Originally Posted by asinatra

First off horsepower isnt ****, torque is what you want. Everyone and their mom is going to say get the AF1 and return the Airaid only because they have only used ONE intake and not used both to compare. And there has been NO dyno sheets of either to really know what is better, just a guy, his website with his "claims". And different trucks will respond to different things.

Originally Posted by DarkKnight

just as a side note, Troyer performance posts +20 rwhp for the airaid intake system and airaid posts +12 hp for the airaid intake,,,,,,, interesting,,,,,,,,,

Originally Posted by asinatra

First off horsepower isnt ****, torque is what you want.

Originally Posted by Superchips_Distributor

Hello All,

As the majority of you probably already know, with our schedule & posting here in the Computer Chips section, I don't have the kind of time available to personally drop by this section like I’d like to. But RockPick did ask me to drop by here and answer a few of the basic questions in this thread, so I will make this post to answer some of the basics being discussed - then for any further details, please give us a call at our number listed below & our staff will be happy to help you.

This is probably going to have to be chopped up into numerous posts, as the word count is under 3000, but the character count is over 12K (according to MS Word), so here goes……………..

First - on the topic of how the power gains (as well as fuel trims, wideband A/F’s, etc) were tested – of course they were tested on both stock and modified vehicles, and numerous times at that, just as we typically do. The power gains we stated were those observed on BONE STOCK vehicles, just as they should be represented on that type of performance part – not on some best-case scenario. Nor was there a significant difference in those gains on the modified vehicles we tested the AF1 on, as they were vehicles with straightforward bolt-on mods. So when we say we saw 20 HP at the wheels at 2000 rpm, and 25 HP at the wheels at just 3000 rpm, that means this was observed on a stock 5.4 3V F-150 running on the factory program – with the only change being the Air Force One intake kit. As usual when testing any part that can potentially have an effect on the MAS transfer function, of course we also datalogged all the engine operational data, so things like fuel trims, wideband A/F’s in O/L, etc., were all datalogged. Now for the poster trying to claim that fuel trims can be fine in C/L yet you can still be dangerously lean in O/L, sorry, but you don’t know what you’re talking about, as you are NOT going to have that kind of scenario from this type of air intake tract change - period. In these vehicles you remain in C/L (closed loop) until you are well in excess of 80% throttle in the stock factory tuning, and a scenario that leaves fuels trims fine all thru the C/L MAS range yet end up badly lean in O/L has never happened on any of these 5.4 3V F-150’s, nor has that ever once happened in any of the thousands of these vehicles we have tested with ANY intake kit - and we’ve specialized in F-150 performance for 14 years, since long before F-150 Online was in existence. However, in all fairness it must be pointed out that this is indeed a valid question! Why? Because I DO agree with that it absolutely IS true that you can have that kind of scenario from OTHER types of air intake tract changes - such as a MAF meter change on vehicles using a traditional MAF meter (which the 5.4 3V’s do not, by the way), including even rotating a stock factory MAF meter in the otherwise unaltered factory air intake tract, or when “simply” removing a MAF meter screen on those models where a screen is used. That is the sort of thing that actually happens more from obvious things like running out of fuel pump, injector, fuel line, fuel rail , etc. capacity. In those kinds of scenarios it is indeed possible to have a situation where fuel trims are within the system’s adaptive range in C/L but then elsewhere at WOT (wide-open throttle), the actual wideband A/F’s are unacceptably lean. However, the reality is that does NOT happen from this type of change in the air intake tract that we are talking about – and that certainly never happened here.

So the power gains stated are on BONE STOCK vehicles, and were tested on high-end eddy-current chassis dynos, not over-inflated inertia dynos. Datalogging to include wideband A/F's was done not only on the dyno, but also on the road & at the drag strip, etc., and the results are that the vehicle achieves stoich in C/L & the commanded A/F's in O/L with the Air Force One intake installed.

Originally Posted by Superchips_Distributor

Next – on the subject of dyno plots or any of our other internal raw test data – we are not the manufacturer, so that is not our responsibility and we will not be publishing any of our internal raw test data on the Internet, or in email, or one by one to any individual, etc., because it’s nobody’s business but ours. We are not the manufacturer, plain and simple, so nobody has any right to “demand” our internal raw test data, nor will it be provided. We do the testing we do (and far more of it than any other vendor for these vehicles) for OUR purposes, so that we can properly evaluate which part is doing the best job, or whether a manufacturer is inflating their numbers or perhaps using only a best-case scenario, or to evaluate whether we will carry a given product, etc. We do that testing at OUR expense, and we are not beholden to ANYONE. Any manufacturer that wants dyno plots can darn well do their own testing, they can’t have ours. Remember, posting that kind of info also provides tremendous assistance to competitors who love to use OUR data to help THEM sell products at OUR expense – as we quickly found out years ago when we used to release that kind of data publicly just how dishonest & opportunistic other companies can be – we literally had other companies “steal” our data, claming it was their own testing, and use it to help them sell other products at OUR expense, and we are NEVER going to knowingly allow that again. It’s also far too easy for a manufacturer to obtain a say, a competitor’s product, then look at our results/data for that product and have that give them a significant head start in their own R&D/product improvement – and so on. So for any number of reasons, we're not going to do all the various testing of the many products we have tested at our expense, and then just hand all OUR internal test data out to the world. Anyone who can’t understand that is more than welcome to spend the many years gaining the kind of expertise we have, then spend millions of dollars as we have over the years in the kind of testing we do, and then give it away to the entire world. Bet there won’t be any takers on that.

It’s very simple - those who do business with us get the benefit of the results of the testing we do when we talk about those results when giving them advice on what products to use to get the best results – but they do not get our actual raw test data. We’ve been around for a long time as most here already know, and our thousands of customers appreciate the benefit of our testing, R&D, etc., and realize that our reputation & integrity is the envy of many companies in this industry. They know that we don’t care what the name is on the box, what we care about are the results – which is why we do so much testing, so they know they can count on us when we tell them to use a specific part in a particular area of modification for performance.

Originally Posted by Superchips_Distributor

Now to be fair, let’s discuss the other side of that coin - The reality is, the power gains seen in the 5.4 3V intake tract from both the Airaid intake and the Air Force One intake are indeed larger than any power gains we have ever seen before on any normally aspirated gasoline engine vehicle from just installing a replacement air intake tract – you bet! And that being the case, it is understandable for some who are familiar with what kinds of gains have been traditionally seen in the late-model F-150 from aftermarket air intake kits to wonder how the kinds of gains we’re reporting seeing on these 5.4 3V F-150’s are possible. And one quick look at the stock intake, one quick test of their own would immediately tell anyone who actually has such knowledge, of course. The stock 5.4 3V intake hurts power production except in a very narrow range - in the 4700-5000 rpm range. Now in that narrow area of higher rpms, the stock intake isn’t too terribly bad, as the power gains from the Air Force One in those areas were approximately 7-10 HP at the rear wheels (where the gains in that same area with the Airaid unit were just a tad less). So the profile of the results of a well designed aftermarket intake kit for the 5.4 3V F-150 is that the power gains are HUGE in the low end and all thru the mid-range, very impressive everywhere from about 1200 rpm all the way to about 4200-4500 rpm or so – then as rpms rise to peak levels, the gains from a good intake kit are lower, to where at the actual power peak, the gains from the AF1 are roughly 7-10 HP at the wheels, on average over a number of difference vehicles & some variances in test conditions. Now this kind of power gain pattern has never been seen before in the F-150 from an aftermarket air intake kit, and not on any other vehicle we’ve ever tested intake kits on before, either. So it is indeed significantly different from the normal pattern of power gains from typical airflow-based mods, where the gains are usually smaller at lower rpms, and largest at the power peak at higher rpms. This is due to the unique design of the stock factory 5.4 3V F-150 intake being terribly restrictive everywhere except at the very peak. The dimpled expansion chamber you see attached to the air handling tube of the stock intake is supposed to be for reduction of typical “intake moan” – noise. However, we feel that it is also accelerating the airflow velocity (via pressure drop) at high rpms, as the fact is very clear that at power peak rpms (4900-5000 rpm) it is simply not possible to see the kinds of power gains that we see in the 3000 rpm range – we feel that simply can’t be done with any intake change on the 5.4 3V F-150, and it’s certainly never been achieved with any such changes we have tested on the 5.4 3V F-150 – and we’ve tested darn near everything on the market for this application. We can only conclude that this expansion chamber serves the additional function causing a pressure drop to accelerate airflow in a narrow rpm range up top, and that is why huge gains are possible everywhere except at the peak, where the gains are a bit less than what we traditionally see in 1997-2003 5.4 F-150’s.

The bottom line is, a well-designed intake kit can get BIG power gains in areas never before possible on the 5.4 3V F-150 due to the nature of how the stock factory air intake tract functions. This is precisely why in our Troyer Performance Stage 1 kit for the 5.4 3V F-150’s we have always seen almost as much power gain at just 3000 rpm as we do at the power peak around 5000 rpm – now that pattern is absolutely beautiful for a heavy truck that needs as much power gain as possible in the lower rpm ranges, but it’s a pattern that has never been seen before in these vehicles.

Originally Posted by Superchips_Distributor

Now, as to the question of is anyone going to see “lean” conditions – we have a grand total of two vehicles that have to date seen a lean condition reported with the Air Force One intake kit, both of which are earlier build 2004’s, and one of which we just tested a few days ago here at the shop. That was Marc Carpenter’s vehicle, which is an early build 2004 who has been testing one of the final prototype AF1 units for the 5.4 3V F-150. The reason is very simple – it’s not actually going lean – I repeat – THE TRUCK IS NOT ACTUALLY GOING LEAN! What’s REALLY happening is that in the PCM calibration, just like in a few of the other 2004 5.4 3V calibrations, the threshold parameters for reporting lean OR rich codes is significantly lower (tighter) than the PCM’s actual adaptive strategy A/F ratio correction range. What that literally means is that the PCM will report rich OR lean codes long before there is any actual lean or rich condition - while the PCM is still well within it’s A/F correction range, and we have in fact verified that the engine is NOT actually running lean or rich.

Most won’t understand this as they simply do not have any real knowledge of how the PowerPC PCM in these 3V F-150’s works or of it’s strategies (contrary to what some will claim), but the background on this is that there are a significant number of these 2004 5.4 3V F-150’s that have a very odd setup in their PCM - where they will report a lean OR a rich code LONG BEFORE they actually go rich or lean - while adaptive is still making the corrections and achieving stoich A/F in C/L and commanded A/F in O/L. We have in fact verified this. Now this is correctable via one simple adjustment in the tuning of course, by simply setting those code reporting limits to the same limits as the adaptive range, just as is seen in 99.9% of all other FoMoCo vehicles (and other computer-controlled vehicles in general). I want to stress that we did very thorough testing of this, and found that the trims were well within the PCM’s STOCK adaptive correction range, that the engine never actually ran rich or lean, and it only threw a code because the threshold to report a code is much LOWER (tighter range) than the actual adaptive A/F corrective range.

What that actually means is, we were easily able to clearly identify that the trucks were NOT actually running lean – I repeat – NOT actually running lean, but threw codes because they have a much narrower code reporting threshold range than the actual adaptive A/F correction range capability, and thus threw the code even though the truck was not actually lean at all, and was still well within the limits of adaptive strategy’s A/F correction range.

There are some F-150’s & other FoMoCo vehicles that have the PCM set up like this from the factory, where the code reporting threshold is far tighter than the actual adaptive correction range. This is found not just on some 5.4 3V F-150’s, but once in a great while is found on other model years in the 1997-2003 model year range. It’s very rare in the 1997-2003’s, but we are seeing a number of 2004 5.4 3V’s where that is the case. Now we do not see any codes being reported in the 2005’s because Ford gave them a whopping total of 3% (yes, that’s right – just 3%) more effective range for the code reporting threshold, and it’s that 3% that makes the difference – it’s literally that close.

So the bottom line is that there has not been a single vehicle that has actually had a true lean condition with the Air Force One intake kit installed. Period. Air Force One is well aware of this too, as we have provided them with that specific data to support that particular fact.

There have been NO 2005’s that have reported this to us to date, simply because they have 3% (that’s right, just 3% more) range to their code reporting threshold, with the exact same adaptive A/F correction range. Now for anyone that actually DOES have this kind of knowledge, right about know they’re holding their sides laughing at the individual who set those 2004’s up like that, as that just wasn’t a smart thing to do, and it shows because Ford corrected that for the 2005 model year. And it’s that 3% that makes the difference as to whether it will report a code!

But in any case, the vehicle is NOT actually going lean. Anyone who has this happen and wants that corrected can contact us if they have purchased their Air Force One and their custom tuning from us, we will take care of that at no charge, it’s a very simple fix. Those who bought their tuning or their Air Force One elsewhere will need to contact Air Force One.

If there are any other questions about this, give us a call at our number listed below. J

Originally Posted by Superchips_Distributor

Whew, that was quite a mouthful to post, and quite a bit to read, eh?

Sorry 'bout that! I just had to provide as much info as seemed appropriate, without wasting time inundating everyone with needless trivia.

The bottom line is that we're very happy with this intake kit, and everyone of our vehicles runs the AF1 - no, not because we are somehow beholden to AF1, simply because the provide the best combination of raw power & performance gains, the highest quality materials, and the best results.

Just as we always said about the AF1 for the 1997-2003 F-150's, it happens about once every 12th of never that the same part looks the best under the hood, actually does the best job performance-wise, AND uses the highest quality materials - you just don't see hardly ANY part of ANY kind having all 3 of those attributes, yet time and time again, Air Force One manages to do just that.

Now for anyone who just doesn't feel comfortable with the Air Force One, that's too bad, I think it's a wrong decision but that *IS* your choice! In which case, the Airaid is the only other logical choice, as every other intake kit we have tested has caused true lean conditions, and/or was made of low grade materials, or simply didn't add significant amount of power - or was made out of something really dumb like aluminum, which as anyone should know is the absolute WORST material to use for an air handling tube because it takes on heat quicker and rejects it slower than any other material we've ever tested used in any other air intake tract. It cracks me up how a couple of certain intake manufacturers make the claims of the "most dyno-proven horsepower" yet are made of aluminum, and when *we* test them, come nowhere near their claims - just another of the many reasons why we do NOT accept manufacturer's marketing claims (hype) at face value, but instead, do our own actual testing to see what the truth actually is.

Which is generally why you see our customers trucks with the same basic types of modifications out-running other identically-configured trucks with the same mods provided from different manufacturers than what we recommend. *THAT* is why people trust us, and refer their friends & family members to us, as they know they'll get the best results and the truth when dealing with us - because we test.

By the way - one other neat little tidbit we verified once again when we brought Marc Carpenter's truck back in for the last round of datalogging................ we also documented the fact that even in heat-soak conditions (idling for long periods at standstill with no airflow over the vehicle), the Air Force One provided 8-13 degree COLDER Inlet Air Temperatures than the stock factory plastic intake did! Proving once again, just as we proved years ago, the point that the claim from certain intake manufacturers that their black phenolic resin-based plastic intake kits do NOT provide colder inlet air temperatures. Not only did we log the IAT sensor, but we also shot the actual temps using laser-point infrared thermometers as well.

Hats off to AF1 for another fine product, and many thanks to all of you for reading all of this lengthy diatribe!

Our bests to all,