Air Intake Information for GM's 3.6L V6

[scrming]

Originally Posted by curtis0407

Hello everyone... I've been cruising around the sight for about a month now, reading and researching all that is being written about the V6 Camaro in hopes of eventually making a well formed decision when it comes time to lay down some money for one.

That said, I was struck by the following:



Does this mean that an Airaid modified Camaro V6 will perform as well @ 7000 feet as it would at sea level? As you may have guessed - Santa Fe is up at 7000 feet...

Nope... you will still have "thin" air... a CAI doesn't change the air density....

[scrming]

Originally Posted by HokieERVet

So will relocating the IAT sensor outside of the MAF sensor, as some are doing to get a colder air read, cause any issues with the PCM calculations making it "reset" and prevent gains?

Does not appear to... My long term fuel trims are +/- 1.6% and it appears that the car is running about 4 or 5 more degrees of timing...

[calflan]

Originally Posted by scrming

Nope... you will still have "thin" air... a CAI doesn't change the air density....

True, but you'll have more airflow, ultimately providing the same affect as more dense air from the stock system. So I'd bet the Airaid system at 7000 would be comparable (or better) to a Sea level stock system.

[scrming]

Originally Posted by calflan

True, but you'll have more airflow, ultimately providing the same affect as more dense air from the stock system. So I'd bet the Airaid system at 7000 would be comparable (or better) to a Sea level stock system.

Nope... Not even close... Yes you are moving more air but it still has less oxygen! You are just moving more "thin" air! It has to do with the composition of the air, not the volume...

Ok... The Jannetty test showed the Airaid added 9RWHP to a stock SS... so let say we give Airaid the benefit of the doubt and say you pick up 11RWHP. Now using a DA calculator looking at 7000 feet, if you run say a 15.00 in the 1/4, the DA calc says that if you run that same car at sea level you are looking at upper 13's. So clearly a full second faster. It takes a LOT more than 11 RWHP to make up a second! Rough number is about 10HP = 1/10th second...

So adding an Airaid my give you gain you .1 or .2 in the 1/4 mile... it certainly won't make up the difference between 7000 feet and sea level...

[Xanthos]

Originally Posted by scrming

Nope... Not even close... Yes you are moving more air but it still has less oxygen! You are just moving more "thin" air! It has to do with the composition of the air, not the volume...

Ok... The Jannetty test showed the Airaid added 9RWHP to a stock SS... so let say we give Airaid the benefit of the doubt and say you pick up 11RWHP. Now using a DA calculator looking at 7000 feet, if you run say a 15.00 in the 1/4, the DA calc says that if you run that same car at sea level you are looking at upper 13's. So clearly a full second faster. It takes a LOT more than 11 RWHP to make up a second! Rough number is about 10HP = 1/10th second...

So adding an Airaid my give you gain you .1 or .2 in the 1/4 mile... it certainly won't make up the difference between 7000 feet and sea level...

I was going to say something along these lines, but you beat me too it and worded it better than I probably would have anyway.

Heh.
- X

[fastal]

Originally Posted by scrming

Nope... Not even close... Yes you are moving more air but it still has less oxygen! You are just moving more "thin" air! It has to do with the composition of the air, not the volume...

Ok... The Jannetty test showed the Airaid added 9RWHP to a stock SS... so let say we give Airaid the benefit of the doubt and say you pick up 11RWHP. Now using a DA calculator looking at 7000 feet, if you run say a 15.00 in the 1/4, the DA calc says that if you run that same car at sea level you are looking at upper 13's. So clearly a full second faster. It takes a LOT more than 11 RWHP to make up a second! Rough number is about 10HP = 1/10th second...

So adding an Airaid my give you gain you .1 or .2 in the 1/4 mile... it certainly won't make up the difference between 7000 feet and sea level...

Sadly this is very true. I live near Denver and our local track is at 5800'. I haven't gotten my 2010 to a dyno yet but my 2000 Z28 has seen quite a bit of dyno time. Typically the correction factor on the dyno is between 1.2 and 1.25. So while my 2000 Z28 dynos at 405 with correction factor, the actual rear wheel is around 335hp.

I've decided with my 2010 my goal is to modify it to stock sea level performance. Since I'm at a lower altitude then 7000' I figure I need to add an actual 30-40HP. I figure I'll need a CAI, cat-back, and headers. On the headers I'm waiting until spring to see results people get from the various short and long tube. I'm guessing now that I'll have to go with longtubes to meet my goal. The only other thing that might help is tuning.

For a car guy I really hate living at high altitude On the other hand everything else is awesome, especially since I bought my house in a non-emission county so long tubes are easy to justify.

[Xanthos]

Originally Posted by fastal

Sadly this is very true. I live near Denver and our local track is at 5800'. I haven't gotten my 2010 to a dyno yet but my 2000 Z28 has seen quite a bit of dyno time. Typically the correction factor on the dyno is between 1.2 and 1.25. So while my 2000 Z28 dynos at 405 with correction factor, the actual rear wheel is around 335hp.

I've decided with my 2010 my goal is to modify it to stock sea level performance. Since I'm at a lower altitude then 7000' I figure I need to add an actual 30-40HP. I figure I'll need a CAI, cat-back, and headers. On the headers I'm waiting until spring to see results people get from the various short and long tube. I'm guessing now that I'll have to go with longtubes to meet my goal. The only other thing that might help is tuning.

For a car guy I really hate living at high altitude On the other hand everything else is awesome, especially since I bought my house in a non-emission county so long tubes are easy to justify.

You might actually be ok with just intake/exhaust/shorties.

However, I'm also waiting to see how the shorties vs. longtubes turns out.
- X

[MontyCarlo]

There will be some point where a camaro with an Airaid intake will have the same mass airflow as a stock car at sea level, but it's probably in the 1,000-2,000ft range.

Air pressure (and density, assuming temperature's the same) going into the engine depends on outside air pressure minus pressure loss through the intake. The Airaid intake will have a smaller pressure loss, so it'd definitely be able to go to some higher altitude and get the same flow density into the engine as a stock system at sea level, but exactly what altitude? Can't calculate that without some fluid flow modelling. Now, if somebody wants to send me CAD data for both intakes...

[Airaid Filters]

Originally Posted by calflan

Dave, so pulling fuses 5 and 20 (reset of power to the ECM) are NOT required it would seem. If there is not an engine light illuminated, the system recognized proper sensing requirments and performance gains are immediately available, would'nt that seem the case ?


This supports Scrming's quiry about mounting the temp sensor outside of the flow tube. If the sensor notes a colder - more dense - ambient temp, the ECU / car performs better.
'Within an allowable spec' does not mean a predetermined power level does it ? In other words, the ECU has a set target torque / power rating and therefore based on sensor inputs, compensations or adjustments will be made to maintain a set performance level ?




I agree completely that Airaid's system provides increased air flow, function and fit very well - first hand testimonial, have had the system installed approx. 2 weeks now. Additionally, based on Airaids testing, the system also satisfies required parameters for the ECU sensors, since the ENGINE light does not remain on after installation. But again, is the ECU returning performance to a set level, to maintain a burn level the ECU 'wants' ? May be more a Chevy question than Airaid I suppose.

Dave, thank you for posting. Your attention to customer detail and inquiries only make me more satisfied that I purchased an Airaid system.

Hello calflan,

That is correct; you do not need to pull the 5 and 20 fuses. If installed properly, there should not be a CEL.

WE do no recommend relocating the IAT sensor. All that is going to do is “Trick” the computer, which could end up with timing issues and other problems down the road. The Airaid is a true cold air intake system and pulls true cold air and that is what the IAT temp sensor is reading.

Thanks,
David

[Airaid Filters]

Originally Posted by HokieERVet

So will relocating the IAT sensor outside of the MAF sensor, as some are doing to get a colder air read, cause any issues with the PCM calculations making it "reset" and prevent gains?

Hello HokieERVet,

Its possible relocating the IAT could result in a PCM issue. Relocating the IAT sensor is only going to "Trick" the computer into reading a false reading which could cause timing and other issues down the road.

Airaid does not reccomend relocating the IAT sensor.

Thanks,
David

[esperman]

Originally Posted by David@Airaid

Hello HokieERVet,

Its possible relocating the IAT could result in a PCM issue. Relocating the IAT sensor is only going to "Trick" the computer into reading a false reading which could cause timing and other issues down the road.

Airaid does not reccomend relocating the IAT sensor.

Thanks,
David

Thanks for your input on the forum David.
I'm super happy with my Airaid and see no reason to modify any sensors.

[fastal]

Originally Posted by Xanthos

You might actually be ok with just intake/exhaust/shorties.

However, I'm also waiting to see how the shorties vs. longtubes turns out.
- X

When it comes to modding a car I'm a pessimist. I'd rather overshoot my goal then miss it by a bit

[curtis0407]

Nope... Not even close... Yes you are moving more air but it still has less oxygen! You are just moving more "thin" air! It has to do with the composition of the air, not the volume...

Ok... The Jannetty test showed the Airaid added 9RWHP to a stock SS... so let say we give Airaid the benefit of the doubt and say you pick up 11RWHP. Now using a DA calculator looking at 7000 feet, if you run say a 15.00 in the 1/4, the DA calc says that if you run that same car at sea level you are looking at upper 13's. So clearly a full second faster. It takes a LOT more than 11 RWHP to make up a second! Rough number is about 10HP = 1/10th second...

So adding an Airaid my give you gain you .1 or .2 in the 1/4 mile... it certainly won't make up the difference between 7000 feet and sea level...

I guess I need to move to California then... :(

Seriously, I appreciate the feedback. It is kind of a pain living up so high in terms of being a car-nut and a little power hungry. I guess the good thing about this is that every one else living here in SF has the same thin air to contend with - so all of our cars are SLOW!

I guess I may have to go after an SS after all...

[scrming]

Originally Posted by David@Airaid

Hello HokieERVet,

Its possible relocating the IAT could result in a PCM issue. Relocating the IAT sensor is only going to "Trick" the computer into reading a false reading which could cause timing and other issues down the road.

Airaid does not reccomend relocating the IAT sensor.

Thanks,
David

It's not a "Trick"... the stock MAF/IAT suffers from heat soak. This simple and inexpensive mod combats that. Do a google on "GM MAF heat soak". It's a very common issue and pretty well documented....

I constantly monitor my ECU... I have had ZERO issues... my fuel trims look good, my timing looks great and spark retard is fine. And there are lot of other guys out there that have done the same thing on their other GM products.... again, don't seem to find anyone complaining...