If you want additional levels of certainty, then your only answer is to wait over time and let other people do the research in effect for you by installing these things on their cars. And, there will be some limits even when others do this as often they don't do before and after dynos due to the cost, or they do other mods at the same time, or they tune, or people attack the way in which they did the analysis.
The same sentiments and occurrences happened with the c5 when competitive air boxes came out for those.
No one manufacturer is likely to test all these and/or to make all folks happy, and even if they did then in theory they would have to do it not just for their product but also for everyone else's too. That would start a huge pi$$ing match, to say the least. And, I'd bet that even if an 'independent' entity were to do a comparison, there'd still be plenty of whiners here questioning its accuracy.
On my car, I felt it did make a noticeable difference at the uppper RPMs, where at bone stock my car felt a little tired. This doesn't surprise me as it was said in another thread that GM has limits to how much it can open the air box due to water limitations, whereas the aftermarket does not have to worry as much about that because they are serving a specific group of consumers that is knowledgeable enough and willing to take some risk for greater horsepower gains.
So, I end where I started. If you want exactitude, I bet you never find it. This is not brain surgery, so you're not gonna get that level of test and proof. But, a lot of folks believe the airbox increases the fun factor, and I'm one of 'em, so take that and fifty cents (or 6 bucks if you're at Starbucks), and you can get yourself a cup of coffee.
The same sentiments and occurrences happened with the c5 when competitive air boxes came out for those.
No one manufacturer is likely to test all these and/or to make all folks happy, and even if they did then in theory they would have to do it not just for their product but also for everyone else's too. That would start a huge pi$$ing match, to say the least. And, I'd bet that even if an 'independent' entity were to do a comparison, there'd still be plenty of whiners here questioning its accuracy.
On my car, I felt it did make a noticeable difference at the uppper RPMs, where at bone stock my car felt a little tired. This doesn't surprise me as it was said in another thread that GM has limits to how much it can open the air box due to water limitations, whereas the aftermarket does not have to worry as much about that because they are serving a specific group of consumers that is knowledgeable enough and willing to take some risk for greater horsepower gains.
So, I end where I started. If you want exactitude, I bet you never find it. This is not brain surgery, so you're not gonna get that level of test and proof. But, a lot of folks believe the airbox increases the fun factor, and I'm one of 'em, so take that and fifty cents (or 6 bucks if you're at Starbucks), and you can get yourself a cup of coffee.
Quote:
The same sentiments and occurrences happened with the c5 when competitive air boxes came out for those.
No one manufacturer is likely to test these to make all some folks happy, and even if they did then in theory they would have to do it not just for their product but also for everyone else's too. That would start a huge pi$$ing match, to say the least. And, I'd bet that even if an 'independent' entity were to do a comparison, there'd still be plenty of whiners here questioning its accuracy.
On my car, I felt it did make a noticeable difference at the uppper RPMs, where at bone stock my car felt a little tired. This doesn't surprise me as it was said in another thread that GM has limits to how much it can open the air box due to water limitations, whereas the aftermarket does not have to worry as much about that because they are serving a specific group of consumers that is knowledgeable enough and willing to take some risk for greater horsepower gains.
So, I end where I started. If you want exactitude, I bet you never find it. This is not brain surgery, so you're not gonna get that level of test and proof. But, a lot of folks believe ithe airbox increases the fun factor, and I'm one of 'em, so take that and fifty cents (or 6 bucks if you're at Starbucks), and you can get yourself a cup of coffee.
Originally Posted by SteveL2
If you want additional level of certainty, then your only answer is to wait over time and let other people do the research in effect for you by installing these things on their cars. And, there will be some limits even when others do this as often they don't do before and after dynos due to the cost, or they do other mods at the same time, or people attack the way in which they did the analysis.The same sentiments and occurrences happened with the c5 when competitive air boxes came out for those.
No one manufacturer is likely to test these to make all some folks happy, and even if they did then in theory they would have to do it not just for their product but also for everyone else's too. That would start a huge pi$$ing match, to say the least. And, I'd bet that even if an 'independent' entity were to do a comparison, there'd still be plenty of whiners here questioning its accuracy.
On my car, I felt it did make a noticeable difference at the uppper RPMs, where at bone stock my car felt a little tired. This doesn't surprise me as it was said in another thread that GM has limits to how much it can open the air box due to water limitations, whereas the aftermarket does not have to worry as much about that because they are serving a specific group of consumers that is knowledgeable enough and willing to take some risk for greater horsepower gains.
So, I end where I started. If you want exactitude, I bet you never find it. This is not brain surgery, so you're not gonna get that level of test and proof. But, a lot of folks believe ithe airbox increases the fun factor, and I'm one of 'em, so take that and fifty cents (or 6 bucks if you're at Starbucks), and you can get yourself a cup of coffee.
Very well said. For some reason people continue to frequent this forum and all they do is demand proof of claims. I don't get it.
Yes, we all want to know what the mod does and how effective it is but constantly complaining about it doesn't help anyone here...
IMHO, if you have a valid question about the published claims, make the point and move on. If all you want to do is complain about it, go somewhere else...
LS1LT1
Team Owner
close
Yesterday
- Member SinceFeb 2001
- LocationShort Hills, NJ
- Posts:27,226
-
Likes:773
-
Liked:112 Times in 77 Posts
Quote:
This is true as well, I've seen it happen on more than a few occasions.Originally Posted by Michael A
I could run the same engine over and over, never making one change to it, and show a 10 hp gain.
*89x2*
Team Owner
close
Yesterday
- Member SinceMay 2001
- Location...tearing up the highways, one state at a time™®©
- Posts:36,021
-
Likes:705
-
Liked:2,510 Times in 1,236 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by LS1LT1
This is true as well, I've seen it happen on more than a few occasions.
Yeah - usually it is the difference between the first run, and the second or third
As the car is run hard on the dyno, generally the numbers improve.
If you run just one pull for your baselinie, then your next run w/ a mod soon after, logically it would put down more power anyways - so how much gain did one get??
Key is testing, testing, and more testing and controlling the environment your tests are conducted in the best you can for accuracy
