Cai difference?

[huitt06]

5500 first , 5460 yesterday


Sent from your mom's iPhone

[Irnwkrkev]

60' diff = .164
et diff = .002 & -2.14 mph

with a D.A. diff of 40' it shows that the Spectre was a worthwhile upgrade

[jbrown13]

Originally Posted by Irnwkrkev

60' diff = .164
et diff = .002 & -2.14 mph

with a D.A. diff of 40' it shows that the Spectre was a worthwhile upgrade

Except that ET win races, not MPH. In many instances I'll run a faster ET, but a slower MPH, with the car in the same configuration and in similar air, but the fact the 1/4 ET was only .002 quicker leads me to believe there is more to it than the intakes. If he had a bunch of slips with each intake it would be much easier to draw conclusions. That 2.14 MPH difference could be a head wind, which will affect the speed more the faster the car is going, or he could have lifted a little too soon. Looking back at my logs I have many instances where my best 60' did not give me my best ET, and my best ET did not give me my top MPH, nor was my best ET run in the best air of the night. My point is I don't think you can draw any conclusions from just two slips, and the Spectre intake may be better at high speeds and the stock intake may be better at low speeds. IMHO, it's not as simple as some would make it out to be.

[trw427ss]

His 1/8 MPH is down also the ET is the same because of the 60ft!

[Camarojt]

Originally Posted by jbrown13

Except that ET win races, not MPH. In many instances I'll run a faster ET, but a slower MPH, with the car in the same configuration and in similar air, but the fact the 1/4 ET was only .002 quicker leads me to believe there is more to it than the intakes. If he had a bunch of slips with each intake it would be much easier to draw conclusions. That 2.14 MPH difference could be a head wind, which will affect the speed more the faster the car is going, or he could have lifted a little too soon. Looking back at my logs I have many instances where my best 60' did not give me my best ET, and my best ET did not give me my top MPH, nor was my best ET run in the best air of the night. My point is I don't think you can draw any conclusions from just two slips, and the Spectre intake may be better at high speeds and the stock intake may be better at low speeds. IMHO, it's not as simple as some would make it out to be.

ET definitely wins races! Mph means nothing if you are finishing 2nd...except when you are comparing a mod with just slips, mph can tell you alot just like the rest of the slip can tell you alot.
I do agree with what you are saying in that there can be other circumstances that can lead to higher or lower ET or mph.
But just based off of what he has given us so far, the 1st run had a slightly worse DA than the 2nd run and it also had a noticeably worse 60ft but it was faster all the way down the track, but the ET was 100% affected by the 60ft.
So it's pretty safe to say that had the 1st run had the identical 60ft as the stock air box run, the 1st run would be in the 12.5X range which isn't bad at all in that elevation. And would be about right for a CAI vs stock result.

[jbrown13]

Originally Posted by trw427ss @ Futral

His 1/8 MPH is down also the ET is the same because of the 60ft!

What conclusion do you think we can draw from that and why?

I'm not trying to be smart ass, just smart enough to know I don't know as much as I'd like to know. May be a learning experience for me. Wanted to clear that up before someone took offense with my short, possibly curt, question.

[trw427ss]

Originally Posted by jbrown13

What conclusion do you think we can draw from that and why?

I'm not trying to be smart ass, just smart enough to know I don't know as much as I'd like to know. May be a learning experience for me. Wanted to clear that up before someone took offense with my short, possibly curt, question.

With the CAI the car was accelerating faster down the track versus the the stock air intake! Here are the numbers so you can see. He didn't let off early the car wasn't accelerating as fast with the stock air intake.

.........CAI.............Stock
60ft...1.978.......... 1.814 = .164
330ft..5.433.......... 5.305 = .128
1/8....8.269.......... 8.183 = .086
mph...87.10.......... 85.84 = 1.26 mph
1/4....12.756........ 12.754 = .002
mph...109.92........ 107.78 = 2.14 mph

[jbrown13]

Originally Posted by trw427ss @ Futral

With the CAI the car was accelerating faster down the track versus the the stock air intake! Here are the numbers so you can see. He didn't let off early the car wasn't accelerating as fast with the stock air intake.

.........CAI.............Stock
60ft...1.978.......... 1.814 = .164
330ft..5.433.......... 5.305 = .128
1/8....8.269.......... 8.183 = .086
mph...87.10.......... 85.84 = 1.26 mph
1/4....12.756........ 12.754 = .002
mph...109.92........ 107.78 = 2.14 mph

OK, let me put it in old fart words and see if I understand you. Are you saying because the times between the splits (from 60 to 330 to 660 to 1320) were longer with the stock box is telling you that he's accelerating slower and therefore the stock intake is either not giving him as cool an intake air or as much intake air, and he is making a little less HP? If I understand you correctly, that makes sense to me. With us old guys, you youngsters need to explain the obvious sometimes. Thanks.

[huitt06]

That's what I'm hoping^


Sent from your mom's iPhone

[trw427ss]

Originally Posted by jbrown13

OK, let me put it in old fart words and see if I understand you. Are you saying because the times between the splits (from 60 to 330 to 660 to 1320) were longer with the stock box is telling you that he's accelerating slower and therefore the stock intake is either not giving him as cool an intake air or as much intake air, and he is making a little less HP? If I understand you correctly, that makes sense to me. With us old guys, you youngsters need to explain the obvious sometimes. Thanks.

I don't know I may not be as old as you but I'm no youngsters I'm 53 just been doing this a long time. Lol

[jbrown13]

Originally Posted by trw427ss @ Futral

I don't know I may not be as old as you but I'm no youngsters I'm 53 just been doing this a long time. Lol

I'm 69 and only been doing it for a year and a half, so as far as years of knowledge I'm the youngster. A lot of terms seem to have changed, especially gear terms, since my pre-kids days when I was last into muscle cars. In my days we had high and low gears, now they have steep, tall, short, etc., and it confuses the hell out of me. I assume I understood your explanation correctly? Thanks for your help.