so how do u prevent the cel with the af1?

 

Amen to that.

 

So Gentlemen, I have an Edge that I run on setting "3" performance w 93 octane gas. If I throw an AF1 on will it give me a CEL? What's the consensus on this? Thanks.

 

Hard to say really. My K&N FIPK intake doesn't cause a lean enough condition to throw a CEL, but the AEM Brute Force did. However, I have a 2004 F150, which supposedly run fairly lean straight out the factory; and many people who slapped on an intake on the '04's were getting lean condition CEL's in one or both banks.

Realize that any lean condition can be fixed with a custom tune, but not with the Edge.

As far as the AF1, I've personally never tried it; but the last I heard, Troyer got the kinks worked out and it shouldn't throw a CEL.

From Troyer's site:

 

In the interest of understanding the verdict, keep what I have, or make a change?

 

Okay Marc, you seem like you've been around the block... should I go with the 3" or the 3-1/4" from Troyer when they write my Xcal2 tunes? I like the versatility of the 3" running it with stock programs, but don't want to cheat myself if the 3-1/4" is THAT much better. Anyone else with experience.... please feel free to chime in as well... the tunes are getting closer as we speak... not much time!

 

Marc,

With all due respect, I would like to challenge a few of your statements.

***When you state that an open element intake design can't be matched in airflow when compared to a closed element intake system, I'm forced to assume that a open element design is actually a typical "filter on a stick" intake design. This assumption is what drove me to respond to your post. If I am incorrect in this assumption, please disregard the following comment(s) and let me know so I may alter my post accordingly. That being said, let me continue to address your comments. ***


Your theoretical expression regarding the airflow characteristics and restriction levels between open and closed intake systems is very interesting. I would love to see the data that supports your claim. It appears to me that you base your statement on the inlet size of the tube alone and totally ignore thermodynamic and fluid dynamic laws.

The cross-sectional surface area of a tube is not the only factor when discussing the airflow restriction for an intake system installed on an engine. Let's not forget the pulses traveling back from the intake valve toward the filter, the Carnot cycle (thermodynamics), velocity decay from the inlet centerline, and quite a few other factors. The inlet size is important, but restriction levels can by improved by addressing other factors as well.

Restriction is a funny thing and it isn't always a bad thing either. The key to understanding and controlling restriction on an intake system is to perform tests in a climate controlled environment for repeatable and accurate data. If one really knows what their doing, the can completely tune the airspeed (velocity) inside the intake to slightly adjust the powerband as well.

My point is that a closed element system can easily outperform an open element system when designed properly; this includes vehicle performance testing and flow bench testing. I have the actual results from our ISO 5011 certified test lab to back up my claims. These test results are posted on our corporate website as well, so the liability factor alone shows how confident we are in our testing.

ISO 5011 Testing Explained

I wasn't going to mention this at first, but I work for S&B Filters. Among my other duties at S&B, I also help develop our new intake systems. S&B has placed a real focus on the performance, function, and design of our new intake systems for 2007. If you've seen our intakes in the past, I can promise you that our new designs are far superior now.

For example: We previously had an intake system for the 5.4L 3V F150, but it wasn't the best system we could offer. After some discussion, we began development on a new system to update our previous design for improved looks and performance. If you take a look at the pictures below, you'll see that we nailed it with this intake system! ($269 retail too!)

Here is our new design that we being displayed at the past SEMA show in my truck.





Below is the actual ISO 5011 test results -
ISO 5011 Certified test results


I danced around with my reply above because there are some variables to consider, but your statement concerning air inlet temps is misleading at best. Let's address your claim about heat soak between the two materials using the links below. If the question is still present, we'll address it at that time.

Understanding Thermal Conductivity

Engineering ToolBox - Thermal Conductivity

 

If you're measuring the temp from outside of the tube, then your test data is completely inaccurate. You need to measure the air temp from inside the tube, as that is what really matters.....cool, dense, air inlet temps inside of the tube feeding the engine.

The easiest way to measure the inlet temps is with a scan tool. You can use the scan tool to monitor the MAF for all the information you need. The voltage signal that the MAF sends the computer is based on real time inlet temp, density, and air speed that the MAF is experiencing. Remember, this is real time data too. Note the readings while the vehicle is static and then monitor the temps as you take the vehicle for a drive. Once you have all the data for both intakes, compare the notes and you'll agree with what I'm saying.

Believe it or not, this is a very common misconception with intake systems. Very soon we'll have data posted on our site that will help everyone understand what our intakes are doing to restriction levels, filter efficiency, ambient noise levels, air inlet temp differences, and much more.

 

Thanks. Now we have hard evidence to compare to. Whats best is you're helping out with the information, and you're direction isn't to sell your product.

 

I have an F150 myself, so selling product isn't why I'm here. It just happens that I stumbled over this thread while searching for answers to the dreaded COP issue. By being an engineer and a gearhead combined, I'm allowed to enjoy talking about technical problems AND having the chance to either learn something new or help someone else along the way. It's the best of both worlds!

 

Knuckleupunk: maybe i missed it but do you have any dyno results of your CAI? Does it have a drone like the volant does?
By the way great information in your previous posts!

 

X2 !!



Since the intake you pictured above seems completely closed, can I assume that it is much quieter than the other CAI’s on the market? I’d be willing to invest in this product provided it doesn’t detract from the civility of my Lariat. I’m 38, not 18, so I don’t want my truck to sound like a “jet” when I push the go-pedal down. When I want to go fast and turn heads, I drive the mustang.

Thanks knuckleuppunk for the very informative post which is backed by factual data and proven laws.

 

Since I am not a site sponsor (yet), please direct all questions regarding our products to me in a private message. Please understand that I am not trying to be rude, but rather respect the rules of this forum.

Now that I've said that - Thanks again for having me!

 

We can't PM unless we have 100 posts and you dont accept emails

 

Interesting.

Well, hang tight guys and I'll get this resolved very quickly. Until then, check out our website (sbfilters.com). You can contact us from there. If you call or email, just ask for Jay and you'll get me.

Thanks again for understanding!