Dyno results not good for C&L airtube.

I dyno'd my truck Fri., and it was down over 20lb/ft of tq and 11hp. The air/fuel was good, the only changes I'd made was a cat back and C&L aluminum air inlet tube. I ran home, got the stock rubber tube, and the power was right back up where it had been (almost, but it was much hotter Fri. than my previous pulls). Just to be sure, we put the C&L back on, and the power dropped off again. Anyone else dyno'd this part?

No but I just ordered it, hmmm. I will conduct some results of my own to verify. I plan on however polishing the inside and smoothing it drastically.

i wish someone would make a powerpipe that would go down into the fenderwell, kinda like the one's anderson ford makes for the mustangs. but like most things, there would be some custom fabs with it, but atleast you would actually get cold air, and the tube would be alot bigger than the stocker.
later
chiz

Thats intresting, sure is a big differance.
On the same day test what was your differance?
I have heard some catbacks cause a slight loss of power, what catback do you have?

I know Ryan orderd one, will be intresting to see his results, he runs a lot of boost so should be intresting.

Hmmm! That is a big difference. I also recently did a dyno on my truck and found a somewhat low dyno and I've got the C&L tube. However, this was my first dyno with the truck so I didn't have numbers to compare with. Did you notice a difference in drivability - meaning did you feel the 20ft lbs of tq/and 11hp loss in driving?

Oh... can you post the dyno so we all can see?

Did you check your vaccum hoses with the inlet tube? I know on my inlet tube that the vaccum lines to the bottom of the tube BARELY FIT. You could be having a vaccum leak if you have the same problem I did. And I don't like C&L anyway.A company that builds a MAF housing 95mm in diameter but doesn't sell the sensor to go with it, NO ONE MAKES IT, and it is ridiculously hard to tune out.

I know for sure that I checked the hoses. Also if I had a vaccum leak, my vac/boost gauge would show a loss too... right? I ended up re-routing the one small vaccum line so it comes around the outside a bit and I've got a lot more clearance now. It isn't as tight to slip it on.

it would show up as a couple of #'s loss. How much vaccum is your truck running. Mine runs up somewhere between 10-20.

C&L sucks. Go with Pro-M or another brand. Whoever does their tuning is a stupid ass. I know of a couple lightning owners that have had the same problem. You get the same crap with their mustang meters too.

I have the tube as well.... but I fail to see how it could cause a loss in power outside of a leak. It has more flow than the stock boot.... and the C&L is smooth on the inside...doesnt have ribs like the stocker does.

Im thinking something else is up... it IS just a tube after all.... are you sure everything is sealing? I know the fittings arent super tight on the C&L



And by the way...the 95mm intake tube/MAF housing that REM sells is in the same boat as the C&L version... 95mm physicaly, but only a 90mm sensor....from what I remember anyhow

Yea no one makes a sensor larger than 90mm.

Originally posted by ITHAULS
I dyno'd my truck Fri., and it was down over 20lb/ft of tq and 11hp. The air/fuel was good, the only changes I'd made was a cat back and C&L aluminum air inlet tube. I ran home, got the stock rubber tube, and the power was right back up where it had been (almost, but it was much hotter Fri. than my previous pulls). Just to be sure, we put the C&L back on, and the power dropped off again. Anyone else dyno'd this part?

Click to expand...

If there's one thing I've noticed with these trucks it's that you need to drive around for a couple days so that the whole system can "learn" whatever you've added.

For example, I put on a K&N (absolutely no other changes) and lost 4rwhp. Another guy the same day added a conical style K&N and lost 9rwhp. A few days later I dyno'd again and I was up 3rwhp with it.

For what it's worth, a buddy of mine got a C&L pipe for free to test out, and he gained nearly 10rwhp with it over the stock rubber boot.

And the final thing to keep in mind is what your intercooler temps were on both runs. Even a 10 degree difference can make a 3-5rwhp difference on a dyno. (Something I've seen happen)

The whole story.....

To clarify, I have had the tube on for a couple months. I did not notice a SOTP difference when I put it on, good or bad. We ran it first with the C&L tube since it was already on there. It was so down on power that we ran it again about 10 min. later and it was down about 5 more hp and tq, due to heat I'm sure. We put the stock rubber one on, with approx 10 min between pulls, and the power shot up 10+ hp and 20+ tq. We waited about 10 minutes, ran it again with the stock tube with the same results. We put the C&L BACK ON, I think out of disbelief, and the power dropped back down the same 10/20 across the board. I don't know how to explain it. The truck even sounded better during the pull with the stock tube on...smoother.

I will say that I have always had very good results on other vehicles and other C&L products, including an 11 sec. '95 Cobra, a low 10 sec. '88 coupe, and my '00 L I had previously all had C&L meters on them. I'm not trying to bash C&L. I would be interested in hearing others' results. I normally wouldn't have even tested a small part like that, I just had an opportunity. I will gladly email the graph to anyone who's capable of posting it.

Edit: I have a stock MAF on this truck.

hmmmm....I'd say heat soak initially since the aluminum maybe retains the heat longer than the stock rubber.
But, swapping it out should have cooled it. So that theory isn't very good.

The inside of my tube is a little rough. Although I had the exterior polished, the inside isn't. There is flashing inside and its not really smoothed out. Who knows, maybe the air is hitting the sides of the tube and causing turbulent air and hampering flow characteristics.

That's my only guess how a tube can cause issues like this.

I have personally seen strange things like this happen.
For instance, we put a friends 96 Mustang GT on the dyno made a few pulls then found out he still had the stock air silencer, we called him a dumbass.....pulled the silencer then dynoed again, he lost 15 rewhp across the entire pull. We backed up that pull with another and found the same results.
So we put the silencer back in and he gained 15 rwhp right back, we made another pull to verify.
We are still scratching our heads over that one. :dw:

Originally posted by CHIZ
i wish someone would make a powerpipe that would go down into the fenderwell, kinda like the one's anderson ford makes for the mustangs. but like most things, there would be some custom fabs with it, but atleast you would actually get cold air, and the tube would be alot bigger than the stocker.
later
chiz

Click to expand...

The problem with making a tube that goes to the hole in the fender is that the engine MOVES (rocks back and forth).


As far as "Letting the PCM learn" that’s BS... when at WOT the PCM goes to tables not adaptive strategy

“Learning” only changes the @idle and @part throttle values not WOT

hope this helps

Originally posted by KB ZILLA

We are still scratching our heads over that one. :dw:

Click to expand...

I think the same thing can be said about the air box's on L's too. I know mines better with the stock box a cold air hose hooked to it.

I agree. I need to get an open filter thing with a PSP/JL setup.

No one else has dyno'd this part?

Just for shits and grins I'll pulling mine off before I go to the track this afternoon.