Jump to content

6.2 with afe intake = 36hp!

truckguy82

By truckguy82
in Engines & Drivetrain

Recommended Posts

evilstevie Enthusiast

evilstevie

Posted
Posted

 

Two points on this.

 

1) Regarding a vested interest: Might be worth looking into margins on the performance parts industry. If we were to see one intake sale per day, every day for a year, it would cover salary for one employee for less then a month. This is not now and will not ever be a significant portion of our revenue.

 

2) Regarding air not being a limiting reagent: Air is the ONLY limited factor in engine performance in this discussion. Fuel and ignition timing are easily adjustable and controlled, however both of those variables will only allow you to extract the maximum performance relative to the number of oxygen molecules. A 10% increase in air into the combustion chamber will yield just slightly less than a 10% increase in power.

2) This is an NA motor, so it pulls in air via vacuum as a result of the combustion cycle. Increasing the amount of available air, even by a tremendous amount, isn't going to change the amount of air that's pulled into the combustion chamber, unless this air is being forced in via FI. CAI's are not superchargers. Is the stock air box so tremendously restricted that it's not actually getting the air that it can use? Seems unlikely to me but anything is possible.

  • Replies 192
  • Created
  • Last Reply
truckguy82 Senior Enthusiast

truckguy82

Posted
  • Author
Posted

2) This is an NA motor, so it pulls in air via vacuum as a result of the combustion cycle. Increasing the amount of available air, even by a tremendous amount, isn't going to change the amount of air that's pulled into the combustion chamber, unless this air is being forced in via FI. CAI's are not superchargers. Is the stock air box so tremendously restricted that it's not actually getting the air that it can use? Seems unlikely to me but anything is possible.

Exactly why I talked about the additional vacuum reading earlier in the thread.

GMC_SD_Ult_16 Enthusiast

GMC_SD_Ult_16

Posted
Posted

Exactly why I talked about the additional vacuum reading earlier in the thread.

Truck guy 82,

 

Can you repost the vacuum difference to clarify your point that the airbox is that restricted? If I remember it showed stock box amounts vs putting on the CAI. Thanks.

 

Sent from my Note 5 using Tapatalk

truckguy82 Senior Enthusiast

truckguy82

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I stated the data pertained to the air intake system. Attached you will find a scan from a stock Camaro on the dyno. If you look at the MAP values, you can see it only pulls 3-3.5 kPa of vacuum from beginning to ~6K RPM, depending upon the exact RPM ranges over which you take your averages. That's as good as the trucks will do with an aftermarket CAI. With the stock system, the trucks will pull 5.5-6 kPa of vacuum.

 

1300c Enthusiast

1300c

Posted
Posted

-We have 1 dyno from a company that sells CAI's. No offense but not exactly unbiased.

-It is clearly not the same exact engine. Cam, intake, exhuast, tune, etc. are different.

-all motors make power with bolt ons. Typically very little from a CAI and no tune

No opinion on your last two points.

 

These CAI vendors and manufacturers obviously have a vested interest in posting big hp gains. A truly scientific test would attempt to explain the results, using other data, and not just throw things on a dyno and report the numbers. GM probably has 1000000x the R+D budget of all of these CAI manufacturers combined, so it seems a bit absurd that such a hp gain would be possible. Especially in light of the fact that the new ecoboost now out torgues the 6.2. Wouldn't now be the time for GM to "remove the restriction" and reclaim bragging rights for power, if they were in fact intentionally throttling back the 6.2? Air is not the limiting reagent in combustion chemistry, so increasing available air by 10% or 1000% isn't going to make a lick of difference in hp. But it will sell a lot of CAI's.....

Have you cross referenced part #'s on the internal engine parts? Everything internally on the l86, and lt1 are the same according to the part #'s supplied for both engines.

truckguy82 Senior Enthusiast

truckguy82

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Have you cross referenced part #'s on the internal engine parts? Everything internally on the l86, and lt1 are the same according to the part #'s supplied for both engines.

they are the same, he has no idea what he's talking about

shift_grind Enthusiast

shift_grind

Posted
Posted

2) This is an NA motor, so it pulls in air via vacuum as a result of the combustion cycle. Increasing the amount of available air, even by a tremendous amount, isn't going to change the amount of air that's pulled into the combustion chamber, unless this air is being forced in via FI. CAI's are not superchargers. Is the stock air box so tremendously restricted that it's not actually getting the air that it can use? Seems unlikely to me but anything is possible.

The combustion cycle is a fixed amount of time depending on the rpm. The more air it can suck in, the more power it will make. If it didn't, putting a 1" intake tube on wouldn't reduce power.

polarisnchevy Enthusiast

polarisnchevy

Posted
Posted

I just installed the afe momentum on my 2017 5.3 this afternoon. Was talking with afe before ordering and they said to see if it fits and if it didn't they would take back and pay for shipping. No fitment issues during install.

15_silverado Enthusiast

15_silverado

Posted
Posted

I just installed the afe momentum on my 2017 5.3 this afternoon. Was talking with afe before ordering and they said to see if it fits and if it didn't they would take back and pay for shipping. No fitment issues during install.

Was that the same model used in the black bear test?

 

What's the part number?

 

Also how does it sound on the 5.3

polarisnchevy Enthusiast

polarisnchevy

Posted
Posted

I got the dry filter, the test used the oiled filter. The part number for dry is 51-74104. Have only driven around the block so I will have to tell you tomorrow.

MIDNITEZ71 Enthusiast

MIDNITEZ71

Posted
Posted

I got the dry filter, the test used the oiled filter. The part number for dry is 51-74104. Have only driven around the block so I will have to tell you tomorrow.

 

post some pics please

evilstevie Enthusiast

evilstevie

Posted
Posted

Have you cross referenced part #'s on the internal engine parts? Everything internally on the l86, and lt1 are the same according to the part #'s supplied for both engines.

 

Cam is the same apparently. Intake, exhaust, tune are the only differences between LT1 and L86.

 

The combustion cycle is a fixed amount of time depending on the rpm. The more air it can suck in, the more power it will make. If it didn't, putting a 1" intake tube on wouldn't reduce power.

Right. But it's not going to suck in more air than it's capably of using just because the air is there. Obviously a 1" intake tube wouldn't flow nearly enough air. Conversely, if "more air" was always the answer, all manufacturers would have a giant 3 foot diameter orifice at the front of all of their intakes, with a screen on the front to keep out birds. And those BS K+N demos claiming "3x more air flow!" would have really yeilded their advertised +30 hp on every single car ever made instead of jack squat. Typically, CAI's without a tune make minimal hp gains. This has been proven time and time again with various dyno tests over the years. Throw a tune on and they typically add a handful of hp. Apparently one out of this bunch was able to add 25 hp without a tune. That is certainly not typical. I missed the point about the vacuum mentioned earlier so I'll have to go see if a logical explanation was included.

truckguy82 Senior Enthusiast

truckguy82

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Cam is the same apparently. Intake, exhaust, tune are the only differences between LT1 and L86.

 

Right. But it's not going to suck in more air than it's capably of using just because the air is there. Obviously a 1" intake tube wouldn't flow nearly enough air. Conversely, if "more air" was always the answer, all manufacturers would have a giant 3 foot diameter orifice at the front of all of their intakes, with a screen on the front to keep out birds. And those BS K+N demos claiming "3x more air flow!" would have really yeilded their advertised +30 hp on every single car ever made instead of jack squat. Typically, CAI's without a tune make minimal hp gains. This has been proven time and time again with various dyno tests over the years. Throw a tune on and they typically add a handful of hp. Apparently one out of this bunch was able to add 25 hp without a tune. That is certainly not typical. I missed the point about the vacuum mentioned earlier so I'll have to go see if a logical explanation was included.

Yes more air actually is always the answer, welcome to internal combustion engines

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Grumpy Bear
      Slate Electric Truck

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      I have thought an EV might have some practical value in extending the life of the ICE members of ones fleet. Now....I'm convinced of it. I've been letting my better half access Raven (Mitsubishi Mirage) for her needs while Dizzy has been in the shop. Being the fuel freak I am and given the fact Raven is capable of over 60 mpg in clean air on a warm day I was taken back by the wife's ability to take a car that had used a half a tank of gas that to that point had returned a value of 57 mpg and return in with a decimating 51 mpg for that same tank in that same day in a 15 mile round trip of short hop errands and a stop in the drive through at Micky D's.  😱   Trust me on this. It would take the remainder of that tank driven on the highway to return that tank to just 54 mpg. This is not a Mitsubishi issue. This is an ICE issue that is magnified in vehicles capable of such high fuel economy values. On a percentage basis your 1500 does the same thing. Short hopping an ICE consumes a good deal more fuel and in doing so provides zero additional useable outputs. That entire volume of fuel is wasted in diluting the cylinder walls oil films, creating crankcase moisture and acid content and the resultant wear.    Enter the SLATE. All of that is avoided and the ICE's advantage in range and made useful at reduced wear for your ICE!   Kind'a cool. 
    • KARNUT
      Slate Electric Truck

      By KARNUT · Posted

      Back in the day people would buy cars based on performance. The charger posted does 0-60 in 3.3 seconds. And it’s fully loaded.  It has a decent warranty and will fit most anyone’s needs. Remember the original Hemi? 90 day warranty. 25K mini truck or that car? I’d go with the car. It wouldn’t fit my perimeter. If I could just talk my wife out of her Genesis. It would be perfect for her.
    • Atlas
      Slate Electric Truck

      By Atlas · Posted

      Let's pivot this back. Someone said they wanted pictures.   Even better, there's already video. Pre-prod prototypes are already on the road and they're letting the press drive them.   JerryRigEverything did a good review. I really enjoy his content and EV adventures, so I was thrilled when he had the chance to review a Slate:    
    • Grumpy Bear
      Slate Electric Truck

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Interesting pivot.  
    • Atlas
      Slate Electric Truck

      By Atlas · Posted

      The Charger EV was stillborn. Wrong car at the wrong price for Dodge's intended audience. Now at a good price with fire-sale discounts, and still not selling, it's still very much the wrong car. Again, Dodge's intended audience. I believe a lot of Stellantis' EV blunders were all under Tavares' regime at Stellantis...the board convinced him to move on. Neat car, just wasn't received on the level that would sustain mass production.   Dodge is headed in a better direction for its core business. I didn't think there was anything left to get excited about re: the Durango after its 15 year run, but they're just now releasing a 392 version that should price out in the low 40's. Nicely done. I'm not sure I would touch anything Stellantis makes with a 10' pole these days, but the Durango is still mostly parts designed like 3 parent companies ago so maybe it's still OK?

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...