Cold air intakes worth the money?

After a couple trips to the dyno, I'd probably save the money and go another route if I had to do it over.

My initial dyno run was with the SCT X4 93 octane pre-loaded tune and Borla S-Type catback (2.5").

Results
401.7hp and 376.3lb' torque
Ambient air temp of 83°
Average IAT 87.7°
DA 2080'
Cost ~$400

My latest results including the addition of the JLT CAI and Lund tune (also 93 octane).

Results
408.7hp and 376.6lb' torque
Ambient air temp of 91°
Average IAT 100.8°
2757'
Cost ~$375

Edit: Based on the DA delta, there is a best guess difference of roughly 2.03% loss on today's run. This would provide a corrected (to match my initial runs conditions) 416.99hp. At this point, I'm relying on calculators to provide the apples to apples comparison in regard to DA differences. The additional corrected 8hp looks better than initial difference of 7hp (15hp over the initial run) but it's purely a guesstimate based on the calculator I used.

The runs were done on the same dyno but different days. The dyno in question is a Dyno Dynamics. For those not familiar with this particular dyno, it is very similar to the Mustang Dyno (resistance loading). It is known for publishing results considerably lower than the Dynojet just like the Mustang Dyno as well.

With that being said, I had very little interest in what the actual numbers were, the only thing I cared about was the difference between those numbers so I knew what the modications were actually doing or not doing.

What my results show - and what many members have argued to the contrary - is that the SCT pre-loaded tunes actually perform a lot better than most people "believe" to be true. Sure, they can argue that my initial results were inflated (must be the dyno, right?).

The flip side of that coin is the results showing the JLT CAI and custom Lund tune combined for 7hp and .3lb' torque. Paints an interesting picture now, doesnt it?

Looking at the AFR from today's run(s), there is room for improvement in the Lund tune (decent margin of safety) below 6000 RPM.

Initial run from last week in red with today's results in blue.





Contrary to popular belief, the SCT pre-loaded tunes are producing strong results and for the amount of money spent, provide far more bang for the buck than the JLT cold air intake and Lund tune. I do have a Lund tune for the stock intake and I'm really tempted to spend the $100 for another dyno session to see what it can do so I know exactly what the after market cold air intakes are really doing. Right now, my overwhelming speculation is that they (in the case of JLT since that is all I have data on) do absolutely nothing in regard to HP and torque on an essentially stock vehicle.

Video of the vehicle on the dyno

Im more interested in the da for both days, personally. Just my .02

mustang_guy said:

Im more interested in the da for both days, personally. Just my .02

Click to expand...

That is a piece of information I dont have. I posted the facts I do have and did my best to leave out bias. I can say for certain the humidity was higher today. I can also say the IATs were over 20° cooler on the dyno than reality today. In addition, the hood of the vehicle was up leaving the JLT air box and filter completely open to fresh air.

8whp is not gna make a difference in a race. Interesting. Were you stock box with stock filter?

re-rx7 said:

8whp is not gna make a difference in a race. Interesting. Were you stock box with stock filter?

Click to expand...

The initial pull was with stock box and filter. Think the vehicle had 1250 miles and now it has 1420. And it was 7hp but who is counting LOL.

Da will still matter. Im not calling you out. I think two different days with probably 2 different DA can make nice difference. Id be willing to wager you lost 6-8whp or so because of the more then likely higher da. Id put money on that. While its not a lot but it skews your results. Without same day results the thread is a bit useless.

This will show you how much of a difference there is roughly between the two days.

Imagine you're in Miami, Florida during July, where the average temperature is 83 degrees Fahrenheit (28.3 degrees Celsius). Miami's essentially at sea level, so on average during July, the temperature's 13.3 degrees Celsius above standard. How much does your density altitude increase? It increases 1535 feet - that's on an average day!

How about Denver, Colorado? Denver International Airport sits at 5434 feet, and its average temperature in July is 88 degrees Fahrenheit (31.1 degrees Celsius). Since the standard temperature decreases 2 degrees Celsius for every 1000 feet, Denver's standard temperature is roughly 4.1 degrees Celsius. On an average day in July, Denver's temperature is 27 degrees Celsius above standard!

What does that do to Denver's density altitude? On an average July day, the temperature increases Denver's density altitude by 3012 feet to 8446 feet!

Click to expand...

I am going to assume that the a/f was monitored with a wideband in your tailpipe? It appears lean and sniffers typically run lean due to their location. The datalog will tell the true story with the lambda however. What lambda values were you seeing?

My 11 made 402rwhp with airaid cai and bama tune on that same dyno in va. Would expect better numbers for a 15.

mustang_guy said:

This will show you how much of a difference there is roughly between the two days.

Click to expand...

I'm well aware of what DA is. I went back, looked at the historical weather data, and added the results to the original post. 2757' today and 2080' at noon on the 23rd (my best run was actually done at about 10:50 but that's the best I can do).

I didnt think you didnt know. It just seems like you dont know just how much it can effect things. i dont think you should waste the money for another dyno unless you do back to back with both intakes. Why skew your results? Did you do any datalogs to get your tune revised? One tune isnt good for all cars. Id get it revised with what your car does, vs what is given to everyone else. Of course lunds generic tune isnt custom made off logs for your car. Its not much better then an ots canned tune. What did you expect? Just wondering. Id make logs and have it more custom tailored to your car.

Cai compared to a drop in with tube isn't much different.

mustang_guy said:

I didnt think you didnt know. It just seems like you dont know just how much it can effect things. i dont think you should waste the money for another dyno unless you do back to back with both intakes. Why skew your results? Did you do any datalogs to get your tune revised? One tune isnt good for all cars. Id get it revised with what your car does, vs what is given to everyone else. Of course lunds generic tune isnt custom made off logs for your car. Its not much better then an ots canned tune. What did you expect? Just wondering. Id make logs and have it more custom tailored to your car.

Click to expand...

I have datalogs for the pulls and will be providing the data to Lund. I had no misconceptions and clearly stated there was room for improvement in the tune based solely on the AFR in the original post (not sure where the other member is seeing a lean condition...). As for expectations, I expected right around 410hp which is very close to what it did. What I didnt expect was just how close the stock CAI and SCT tune got to the aftermarket CAI and "custom" tune.

This post wasnt made to run some sort of smear campaign, it is here solely to provide the data I've gathered. I cant convey my "tone" in the words and havent added any emotion to what I've been writing. I'm just relaying as much factual data to other members as I can so they can make an educated decision on their purchases. I had made a post in another thread that I thought the CAI and tune was the best bang for the buck mod out there. With these results, I think a tune is the best bang for the buck out there.

Thanks for the detailed posts madweazl. Much appreciated here!!

If I assume your DA estimates are accurate, does that mean the CAI and Lund tune actually made roughly 15 HP over the SCT preloaded tune (401.7 to 417 HP)?

If so, that doesn't seem too bad.

-T