The mods have begun...2018 Mustang GT A10 PP1

Idaho2018GTPremium

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2018
Threads
19
Messages
1,341
Reaction score
1,078
Location
Idaho
Vehicle(s)
2021 Camaro ZL1 A10
So I finally decided to pull the plug on some mods for my '18 A10 GT that I don't believe will risk any warranty issues if problems arise in the future. I've chosen the following 1st round of upgrades:

K&N Intake
Airflow solutions OEM ported throttle body (awaiting receipt)
Airflow solutions OEM ported intake manifold (awaiting receipt)
Borla S-type catback (received, awaiting install, car is not running now since the TB and IM are at Airflow solutions in AZ).

The K&N intake gained noticeable mass airflow increases, no tune required. My 30-70 mph time of 2.75 seconds is noticeably quicker than stock (only change being the K&N intake).
I went with the stock OEM ported TB and intake manifold to reduce risk of warranty issue compared to larger TBs that would require a tune, or swapping to the GT350 IM which would require the 87 mm TB, also requiring a tune. Plus, portinf my stock '18 IM and TB is MUCH cheaper than going with the GT350 intake and Bullitt TB. I didn't want to change the tune at this time for warranty purposes.
The Borla S-type - went with this due to the sound, and the good hp and torque gains seen by MotoIQ: https://motoiq.com/testing-borlas-s-type-cat-back-exhaust-for-the-2018-mustang-gt/
13 rwhp peak gains, and a massive 33 ft-lbs at the low end. That's some great low end and top end pickup for just a catback. Plus, it's 20 lbs lighter than the stock catback.

I also bought the Borla H-pipe resonator to use if the regular S-type X-pipe setup is too loud for me. I think the H-pipe will lose a few hp compared to the X-pipe setup, but may be worth it if it quiets it down enough, reducing too much unwanted attention during heavy throttle.

 
Last edited:

dn1984

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2019
Threads
27
Messages
822
Reaction score
714
Location
SF Bay Area
Vehicle(s)
2018 Mustang GT A10 Premium
which k&n intake? no tune required? how are IATs? i'm always skeptical of these CAIs. i also don't believe a ported throttle body will do anything
 

Htk084

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2020
Threads
2
Messages
258
Reaction score
35
Location
Us
Vehicle(s)
Soon to be stang
Curious why did you choose the K&N of all intakes?
 
OP
OP
Idaho2018GTPremium

Idaho2018GTPremium

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2018
Threads
19
Messages
1,341
Reaction score
1,078
Location
Idaho
Vehicle(s)
2021 Camaro ZL1 A10
which k&n intake? no tune required? how are IATs? i'm always skeptical of these CAIs. i also don't believe a ported throttle body will do anything
K&N intake 63-2605. I had it on the car for a week before I took the TB and IM off and IATs didn't appear any different from the factory box. It wasn't very hot outside (mid 70s IIRC). When closed, the hood touches the weather stripping around the top of the intake box, so I think it does a good job of sealing the hot engine bay heat away from the air filter.

No tune required for the K&N intake. I assume the diameter of the tubing where the MAF is installed matches that of the stock box, so the MAF readings aren't skewed. Idles good. Sounds different than the stock box, maybe a little more induction noise. There is no connection for the sound tube so that goes away.

I think the ported TB will help with a few extra hp, but only when combined with the freer flowing K&N intake and ported IM. By itself, it probably wouldn't do much. Airflow solutions gives a discount when doing both the TB and IM at the same time, so I went ahead and did it also. I won't have a way of testing the MAF readings with only the addition of the ported TB, since I'll be putting on the ported IM at the same time.

K&N intake: https://www.knfilters.com/63-2605-performance-air-intake-system
 
OP
OP
Idaho2018GTPremium

Idaho2018GTPremium

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2018
Threads
19
Messages
1,341
Reaction score
1,078
Location
Idaho
Vehicle(s)
2021 Camaro ZL1 A10
Curious why did you choose the K&N of all intakes?
I went with the K&N 63-2605 due to: No tune required, high filter efficiency (98-99+% matches OEM paper filters), good experience with K&N intakes on other cars, the fact that K&N actually publishes dyno results of the same car same dyno for the intake, and K&N's hp increase guarantee. It's a process that requires before/after on the same dyno which I haven't done, but K&N guarantees a hp increase, or your money back. As far as I know, they are the only company that offers a hp increase guarantee for an intake system. K&N's dyno included with the 63-2605 shows a 22 rwhp peak to peak gain (22 rwhp = ~25 crank hp) at 6800 rpm, with very consistent gains realized from the low end all the way up through the curve. I realize not every dyno or car will see the same increase, however, the increase in mass airflow readings I've seen during data logging would support K&N's dyno graph, almost to a tee.

I saw a large increase in MAF readings at 7k rpm, and much better average MAF readings from 5,800-7,000 rpm. I ignore MAF readings above about 7,100 rpm, since the car may still be taking in more air due to higher engine speeds, however, even though the engine may be taking in more air, it won't necessarily be making more power since the known power peak is at 7k rpm.

Contrary to popular belief of some folks, when oiled correctly, the K&N filters do not leach oil downstream into the intake and the filtering capability matches OEM paper filter efficiency for fine particulate matter. K&N actually publishes filtration test data for their filters, including the very large conical filter that comes with the 63-2605 kit.
 


Htk084

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2020
Threads
2
Messages
258
Reaction score
35
Location
Us
Vehicle(s)
Soon to be stang
Interesting so are you planning on keeping the stock tune?
 

Htk084

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2020
Threads
2
Messages
258
Reaction score
35
Location
Us
Vehicle(s)
Soon to be stang
Pretty cool, are you gonna have it on the dyno? I bet you can add some pretty decent power with just these mods.

Also, another warranty friendly mod is the velossa tech. I highly recommend it and it apparently does work
 
OP
OP
Idaho2018GTPremium

Idaho2018GTPremium

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2018
Threads
19
Messages
1,341
Reaction score
1,078
Location
Idaho
Vehicle(s)
2021 Camaro ZL1 A10
Pretty cool, are you gonna have it on the dyno? I bet you can add some pretty decent power with just these mods.

Also, another warranty friendly mod is the velossa tech. I highly recommend it and it apparently does work
I'm probably not putting it on the dyno at this time. I'm doing mass airflow logs and before/after timed acceleration runs to measure and compare the gains.
 

Htk084

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2020
Threads
2
Messages
258
Reaction score
35
Location
Us
Vehicle(s)
Soon to be stang
Hey Idaho, can you show me where the K&N dyno before and after is? I’ve been looking for it but any seem to find it. Thanks!
 
OP
OP
Idaho2018GTPremium

Idaho2018GTPremium

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2018
Threads
19
Messages
1,341
Reaction score
1,078
Location
Idaho
Vehicle(s)
2021 Camaro ZL1 A10
Hey Idaho, can you show me where the K&N dyno before and after is? I’ve been looking for it but any seem to find it. Thanks!
http://kandn.com/dynocharts/63-2605_dyno.pdf
Same car before/after; K&Ns dyno results. I haven't seen independent same day dyno results. But like I said earlier, my MAF readings from 3 separate data log drives correspond to the dyno increases. Big MAFs bump at 7k rpm, and large bump in avg MAF readings from 6-7k rpm.
 

Htk084

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2020
Threads
2
Messages
258
Reaction score
35
Location
Us
Vehicle(s)
Soon to be stang
Thanks so much, and nice. Do you know the MAF value of each you were seeing (stock vs KN)?

http://kandn.com/dynocharts/63-2605_dyno.pdf
Same car before/after; K&Ns dyno results. I haven't seen independent same day dyno results. But like I said earlier, my MAF readings from 3 separate data log drives correspond to the dyno increases. Big MAFs bump at 7k rpm, and large bump in avg MAF readings from 6-7k rpm.
 
OP
OP
Idaho2018GTPremium

Idaho2018GTPremium

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2018
Threads
19
Messages
1,341
Reaction score
1,078
Location
Idaho
Vehicle(s)
2021 Camaro ZL1 A10
Thanks so much, and nice. Do you know the MAF value of each you were seeing (stock vs KN)?
Stock average from 4 separate data logs at or around 7k rpm (negated the higher rpm values since the engine was taking in more air but not making more power) = 48.7 lbs/min
Average w/ K&N intake from 3 separate data logs is 51.8 lbs/min, same constraints, only change is K&N intake 63-2605.
Average stock from 6-7k rpm = 47.3 lbs/min
Average K&N intake from 6-7k rpm = 49.4 lbs/min
 

Htk084

Well-Known Member
Joined
Mar 27, 2020
Threads
2
Messages
258
Reaction score
35
Location
Us
Vehicle(s)
Soon to be stang
Thank you very very much, I appreciate this data. When you were stock, did u have the paper filter in or aftermarket drop-in?

Never considered this intake before but I’m intrigued, does it really feel like 20 whp faster? That seems like too much from just an intake

Stock average from 4 separate data logs at or around 7k rpm (negated the higher rpm values since the engine was taking in more air but not making more power) = 48.7 lbs/min
Average w/ K&N intake from 3 separate data logs is 51.8 lbs/min, same constraints, only change is K&N intake 63-2605.
Average stock from 6-7k rpm = 47.3 lbs/min
Average K&N intake from 6-7k rpm = 49.4 lbs/min
 

Rod27

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 15, 2020
Threads
19
Messages
128
Reaction score
10
Location
St. Louis, Missouri
Vehicle(s)
2018 Ford Mustang GT
Hello, I am researching CAI right now, and seen this thread. Did you notice an immediate difference in your car power (acceleration and speed) when you had the K/N filter installed?

Thanks
 

 
46 - Roush Performance - 3
Top