Power Hungry Performance Forum  

Go Back   Power Hungry Performance Forum > Everything Else > The Conversation Pit

The Conversation Pit
This is where EVERYTHING else goes. No subject is too mundane. How's the weather in your area? Did your kid cut his first tooth? Really, what do you think about the President? And don't get me started on Cummins and Duramaxes. Have at it!


Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old Tue, July 6th, 2010, 01:54 PM
Longshot270's Avatar
Longshot270 Longshot270 is offline
Forum Predator
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: DFW, TX
Posts: 1,878
Longshot270 will become famous soon enough
Default Supporting evidence for the gotts/dwv intake mod

Got around to testing for some real numbers. Unfortunately it is only for fuel economy.
Here is the intake mod I am talking about


Here is a comparison of the mod with the stock setup.
This first graph is RPM vs the MAF sensor reading. Considering that there IS a difference I would not worry about a lean condition resulting from the computer not knowing that there is more air coming in than usual as seen in aftermarket CAIs. The pictures are a visual representation of datalog readings. When, for example, the RPM was AT 2500 rpm and the MAF was reading AT 70 g/s, a dot was placed. With enough similar readings the dots begin to overlap and show trends.



The scale is a bit misleading (and made worse by compression for internet use) but at 2500 rpm there is about 3 extra g/s (grams of air per second...and since air weighs next to nothing that is a difference) and about 10 extra g/s at 5000 rpm.

Since I didn't have a dyno to test the before and after I can't say how much of a power increase the added volume can add.

But that graph says nothing about fuel economy right? Well that leads to the next graph.

This graph is a little backward because the axes are flipped(blame MS excel) but the results are still the same. This compares the MAF sensor reading and fuel economy (IECON).



Anyone looking at this will see that it promises 3 or 4 mpg...well not necissarily. The peak efficiency (Most mpg from a given amount of air) is under the best conditions. Obviously anything below optimal will be below that curve. The peak conditions are usually flat smooth roads with little turning and for shorter sections that are down hill. Sometimes I was barely putting any pressure and that is how the 25 + showed up (or at least that is the only way I can think to explain it). I would consider anything below 23 mpg for this to be reliable because I can get up to 22 mpg on certain roads. 18 mpg is almost always expected for cruising, 19-20 is common for many roads and then there are a few roads where I get 21-22 every time

Edit: I want to mention that the high mileage was with the intake mod installed...there is no way my truck will get 27 mpg in the current state it is in.
__________________

Last edited by Longshot270; Tue, July 6th, 2010 at 07:24 PM.
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:00 AM.


All Contents Copyright 2008-2024, Power Hungry Performance