09-06-2012, 11:04 PM | #57 |
Drives: 2010 CAMARO. 10.04@133mph, 1.4 60' Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Lafayette, Louisiana
Posts: 4,585
|
We look forward to testing it out! Looks great!
|
09-10-2012, 12:06 AM | #58 |
Drives: 2016 1LT RS Camaro; 72 Chevelle Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Central Point, OR
Posts: 5,688
|
Well, I'm pretty happy with the fueling I'm seeing. I installed a wideband o2 sensor & gauge on the car today, and the intake is within the normal range (avg 14.5:1 at cruise), at WOT the intake is at about 12.2:1 avg, which I think is very safe, especially when most tuners are tuning for 12.5 to 13.0:1 (depending on the tuner, and the application) at WOT, so we're good to go!
Essentially the intake is now finished design wise, the only thing that will change is it's appearance (finished lid, slight change in the tube, permanent MAF mount, different color options). Going to call and try to get an appointment to get the production prototype intake vs stock intake on the dyno again this Friday! Fingers crossed it's as good, or better than the original prototype was! |
09-10-2012, 07:07 AM | #59 | |
Drives: 2010 Camaro SS LS3 Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Eastern MO
Posts: 3,786
|
Quote:
__________________
She is only memory now. |
|
09-10-2012, 09:07 AM | #60 |
Drives: 2012 Camaro 2SS/RS Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Dover, NH
Posts: 678
|
So with that much flow are you throwing codes on the stock tune like some other intakes do?
Sent from my Nexus S 4G using Tapatalk 2
__________________
2012 Camaro 2SS/RS, Hurst Short Throw, IdealG M/C, Pypes Pipe Bomb, LSR Cold Air Intake, LSR Toe Links/Lower Control Arms Clear Image headers, high flows, Slowhawk tune
1974 Chevy K10 Built 355, FAST EZ EFI, 5speed 2000 Chevy Tahoe LT 5.3L, Slowhawk tune |
09-10-2012, 09:21 AM | #61 |
Perpetual Order
Drives: indeed Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Texas Hill Country
Posts: 1,277
|
a lot of that has to do with altering the placement of the maf (angles) too much makes it SEEM like flow is altered but they all flow very similar numbers based on CFM.
|
09-10-2012, 10:14 AM | #62 | ||
Drives: 2016 1LT RS Camaro; 72 Chevelle Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Central Point, OR
Posts: 5,688
|
Quote:
Quote:
Forgot I haven't posted a picture of the most recent iteration, so it's pictured below. It's not the production lid, just a quick lid I made and stuck on there... The only change to the tube is that it will have a barb fitting welded on for the intake air bridge (I didn't bother welding one on since I have the RX Catch can, and would need to cap it anyway.). The MAF block was just siliconed on in this picture as I knew I was going to have to probably move it around a couple times. The MAF if is now located on the front side of the tube section of the velocity stack / filter clamp piece and will be permanently attached (NOT siliconed) on production intakes. Last edited by Jason@JacFab; 09-10-2012 at 07:02 PM. |
||
09-10-2012, 03:07 PM | #63 |
Drives: 2017 2SS 6mt, garnet red Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: NoVA
Posts: 105
|
that looks awesome.
Can't wait for the next update on this. |
09-10-2012, 06:56 PM | #64 |
|
no kidding...hurry up and get this thing done!! HAHA
|
09-10-2012, 07:07 PM | #65 |
Drives: 1989 GTA Trans Am Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Cypress, California
Posts: 610
|
"The MAF if is now located on the front side of the tube"
That is what I was thinking looking at the picture. I would try and center it in the straight section. I believe GM says centered on a minimum of a 6" section of straight pipe. You could probably fudge that measurement into the bend a little if need be. |
09-10-2012, 07:41 PM | #66 | |
Drives: 2016 1LT RS Camaro; 72 Chevelle Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Central Point, OR
Posts: 5,688
|
Quote:
|
|
09-10-2012, 08:20 PM | #67 | |
Perpetual Order
Drives: indeed Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Texas Hill Country
Posts: 1,277
|
Quote:
|
|
09-10-2012, 08:21 PM | #68 |
Drives: 2013 2SS Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 372
|
This really does look awesome. And i like how you have never said anything but good things about other intakes like CAI's intake.
I might just wait to see how this all comes together before i pull the trigger on a CAI.
__________________
|
09-10-2012, 10:31 PM | #69 |
Drives: 1989 GTA Trans Am Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Cypress, California
Posts: 610
|
"I am not noticing any strange symptoms of it not having 6" of straight tube in front"
You should not. What I was trying to say is that you need 3" in front and back of the MAF to straighten out the air for a total of 6" of straight. That is per the GM instructions on installing the card style MAF in a 4" piece of tubing. Sounds like you have it and a very nice product to boot. I think you have a winner there. |
09-11-2012, 09:21 AM | #70 | ||
Drives: 2016 1LT RS Camaro; 72 Chevelle Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Central Point, OR
Posts: 5,688
|
Quote:
+106.4 (over a popular tube and cone filter style intake, the next best in line) +149.1 (over a popular OTR style intake... Yes... That really happened) +202.2 (over kind of an oddball intake, w/ a tube & oval filter, the worst so far) I've got one still to test, and one more in the mail that will be here this week. Quote:
Unfortunately, more than I vendor, I see myself as a regular guy... What I don't approve of is manufacturers claiming ludicrous info and not wanting to explain how that info was come up with, and no documentation of how it was tested. I have no reason to lie to anyone, or falsify anything, I would rather someone bought my product and hopefully think they would get what I claim based real world testing performed to the best of my ability, not because I spewed out a number with undocumented testing (and not necessarily a HP related number in some cases). If you want to claim something, you gotta have proof of how you came up with that claim. |
||
|
|
Tags |
cai, dyno, intake, jacfab, velocity |
|
|