PMAS Power Results Thread

[Gibbo205]

You cant prove that you dont have the tools. Nick has already stated using the snorkel decreases flow, who had the tools to prove it. So you saying itll not decrease flow is sophistry.

I dont think the gold wrap isnt a horrible idea for those that can get it cheap enough.

True but both Porsche and BMW have proven that if you route cold air into an air box and force it in there with nowhere else to go, then you gain horsepower of around 10BHP at 70mph.

PMAS said the snorkel reduced horsepower on a dyno test they did, but he also admitted this was on a car that did not have the grill opened up at the front or a velossa to direct more air flow to the air box.

I have an opened up front grill, a velossa big mouth so I feel with this setup I will not be limiting flow much if at all at low speeds or stationary, but at higher speeds flow will be improved and lower IAT's and that is a win.

When I go the the dyno I can run the car hood down with no snorkel and then hood down with snorkel to see what difference there is. But a better test for the snorkel would be 1/4 mile where increased horsepower from RAM AIR effect and lower intake temperatures are far more likely as speeds go over 70mph which could be worth a tenth potentially.

Sponsored

 

[Gibbo205]

Hi there

Paid a visit to Pumabuild to see what kind of gains the PMAS CAI had given me over my stock intake with panel filter and airaid modular intake tube.

I was expecting an improvement simply because the car feels far stronger on the road, unfortunately the car did not want to play ball on the dyno today for some reason we were getting issues with stability control kicking in causing us to abort runs, meaning that when we did get the car running things were toasty as such I think the car was reducing performance, still the results were rather impressive:


PMAS Tuned vs Stock Modded Intake Tuned vs Stock with panel filter

You can see the gains were not as hoped, but my car was putting down 440BHP on the stock modified intake with airaid modular intake tube and panel filter, which was a good combo, in defence of the PMAS today was hotter. Still A near 10BHP pretty much throughout a solid torque gains of upto 15-20b/ft down low. I think if the car had ran without issue whilst things were cool the gains would be greater and the car would of hit around 455BHP.


Bold red line: Tuned PMAS CAI
Faint red line: Tuned Stock CAI with airaid MIT & panel filter
Dotted line: Stock CAI, Panel filter with NO TUNE.


You can see the largest gains come from the tune, but the PMAS also does offer some further additional gains.

I would say with a Lund tune on a stock car the PMAS "no tune" CAI with tune file is worth 35-45HP and around 45lb/ft over stock. I am talking flywheel figures.


We also tried hood up and down, the runs were with 2-3BHP of each other, the best run above was with the hood down, but there was nothing in it really and was more likely to do with cooling.

 

[Rebellion]

Cool stuff [MENTION=13598]Gibbo205[/MENTION]!

I would suspect that on the road, it will do much better because of your IAT mod.

You convinced me of going the MIT and filter route...which filter did you use? The runs where including the grill delete and velossa right? What other hardware did you use with the MIT?

 

[Terminator2]

Hi there

Paid a visit to Pumabuild to see what kind of gains the PMAS CAI had given me over my stock intake with panel filter and airaid modular intake tube.

I was expecting an improvement simply because the car feels far stronger on the road, unfortunately the car did not want to play ball on the dyno today for some reason we were getting issues with stability control kicking in causing us to abort runs, meaning that when we did get the car running things were toasty as such I think the car was reducing performance, still the results were rather impressive:


PMAS Tuned vs Stock Modded Intake Tuned vs Stock with panel filter

You can see the gains were not as hoped, but my car was putting down 440BHP on the stock modified intake with airaid modular intake tube and panel filter, which was a good combo, in defence of the PMAS today was hotter. Still A near 10BHP pretty much throughout a solid torque gains of upto 15-20b/ft down low. I think if the car had ran without issue whilst things were cool the gains would be greater and the car would of hit around 455BHP.


Bold red line: Tuned PMAS CAI
Faint red line: Tuned Stock CAI with airaid MIT & panel filter
Dotted line: Stock CAI, Panel filter with NO TUNE.


You can see the largest gains come from the tune, but the PMAS also does offer some further additional gains.

I would say with a Lund tune on a stock car the PMAS "no tune" CAI with tune file is worth 35-45HP and around 45lb/ft over stock. I am talking flywheel figures.


We also tried hood up and down, the runs were with 2-3BHP of each other, the best run above was with the hood down, but there was nothing in it really and was more likely to do with cooling.

You changed tuners from JDM to Lund which will change things as you didn't do a baseline run on the Lund tune before the intake?

 

[Lonmon]

I love the performance of this intake but unfortunately there are a couple of design flaws. Today my air filter housing came apart from the maf tube. The plastic is pressed onto the tube with three allen grub screws that are supposed to keep it in place. They are sort of drilled into the very edge of the aluminum tube. They do not do their job and after a month my filter was falling off. I had to apply epoxy around it and I hope that keeps it secure.

It could use a larger clamp for the plastic tube at the inlet of the throttle body coupler. It barely fits over and when you go to tighten it, it only grabs the end and feels like the clamp may strip out if you tighten it much.

The maf tube should have a flat spot to install the maf sensor on. Having to carefully tighten the maf sensor down on a curved surface to make it tight enough but not bend or damage the sensor should not be needed.

I would love to see this kit redesigned to fix these issues and it would be practically perfect. I would have gladly paid $50-100 more for a better quality kit since this seems to be the best performing intake yet! The performance is there PMAS but the fit and finish still leaves much to be desired!

 

[Gibbo205]

Cool stuff [MENTION=13598]Gibbo205[/MENTION]!

I would suspect that on the road, it will do much better because of your IAT mod.

You convinced me of going the MIT and filter route...which filter did you use? The runs where including the grill delete and velossa right? What other hardware did you use with the MIT?

Yes all runs had the front grill opened up and velossa big mouth in place.

The MIT and a panel filter perfects the stock air box which then performs very well, I was using an Afe Pro dry filter. I reckon the combo is worth around 5HP and it improves throttle response.

 

[Gibbo205]

I love the performance of this intake but unfortunately there are a couple of design flaws. Today my air filter housing came apart from the maf tube. The plastic is pressed onto the tube with three allen grub screws that are supposed to keep it in place. They are sort of drilled into the very edge of the aluminum tube. They do not do their job and after a month my filter was falling off. I had to apply epoxy around it and I hope that keeps it secure.

It could use a larger clamp for the plastic tube at the inlet of the throttle body coupler. It barely fits over and when you go to tighten it, it only grabs the end and feels like the clamp may strip out if you tighten it much.

The maf tube should have a flat spot to install the maf sensor on. Having to carefully tighten the maf sensor down on a curved surface to make it tight enough but not bend or damage the sensor should not be needed.

I would love to see this kit redesigned to fix these issues and it would be practically perfect. I would have gladly paid $50-100 more for a better quality kit since this seems to be the best performing intake yet! The performance is there PMAS but the fit and finish still leaves much to be desired!

Its a good performing kit but agreed the PMAS is built on a budget, it could be improved fit and finish wise vastly.

 

[Gibbo205]

You changed tuners from JDM to Lund which will change things as you didn't do a baseline run on the Lund tune before the intake?

Unfortunately not, the JDM tune was awesome on stock air box and the no lift strategy was cool but the throttle was over sensitive with the PMAS and JDM has not tuned the PMAS so were unwilling to change the tune.

So I went Lund as they have tuned this intake on several cars now and I can report with Lund throttle is much nicer and car seems to punch harder when you initially get on it.

I doubt Lund makes more overall power but their tune drives better.

But the Tune + CAI combo has given me around 35HP and 45lb/ft gain which seems very good result.

All my runs were made a few hundred miles after fitting part or tune.

 

[RomanB]

Pmas has already said a snorkel decreases flow. Having a 170 tsat helps cut down fan wash on the iat sensor. As does a grill change or diy. It also allows more cooler air from the grill mod.


*edit*
The 170 tstat helps provided you get tuned and the fan settings get changed. For a no tune intake its not going to do much for iats

SNORKEL does not decrease flow... When he tested the stock intake on a flow bench the rubber end of the snorkel was collapsing because it was designed to slip over the grill insert... He was claiming the rubber end was collapsing at 380hp which I am sure is true with the intake pulled out of the car, but in the car it is a non issue. Here is my dirty dusty AZ engine bay to prove it. If you see the rubber end of the snorkel fits over the grill insert.

Sponsored