Jump to content

NemesisC5

Member
  • Content Count

    91
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

14 Good

About NemesisC5

  • Rank
    Enthusiast
  • Birthday 09/11/1961

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    Array

Profile Information

  • Name
    Array
  • Location
    Array
  • Gender
    Array
  • Drives
    Array

Recent Profile Visitors

3,060 profile views
  1. Has anyone performed autopsy of oem air intake tract? It contains some sort of baffling technology to eliminate noise and I was curious as to the air path and amount of restriction. This piece
  2. I see differences in the tests now that likely explain results. The original test was completed with Airaid Jr Kit, including tube and oiled filter. The most recent test was done with MIT "tube only". This would imply recent test showed zero gains because the gains likely were from oiled high flow filter, similar to claims by K&N and other filter manufacturers. This seems to be backed up by jimmyboy8301 findings on Airaid website (with associated dyno chart) showing gains of 6hp gain utilizing more recent synthetic "dry filter". In summary, if part number and picture are correct on BPP website they tested MIT tube only this time where original test consisted of Airaid Jr Kit with tube and high flow filter.....not exactly apples to apples. As pointed out by Crobinson16 the MIT has been redesigned however the change appears minimal and nothing likely to yield gains. The 6hp gain likely achieved by high flow dry filter, in line with claims from other manufacturers regarding their high flow drop in filters. I noticed the S&B CAI was not tested (disqualified) due to removal of factory component which I assume is the metal mounting bracket the air box assembly rests on. The S&B looks to have the largest sealed box with large round filter.
  3. Posted to ask BBP why GMT 900 platform with a 5.3L V8 using Airaid Jr. Kit with MIT and Filter only show to be the top performer according to their dyno results, however the next Gen 6.2L V8 showed zero gains with MIT tube only? The airbox appears to be the same or very close, does the 6.2L V8 not produce improved numbers because lack of the air filter only or was the factory air box modified in original tests with 5.3L V8? If so it seems modding the air box along with better flowing filter in my 2017 6.2L V8 should produce gains somewhere in line with complete systems in 2016 (latest) CAI comparison. Again, in 2016 CAI results the MIT tube only showed little to no gain so it appears 95%+ of gains are from improved air boxes and low restriction filters. Unless BPP has data of others factors to consider regarding their 2016 results it would make sense that either one of the air box/filter combinations from the tests or modified oem air box with high flowing drop in filter would be obvious choice providing the best value. Compare results from the attachment in my post you quoted with results from original test to results from 2016 testing in link below and you'll see why I'm asking. I don't like the extra noise from the aftermarket tubes and although they clean up appearance of engine bay I rarely open my hood so that is not high on of my list of priorities. Power gains, lower noise and best value are my primary interests. http://blackbearperformance.com/IntakeTestResults_2016.asp
  4. See attached file with previous BBP CAI test using 2008 Silverado 5.3L Flex Fuel "0" engine Intake Testing Results - Intake Testing Results.pdf
  5. In the latest BBP CAI test the MIT with factory air box showed no gain above factory numbers, however all other CAI's showed gains. Has BBP ever tested oem intake piping with baffles connected to aftermarket "CAI filter box" with larger surface area (reduced restriction) round/cone filters? I'm considering this with one of the "CAI filter boxes" tested by BBP. I recall in the previous BBP test with GEN 4 engines the MIT tube combined with factory air box and K&N replacement filter ranked high in results compared to other manufacturers complete CAI systems. Your current test utilized MIT tube with factory box and factory filter implying (to me at least) that a less restrictive filter element has the more effect than the tube itself. Please help me understand as I'd gladly purchase a complete system and install CAI box without tube if I could benefit performance without the additional sound the tube seems to create.
  6. When I purchased my 2017 GM listed a larger front big brake setup in the GM Accessories catalog but they were not available yet. I was tempted later to purchase them but it was front only and not equal in quality to Wilwood product - Wilwoods are the icing on the cake, very nice touch. My compliments on your build.
  7. You are correct, since I posted that July last year I learned the 6.2 is a half point higher at 11.5:1. I'm curious as to why the 5.3 is rated from GM to produce more power with E85 and the 6.2 is not (especially with the higher CR).
  8. Yep that's me on CF. I have plans to modify exhaust pre-catback just not settled on which way I'm going, catted or no cats with CMR Diablo tune cats turned off. I frequent a few forums gathering intel, the hot topic going is GM's new 4.2L DOHC TT Caddy motor likely a precursor of what we'll see in GM's top performing cars and in time our trucks as well.
  9. Blaspheme indeed, I'll need counseling the day I hear a V8 running on 1 cylinder....
  10. The cat back on the All Terrain made by TMG aka Corsa is the same I purchased through GMPP. I considered the AFE Y-pipe but was concerned it would likely throw codes and for $700+ I was not ready to take a chance that I'd have to purchase a tune as well voiding warranty. Post a sound clip if you don'y mind.
  11. Mine will soon be banished as well. I've read the 2019's may have single cylinder mode...I bet that sounds good.
  12. I have the GMPP Corsa 3.5" on my 2017 w/6.2, has a throaty sound when accelerating that I like to hear. At lower speeds around town it does have a little drone in 4 cylinder mode however I usually have my foot in it so it rarely sees 4 cyl mode.
  13. When I removed the MIT from 2011 6.2 before trade-in it became quieter and I liked it. I have not since installed on 2017 6.2 because I didn't want that low frequency sound again. Thanks for the feedback.
  14. Did you notice an increase in low frequency noise after installing the tube with no other changes?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.