even if you rev it out to 7500.

The truck intake makes peak hp lower than the stock intake, the fact your flowing more air even after you pass the peak hp point of that intake seems weird to me. Still climbing even past 7k.

Anyone else think that's odd?

I just want to know for my own curiousity, not hating on your choice of intake or anything.
 
Last edited:

VooDooDaddy

Banned
Banned
Banned
Joined
Nov 22, 2017
Threads
9
Messages
602
Reaction score
623
Location
SW Iowa
Vehicle(s)
2016 GT Premium
Should the intake not be flowing it's max flow @ where it's making peak hp...

...the fact your flowing more air even after you pass the peak hp point of that intake seems weird to me. Still climbing even past 7k.

Anyone else think that's odd?
An internal combustion engine can make less hp when ingesting more air. Frictional losses increase as rpm increases, as well as other changes such as intake/exhaust flow wave separation, valve overlap, valve-train harmonics, etcetera . There are other many, many other factors to consider as well that are quite frankly too numerous to list here...
Sponsored

 
 




Top