Jump to content

How well the stock intake works

SILVER SLED
 Share

Recommended Posts

SILVER SLED Senior Enthusiast

SILVER SLED

Posted
Posted

I hooked up my dashhawk, that I’ve had since my TBSS, to my ‘21 Silverado.   A dashhawk is basically just a sensor and code reader.  It was handy to measure intake air temp, timing, coolant temp, torque ****** or what ever you wanted when I had my TBSS.  Well it works in my 21, so I decided to check out intake air temps. Compared to my ‘15 and ‘18 Silverado and even my TBSS, it appears the ‘21 Silverado set up works pretty good. I plugged it in after the truck had been sitting for an hour or so and the iat was 81*, ambient temp was 63*.  I started the truck, drove down the road and in about a half a mile of driving 35-40 mph the iat had dropped to 66*.  With fairly steady driving at slower speeds the iat stays within a few degrees of ambient temp.  In stop and go traffic the iat never got 10* over ambient, usually staying 5*-7*. At a steady 55-60 mph drive the iat and ambient would be the same at times and the iat never got more than a couple degrees over ambient.  So I’m not gonna spend any money on any gm or aftermarket “cold air intake”. 
 

A dashhawk can also measure performance based on vehicle speed sensors using distance traveled and time.  I was amazed at how quick this truck ran in the 1/4 mile.  

  • Like 1
Gangly Senior Enthusiast

Gangly

Posted
Posted

The dashhawk is a nice data collector and I'm glad its working well for you, more information is always good!

 

On a side note, the benefits of a cold air intake are not exclusive to incoming air temperature drops, as the name of the modification would have you falsely believe.  Though increased air density from cooler air makes an engine more efficient, the power gains with CAI's on these vehicles come almost exclusively from the increased volume of air being flowed, not any minimal temperature improvements :)

 

As for data loggers, I'm partial to OBDwiz just because I've used it on everything from a 1996 LT1 to my 2020 T1 and its cheap, like me :) 

  • Like 1
OnTheReel Senior Enthusiast

OnTheReel

Posted
Posted

Every aftermarket intake I’ve seen for these retains the stock snorkel. Some even retain the stock lower half of the air box. Test doesn’t prove that an aftermarket intake (or at least a better flowing filter and tube) are useless, however the test definitely proves that this gadget is a waste of money:

 

https://stillen.com/collections/intake/products/2019-2020-chevy-silverado-trupower-by-stillen-cold-air-intake-scoop-tp403501

SILVER SLED Senior Enthusiast

SILVER SLED

Posted
  • Author
Posted
16 minutes ago, Gangly said:

The dashhawk is a nice data collector and I'm glad its working well for you, more information is always good!

 

On a side note, the benefits of a cold air intake are not exclusive to incoming air temperature drops, as the name of the modification would have you falsely believe.  Though increased air density from cooler air makes an engine more efficient, the power gains with CAI's on these vehicles come almost exclusively from the increased volume of air being flowed, not any minimal temperature improvements :)

 

As for data loggers, I'm partial to OBDwiz just because I've used it on everything from a 1996 LT1 to my 2020 T1 and its cheap, like me :) 

I agree about more air being better, but on a stock vehicle I have my doubts.  The GM performance cold air intake kit still uses the same stock sized hole to suck air from, so I don't see how that would gain any.  I haven't looked much, but I haven't seen any aftermarket intakes for these that don't suck air from the same whole in the radiator support area. 

 

I'm not sure how the new programming in the vehicles operates, but on my TBSS, the ecm would pull timing if the iat got above 84*, so cold air was very important.  I actually separated the iat sensor from the harness and moved in into the grill to keep the temp reading down.  Not saying it was the best idea, but I did it and didn't have any issues.  

SILVER SLED Senior Enthusiast

SILVER SLED

Posted
  • Author
Posted
31 minutes ago, OnTheReel said:

Every aftermarket intake I’ve seen for these retains the stock snorkel. Some even retain the stock lower half of the air box. Test doesn’t prove that an aftermarket intake (or at least a better flowing filter and tube) are useless, however the test definitely proves that this gadget is a waste of money:

 

https://stillen.com/collections/intake/products/2019-2020-chevy-silverado-trupower-by-stillen-cold-air-intake-scoop-tp403501

I saw the Stillen thing, and there is a thread about it.  After reading the thread, I would look into positioning of the air shutters to maybe make the air cooler, but for now I'm probably not gonna bother.  

It's Tim Senior Enthusiast

It's Tim

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Gangly said:

power gains with CAI's on these vehicles come almost exclusively from the increased volume of air being flowed,

The dubious asian filter media (dumping dirt into the engine for an infinitesimal "performance" gain) is the major downfall of these setups.

Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, SILVER SLED said:

I agree about more air being better, but on a stock vehicle I have my doubts.  The GM performance cold air intake kit still uses the same stock sized hole to suck air from, so I don't see how that would gain any.  I haven't looked much, but I haven't seen any aftermarket intakes for these that don't suck air from the same whole in the radiator support area. 

 

I'm not sure how the new programming in the vehicles operates, but on my TBSS, the ecm would pull timing if the iat got above 84*, so cold air was very important.  I actually separated the iat sensor from the harness and moved in into the grill to keep the temp reading down.  Not saying it was the best idea, but I did it and didn't have any issues.  

Shape and volume make a difference even when the inlet size is equal when it comes to the amount of air something will pass. That said even if it flows 20% more air through the filter box it may not flow anymore through the throttle body and even if it does..... see where that's going? I've seen ported heads that flowed more air and still made less power. I've ported heads with smaller ports that made more power. There is power in the shape of the valve back and seat, IF someone didn't get there first and the factory is getting pretty good at that anymore. 

 

The point of reference for these sorts of modifications is WOT. Okay, maybe something like this adds some more air and actually makes some more power. Where? At WOT and all of it ONLY after the initial power has been used. 

 

I'll get kicked in the teeth again but say your motor started at 300 hp and your new device shows 330 hp. The only time you will know it is there is when your asking for more than 300 hp. When will that be? 

 

My truck takes about 33 hp to run 55 mph. It takes 33 hp if the motor is making 287 E-10 peak or 305 E-85 peak. It still takes only 33 hp to run 55 mph. I can hit the speed limiter with 287 hp. I can hit the limiter with less than 287 hp. 

 

What an intake does mostly is make NOISE. NOISE that SEEMS more powerful. NOISE that gets ya noticed....like loud pipes. If the ego needs a stroke shell out the cash. :) If you racing ditto. Anything else...meh....

  • Like 4
SILVER SLED Senior Enthusiast

SILVER SLED

Posted
  • Author
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Grumpy Bear said:

Shape and volume make a difference even when the inlet size is equal when it comes to the amount of air something will pass. That said even if it flows 20% more air through the filter box it may not flow anymore through the throttle body and even if it does..... see where that's going? I've seen ported heads that flowed more air and still made less power. I've ported heads with smaller ports that made more power. There is power in the shape of the valve back and seat, IF someone didn't get there first and the factory is getting pretty good at that anymore. 

 

The point of reference for these sorts of modifications is WOT. Okay, maybe something like this adds some more air and actually makes some more power. Where? At WOT and all of it ONLY after the initial power has been used. 

 

I'll get kicked in the teeth again but say your motor started at 300 hp and your new device shows 330 hp. The only time you will know it is there is when your asking for more than 300 hp. When will that be? 

 

My truck takes about 33 hp to run 55 mph. It takes 33 hp if the motor is making 287 E-10 peak or 305 E-85 peak. It still takes only 33 hp to run 55 mph. I can hit the speed limiter with 287 hp. I can hit the limiter with less than 287 hp. 

 

What an intake does mostly is make NOISE. NOISE that SEEMS more powerful. NOISE that gets ya noticed....like loud pipes. If the ego needs a stroke shell out the cash. :) If you racing ditto. Anything else...meh....

I agree. I think my motor makes 420 hp.   I don’t think GM spent a ****** ton of money trying to squeeze every bit of power and economy out of a motor to make a 430 hp motor and throw some intake set up that loses 10 hp and loses any economy.   Same goes for stock exhaust really.  The flapper in these exhausts is technically to increase economy by increasing back pressure in 4 cyl mode, or less than V8 mode.  But I believe it flows 420 hp.  

Edited by SILVER SLED
  • Like 1
OnTheReel Senior Enthusiast

OnTheReel

Posted
Posted

The exhaust flapper is a huge bottleneck. It stops up a third of the pipe and makes you wonder why GM spec’d such a large diameter exhaust just to block it anyway.

 

The GM performance package bumps power to 435, and the exhaust accounts for most of those gains.

 

With no tuning available at a reasonable price, I made all the improvements I could in my driveway. Why not try to get the most of it.

  • Like 2
TNTSierra Senior Enthusiast

TNTSierra

Posted
Posted

Some individuals will argue this till they are dead. And it’s their choice. But they are foolish and wrong. CAI and exhaust make a huge difference on these trucks.  The stock exhaust with the terrible flappers cover almost 50% of the exhaust when open. It’s a crappy design and restricts a ton of airflow. I am so glad I spent $1650 on my Corsa Exhaust and S&B intake. No regrets and I have seen better performance since install. I use just an app on phone and have seen increases of .3 secs.  If it takes 33 hp per 55 mph. It’s gonna take you a while to get there.   I care that I have 435+ hp on tap and I can get to 55 or higher really quick like!!  And it’s a blast doing it. I still have a ton kid left in me and with these 6.2L I enjoy every minute of it. 

Also, we have had this discussion time and time again. Many have shown proven data stating these things work. So the data speaks for itself.


Thank you OnTheReel for proving this for all of us. He has the correct device and has posted his results and they are precise and accurate. 

  • Like 1
SILVER SLED Senior Enthusiast

SILVER SLED

Posted
  • Author
Posted
31 minutes ago, TNTSilverado said:

Some individuals will argue this till they are dead. And it’s their choice. But they are foolish and wrong. CAI and exhaust make a huge difference on these trucks.  The stock exhaust with the terrible flappers cover almost 50% of the exhaust when open. It’s a crappy design and restricts a ton of airflow. I am so glad I spent $1650 on my Corsa Exhaust and S&B intake. No regrets and I have seen better performance since install. I use just an app on phone and have seen increases of .3 secs.  If it takes 33 hp per 55 mph. It’s gonna take you a while to get there.   I care that I have 435+ hp on tap and I can get to 55 or higher really quick like!!  And it’s a blast doing it. I still have a ton kid left in me and with these 6.2L I enjoy every minute of it. 

Also, we have had this discussion time and time again. Many have shown proven data stating these things work. So the data speaks for itself.


Thank you OnTheReel for proving this for all of us. He has the correct device and has posted his results and they are precise and accurate. 

I'm not gonna argue the point.  I'm curious how your truck runs.  What does in the 1/4 mile and what device are you using.  No arguing.  Thanks.  

TNTSierra Senior Enthusiast

TNTSierra

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, SILVER SLED said:

I'm not gonna argue the point.  I'm curious how your truck runs.  What does in the 1/4 mile and what device are you using.  No arguing.  Thanks.  

It's just a 0-60 App on my Iphone.  To be honest I have only done a 0-60 run (5.68 secs). I will try and do a 1/4 run some time. Just never have done one. Just always did a 0-60.  I've never taken it to the track. I'd be curious how well it runs, just never have time with job, wife, 2 kids, and a German Shephard pup.

  @OnTheReel has the correct device and on another thread he showed his improvements and they are quite impressive. Here is the device he runs:

Dragy performance module.

 

dragy 10Hz GPS Based Performance Meter https://www.amazon.com/dp/B077KKPMTB/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_yp7rFbG63D2Y2

 

 I also raced it against my step-fathers ecoboost before upgrades and after. HUGE difference. Just for $h!ts and giggles, I laid down a burn out before and after and the afterwards was darker, longer, and easier to laydown.  The throttle response it better and crisper. My father who is a mechanic at a small town shop was awe-struck on how bad the flappers restrict the stock exhaust. He couldn't believe how much restriction it caused. 

TNTSierra Senior Enthusiast

TNTSierra

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, SILVER SLED said:

92F48064-DFF0-4301-972C-5B59A5F9AD0D.jpeg

223D2073-06C5-4BDB-BA36-77892D7D66E7.jpeg

5366F306-3628-47BA-9002-1B4B488C60D7.jpeg

DF17C181-44B4-412B-AA5E-C6C038E7E4DE.jpeg

Nice, I also read you had a Trailblazer SS ? Did you do any upgrades.   I had a 2006 Superior Blue AWD SS 10 years ago. Loved it, was very quick for it's time, except I couldn't stand the terrible 4 spd. I had a 3200 stall, CAI, tune.I went through 2 transmissions in the darn thing.  

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Forum Statistics

    250.5k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts

  • Member Statistics

    342,947
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    Sothpaw27
    Newest Member
    Sothpaw27
    Joined

  • Who's Online   5 Members, 0 Anonymous, 696 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      www.enginelabs.com/news/what-i-learned-today-bearing-clearances-vs-oil-viscosities/     www.enginelabs.com/news/oil-viscosity-can-the-numbers-be-misleading/ The Big Lie… Coming full circle to the reason Lake discusses the Porsche engines in particular. Based on the 2000 samples in the SPEEDiagnostix database, increasing the oil viscosity in these engines, even those run on the track, showed no significant difference in results.   The smoking gun was in the oil chemistry. That is where the data shows higher instances of more wear. Molybdenum was the key; the higher the amount, the less the wear. Speed postulates that higher viscosity oils have more thickeners to artificially inflate their viscosity numbers. These thickeners lose viscosity under shear, and the result is that not all oils of the same viscosity have the same shear stability.   Having enough viscosity is the most important characteristic, but according to Speed, once that required viscosity level is reached, additive chemistry matters more than additional viscosity. Speed also states, oil pressure problems on the racetrack aren’t a viscosity problem; it’s an oiling system problem. Running a thicker oil is just a band-aid for an underlying oiling system problem.
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Can it still be Assembled II?   Viscosity on the decline by various means. Heat on the rise making that worse. Engine RPM in the tank. Smaller motors with more boost trying to emulate an electric motor. Full torque, zero rpm. Then we will triple the OCI. Argh.    But wait....there is more. LSPI has pushed a shift from Ca to Mg and as that cost more PLUS the run to lower sulfur compounds the TBN is moving in the wrong direction for the increased OCI's demanded.    That not being enough to placate a demand for a parameter they can't measure the other sulfur bearing compounds are also under attack. That would be zinc and phosphorus sulfonate compounds. To some degree those are being replaced with boron esters and others, i.e. titanium ect. All of which have shorter service lives. And there there is the "Secrete Sauce" marketing for AW adds that 'Can't be detected by UOA's" but trust me because I (the blenders) never ever lie.    Spoiler alert; ALL additives are sacrificial! Smaller amounts of the old blended with less robust versions of the new do not equal longer service lives. So what are the blenders recommending? Wait for it.......   MOVING THE GOAL POSTS! OMG      Let's declare the long standing TAN/TBN crossover irrelevant and tell people that soot is a great 'graphite' based lubricant which can aid tribo films. Wait, what? Let's declare that the standards used for oxidation and nitration were to conservative and can be expanded. Let's tell them that because GDI fuel dilution, although being a VISCOSITY KILLER and an acid generator is actually okay because we have better base oils that limit viscosity failure limits. (Said knowing this is measured in fractions of a centipoise and in bases not commonly used in shelf oils)   Lying from the heart is not just the new normal but we have a public, a very young public, that is so ignorant of the facts and so sure of their "RESEARCH" into AI driven models base in regurgitated  instead of scientific research based unvarnished, peer reviewed FACTS that the incoming guard is loosing their grip on reality and the OEM's are tickled pink while the blends bend the knee.    You have an ever limited set of tools to work with. And sooner or later those will be taken from you as the API and the EPA strangle the last remaining fluids from the system. What you have left is your wits. If you care to use them.    At some point in the very near future it will not longer be possible to do "What is best for the machine", and be replaced with "The best you have access too". You WILL be rewarded with half the life and twice the cost. That isn't that hard to predict.         
    • Chuck FB
      Software Update

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I trust you saw the other comment where he knew what he was talking about !. Yes, these darned newer vehicles with all their so smart they are stupid technology, goes and drains the battery down. As you might see my other comment, I installed a Noco 5 battery tender under the hood and at this point still have the cord routed so I have to lift the hood and then plug it in but am typically parked in a garage or a shed so its not risking the engine hood in the wind. That way I am assured or hopefully so of not finding I have a battery drawn down and can't even start the truck and that also damages the battery to draw it down too far. 
    • Chuck FB
      Software Update

      By Chuck FB · Posted

      I guess no surprise my guesses were wrong !, at least now I know if I ever happen to see it grayed out in my own truck as to what is going on.    I never happened to catch my truck with it grayed out, it seemed every time I would test to see if there was an update it never found anything and yet more than once I would check to see if there was an update and there was nothing, then a day later or even that same morning I would drive to town and after more than one engine shut down in town as I did my errands it would pop up that there is an update now ready to install and the only place I have a connection to the internet is at home by wifi so its not as if it grabbed the download while driving. I don't trust these new vehicles due to all the crap they can decide to do while sitting for some days not running and run the battery down so most of the time if I know the truck will sit for a few days I plug in the battery tender I have mounted under the hood and so the only time the truck must have downloaded software was when it was sitting in the garage where the signal is awful but I have that tender plugged in and somehow it managed to download it. I honestly detest all this crap, way to easy to leave a person stranded.    Since I don't trust any of it I don't do the install of the already downloaded software until I get home and sometimes have even sat in the truck to watch what its doing as its going through the process to its conclusion as its not like it is set up that it will tell you the next time you fire up the engine that the update that was initialed actually installed or installed properly. Yes I can go into the updates and see the list. After I go through the install where I feel its safe to do so in case it breaks down as a result, I will plug in the battery tender after the fact to recharge as I don't know how much power its taking just to do the install and that can take a while for it to install. 
    • nfisherman
      Software Update

      By nfisherman · Posted

      Thanks for the reply. All settings were correct and the engine was off, as it was supposed to be. It turned out to be something simple. I took a drive for about an hour. I must have had a low battery without knowing it. The voltage gauge on the display looked ok. At the end of my drive, I shut off the engine and the update prompt came up and it updated normally. It’s ironic because one of the features of the update is a reduction of battery drain. 

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...