Jeep Wrangler Forum - Reply to Topic
Jeep Wrangler Forum

Go Back   Jeep Wrangler Forum > TJ Jeep Wrangler Forum > TJ Tech Forum > Jeep Wrangler 18 dyno pulls for CAI testing

Join Wrangler Forum Today


Thread: Jeep Wrangler 18 dyno pulls for CAI testing Reply to Thread
Title:
  
Message:
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Jeep Wrangler Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

Topic Review (Newest First)
08-01-2013 03:21 AM
Pittsburghwrangler Wow I guess that not many people really understand how engines work. In order to see gains from increased air flow that air needs someplace to go. I have never seen dyno tests for this on a Jeep but in street performance cars installing a CAI or a turbo may give increases in hp, but unless you increase exhaust flow as well you will never max out the engines performance.
01-27-2011 11:37 AM
jgorm
Quote:
Originally Posted by McBear View Post
Just as another question, why did you not rerun all the pulls with the same tire pressure to eliminate the variable? I know it "shouldn't" make a big difference but each change, including temps at the wheels always make me nervous.
Because there was no statistical difference between the pulls with and without the horn at the same tire pressure. Maybe if someone was paying me to run the dyno for 2.5hrs I might have cared a little more. This was a "free test" to finally prove, with data, that CAIs really do make 0 hp on the 4.0L.

The effect they have on IATs is yet to be determined. My approach is to pull timing at different levels that correlate to different IATs. Its too tricky to get a high IAT while in the shop. In the tune, the Ecu can pull up to 7* timing for IAT so I expect the results to be drastic. I have seen IATs of 175+ on the trail, and the jeep will feel like you hooked up a 5000lb trailer to it until it cools down!
01-26-2011 09:09 PM
UnlimitedLJ04
Quote:
Originally Posted by Thesnufalufagus View Post
Look at that torque curve for the 4.0 so sexy and flat.
would be a lot more sexy if it was 75 ft-lbs higher.
01-26-2011 08:44 PM
Thesnufalufagus Look at that torque curve for the 4.0 so sexy and flat.
01-26-2011 07:35 PM
McBear That makes more sense. I was going by what you had on bullet 3 in your link which I interpreted as "tires pumped up for those runs only".

Just as another question, why did you not rerun all the pulls with the same tire pressure to eliminate the variable? I know it "shouldn't" make a big difference but each change, including temps at the wheels always make me nervous.
01-26-2011 05:03 PM
UnlimitedLJ04
Quote:
Originally Posted by jgorm View Post
The tires were pumped up for runs 9-18, so the only difference between the aftermarket intake pulls and the ones with the pumped up tires is the absence of the horn. But those pulls compared to the stock pulls, at the same tire pressure, show no hp gains. I'll link the graphs for those too lazy to click the link.
yea....if the tire pressure was the same for the high pressure run and the aftermarket intake, i don't see any gains...they're only 3hp/4tq apart, and thats within the standard deviation of both, and both graphs are very noisy, so i don't see any statistically significant difference between the two.
01-26-2011 04:29 PM
jgorm
Quote:
Originally Posted by McBear View Post
I didn't miss the tire inflation runs.

Looking at your run comments:
  • Pulls 1-5 were done on the stock intake setup
  • Pulls 6-8 were done after removing the stock "horn" on the airbox
  • Pulls 9-12 were done after increasing the tire pressure from 25psi to 55 psi. This was done to try to minimize the wavy torque curves.
  • Pulls 13-14 were done with no intake at all, just an open throttle body with the IAT sensor duct taped 2" above it.
  • Pulls 15-18 were done with the aftermarket intake.
it appears that you only had the tires "pumped" for runs 9-12 which means that the pull 1-5 and pulls 15-18 were done with stock pressures and that is where the 9hp differential came from which is only one from the advertised claim.

My point was, your test has several variables that are not qualified yet you "call BS" on someone's claim on what seems to be 1hp.

Put another way, if YOU were selling the CAI and ran a dyno with STOCK and your CAI and showed a 9hp delta, that is what you would advertise, never mind that, somewhere in the middle of the test you bumped up tire pressure.

That is why I asked the question on type variance of dynos and parameters of your test vs that of the original vendor and their claims.

We moved from a dynojet type of dyno [like Mustang] years ago because they introduce too many variables and went with a dynapack type unit. It keeps the variables to a minimum. Of course it still doesn't answer the question of what type dyno the vendor was using.
The tires were pumped up for runs 9-18, so the only difference between the aftermarket intake pulls and the ones with the pumped up tires is the absence of the horn. But those pulls compared to the stock pulls, at the same tire pressure, show no hp gains. I'll link the graphs for those too lazy to click the link.




01-26-2011 03:22 PM
McBear
Quote:
Originally Posted by jgorm View Post
You missed that pumping up the tires from 25-55psi made 4hp. I won't get too deep into statistics, but when you looks at the 3SD values you can see that 3hp is nothing when you are + 5.5hp. For the other statistical gurus, you will notice that a N of 3-5 will mean that the power analysis will be very low on my accuracy of the SD, but its probably in the neighborhood.

The highest stock hp was 142.12 and the lowest was 139.56. With no horn the best was 143.42 and the worst was 140.94 so its safe to say that did nothing significant. The best HP with pumped up tires was 147.59 and the worst was 145.99 so that is slightly significant and should be used as the baseline for all future tests because the tires remained pumped up. The best intake was 151.66 but the worst was 147.24. So when you compare 147.59 from the best tire pressure to 147.24 with the worst intake pull you can say that there is no statistical change.
I didn't miss the tire inflation runs.

Looking at your run comments:
  • Pulls 1-5 were done on the stock intake setup
  • Pulls 6-8 were done after removing the stock "horn" on the airbox
  • Pulls 9-12 were done after increasing the tire pressure from 25psi to 55 psi. This was done to try to minimize the wavy torque curves.
  • Pulls 13-14 were done with no intake at all, just an open throttle body with the IAT sensor duct taped 2" above it.
  • Pulls 15-18 were done with the aftermarket intake.
it appears that you only had the tires "pumped" for runs 9-12 which means that the pull 1-5 and pulls 15-18 were done with stock pressures and that is where the 9hp differential came from which is only one from the advertised claim.

My point was, your test has several variables that are not qualified yet you "call BS" on someone's claim on what seems to be 1hp.

Put another way, if YOU were selling the CAI and ran a dyno with STOCK and your CAI and showed a 9hp delta, that is what you would advertise, never mind that, somewhere in the middle of the test you bumped up tire pressure.

That is why I asked the question on type variance of dynos and parameters of your test vs that of the original vendor and their claims.

We moved from a dynojet type of dyno [like Mustang] years ago because they introduce too many variables and went with a dynapack type unit. It keeps the variables to a minimum. Of course it still doesn't answer the question of what type dyno the vendor was using.
01-26-2011 01:33 PM
jgorm
Quote:
Originally Posted by McBear View Post
If I am reading your table correctly the differential is about 9hp, only one short of the cai claim.

Also, do you know if you used the same type of dyno to make the comparisons? Same question with other setup parameters.

From experience I have found it hard to compare numbers without testing to the same parameters.
You missed that pumping up the tires from 25-55psi made 4hp. I won't get too deep into statistics, but when you looks at the 3SD values you can see that 3hp is nothing when you are + 5.5hp. For the other statistical gurus, you will notice that a N of 3-5 will mean that the power analysis will be very low on my accuracy of the SD, but its probably in the neighborhood.

The highest stock hp was 142.12 and the lowest was 139.56. With no horn the best was 143.42 and the worst was 140.94 so its safe to say that did nothing significant. The best HP with pumped up tires was 147.59 and the worst was 145.99 so that is slightly significant and should be used as the baseline for all future tests because the tires remained pumped up. The best intake was 151.66 but the worst was 147.24. So when you compare 147.59 from the best tire pressure to 147.24 with the worst intake pull you can say that there is no statistical change.
01-26-2011 11:24 AM
MikalCarbine
Quote:
Originally Posted by Black98
Nice to see actualy numbers and gains at the rear wheels, wonder what the engine actual output is w/o all the loss from the drivetrain.
From what I've read in the past its about 192hp IIRC
01-26-2011 11:22 AM
Mr_RPM
Quote:
Originally Posted by McBear View Post
If I am reading your table correctly the differential is about 9hp, only one short of the cai claim.

Also, do you know if you used the same type of dyno to make the comparisons? Same question with other setup parameters.

From experience I have found it hard to compare numbers without testing to the same parameters.
Thats what I thought, 9HP is not a bad gain.
01-26-2011 01:14 AM
Black98 Nice to see actualy numbers and gains at the rear wheels, wonder what the engine actual output is w/o all the loss from the drivetrain.
01-25-2011 11:14 PM
McBear If I am reading your table correctly the differential is about 9hp, only one short of the cai claim.

Also, do you know if you used the same type of dyno to make the comparisons? Same question with other setup parameters.

From experience I have found it hard to compare numbers without testing to the same parameters.
01-25-2011 10:21 PM
jgorm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikalCarbine View Post
Good question, as it is providing cold fresh air to the engine but the overall length of the intake is increased by OVER 9000!!!!!, I mean, is increased at least 2-3 fold
Yeah, I would suspect worse than stock.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CapnDean View Post
Boy I bet the K&N boys would pay you to shut up! GOOD RESEARCH!
Yeah, its nice being able to do unbiased tests on vendors products that I don't even sell. To many tests are done by guys getting free products. I paid full price for this and bought it like any other customer. I'm willing to disprove any BS claims with actual data on the dyno. I could be "bought" but it would be really expensive!!! I'm not out to bash vendors at all. This intake is pretty sweet, makes about 1-2hp of having an open TB, and makes MORE torque. But I don't feel much of anything on the butt dyno, but i enjoy the cool sound it makes! Its also step 1 in getting ready to DIY lift the front fenders. Step 2 = find a washer fluid soultion. Step 3= lift the up and stuff 35s on a 2"SL, 1"BL.
01-25-2011 10:17 PM
UnlimitedLJ04 did you keep the tire pressure high for the cowl intake tests? which brand cowl?
01-25-2011 09:53 PM
CapnDean Boy I bet the K&N boys would pay you to shut up! GOOD RESEARCH!
01-25-2011 09:20 PM
MikalCarbine
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike_3303 View Post
Would a snorkle kit make it worse or about the same a stock?
Good question, as it is providing cold fresh air to the engine but the overall length of the intake is increased by OVER 9000!!!!!, I mean, is increased at least 2-3 fold
01-25-2011 08:29 PM
sevenservices good post... thanks for sharing!
01-25-2011 08:22 PM
Mike_3303
Quote:
Originally Posted by MikalCarbine View Post
Very nice results on that cowl intake, do you have pictures of that particular setup?

Would a snorkle kit make it worse or about the same a stock?
01-25-2011 08:21 PM
MikalCarbine Very nice results on that cowl intake, do you have pictures of that particular setup?
01-25-2011 07:30 PM
Mr_RPM very interesting
01-25-2011 07:30 PM
Mike_3303 Wow, thats something. Thanks for the post! Nice to see some actual documented proof.
01-25-2011 07:21 PM
rrich Great write up!

Thanks
01-25-2011 04:30 PM
jgorm
Jeep Wrangler 18 dyno pulls for CAI testing

Sunday was a good day screwing around with the dyno proving that any CAI hp claims are BS for sure. The intake claimed 10hp across the board. Haha, maybe 3-5 tops. It will have cooler air from the cowl instead of under a black hood with hot radiator air 1' away. Here is a cut and paste from my site. Hope it works.
Nope, here is a summary and the link. (even the code doesn't work here).
[code]
Condition Avg HP Avg TQ 3SD HP 3SD TQ
stock 140.92 177.49 2.79 3.68
No Horn 142.12 176.69 3.73 6.06
Tire pressure 146.96 181.20 2.07 10.54
No Intake 151.72 183.12 2.46 5.54
Cowl Intake 149.32 185.71 5.57 5.75[/code]



All of the dyno graphs and more info is in this link.


Jeep Wrangler 18 dyno pulls for CAI testing - Trick Tuners Forums

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may 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


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:07 PM.



Jeep®, Wrangler, Liberty, Wagoneer, Cherokee, and Grand Cherokee are copyrighted and trademarked to Chrysler Motors LLC.
Wranglerforum.com is not in any way associated with the Chrysler Motors LLC