LNF MAF tuning - Cobalt SS Turbo with K&N SRI vs stock airbox, Mass airflow question

Printable View

03-23-2016
metroplex

LNF MAF tuning - Cobalt SS Turbo with K&N SRI vs stock airbox, Mass airflow question

I tuned my LNF Cobalt SS Turbo about 3 years ago for the K&N SRI and the GM Stage 1. It runs fine, but after playing around with my 2014 Taurus SHO, it got me thinking about the exact gains from the K&N SRI vs stock airbox, because the K&N SRI has almost zero heat shielding - causing it to become a hot air intake in the summer.

I looked at the MAF vs Frequency table, and checked the delta for the tuned values vs the stock values. I saw a maximum of 2.5 lb/min (about 150 lb/hr) difference at the 8-9 kHz region. If we go by Garrett's estimate of 10 hp per lb/min of airflow, that's a maximum of 25 hp. But on my naturally aspirated Mustang GT (4.6L 3V), I'm maxing out around 28 lb/min but it is making well over 300 hp.

On my 2014 Taurus SHO, I see a max of around 38 lb/min at 5000-5500 RPM, 150% load. The engine makes around 365 hp stock, and I saw an average of 36-37 lb/min with the peak of 38 lb/min. But that PID was "Turbo Mass Flow".

But bottom line is that I'm seeing around 0.1 lb/min difference on the K&N SRI up until the 8-9 kHz region, where I then see about a 1-2.5 lb/min maximum difference - and that's it. If this is accurate, then it seems to be me there's not much of a gain with the K&N SRI??
03-23-2016
T-Man

Quote:

Originally Posted by metroplex

I tuned my LNF Cobalt SS Turbo about 3 years ago for the K&N SRI and the GM Stage 1. It runs fine, but after playing around with my 2014 Taurus SHO, it got me thinking about the exact gains from the K&N SRI vs stock airbox, because the K&N SRI has almost zero heat shielding - causing it to become a hot air intake in the summer.

I looked at the MAF vs Frequency table, and checked the delta for the tuned values vs the stock values. I saw a maximum of 2.5 lb/min (about 150 lb/hr) difference at the 8-9 kHz region. If we go by Garrett's estimate of 10 hp per lb/min of airflow, that's a maximum of 25 hp. But on my naturally aspirated Mustang GT (4.6L 3V), I'm maxing out around 28 lb/min but it is making well over 300 hp.

On my 2014 Taurus SHO, I see a max of around 38 lb/min at 5000-5500 RPM, 150% load. The engine makes around 365 hp stock, and I saw an average of 36-37 lb/min with the peak of 38 lb/min. But that PID was "Turbo Mass Flow".

But bottom line is that I'm seeing around 0.1 lb/min difference on the K&N SRI up until the 8-9 kHz region, where I then see about a 1-2.5 lb/min maximum difference - and that's it. If this is accurate, then it seems to be me there's not much of a gain with the K&N SRI??

On the stock turbo, the K&N offers little gain in terms of power over a modified stock air box (ZZP intake tube, modified snorkel, drop in filter). However, with the ported big wheel turbo that both I and my pop run, there is quite a bit of a power difference between our cars and the only major difference is our intakes. I have the modded air box and he runs the K&N SRI. There is anywhere from 10-15whp difference between us throughout the curve.
03-24-2016
TurboCobalt

metroplex, to my understanding that's not how it works.

Tuning the MAF is done so that the MAF reads the correct real airflow. when you change intake you change how the air passes by the sensor, and what gets registered. so comparing MAF calibration values before and after the tune will only show you how much the sensor was skewed due to new hardware, not how much more air is ingested .

If you want to see the difference in airflow due to hardware change you'd have to try this:
stock box, tune MAF so that it is accurate, and record max airflow, ( ex. 32 lbs/min air).
then change to k&n intake, tune MAF again so that it's acurate, record new air flow (ex 34 lbs/min).
Assuming both your MAF tunes are correct to their respective hardware, then u'll notice (ex: 2 lbs/min) gain due to the hardware change.
03-24-2016
cobaltssoverbooster

^thats correct.

upgrades can only be compared after they have been accounted for within the calibration software.

as mentioned the intake kits dont really pull big numbers on a factory turbocharger as the turbine side will choke you off before you ever see the flow benefits.
on a gt2876R, gt30, 6266, or efr7062 of course the gain is easily verified because those unit handle almost double what the factory unit can take.
03-25-2016
T-Man

Quote:

Originally Posted by cobaltssoverbooster

^thats correct.

upgrades can only be compared after they have been accounted for within the calibration software.

as mentioned the intake kits dont really pull big numbers on a factory turbocharger as the turbine side will choke you off before you ever see the flow benefits.
on a gt2876R, gt30, 6266, or efr7062 of course the gain is easily verified because those unit handle almost double what the factory unit can take.

My big wheel R is a hungry little fella LOL
03-25-2016
cobaltssoverbooster

Quote:

Originally Posted by T-Man

My big wheel R is a hungry little fella LOL

yea you might see a fair flow gain on that.
03-25-2016
T-Man

Quote:

Originally Posted by cobaltssoverbooster

yea you might see a fair flow gain on that.

In comparison with my Dad's car, all else being equal, he makes a bit more power than I do and is pulling up into the low 10K HZ range on the MAF. Now I just need to bite the bullet and go for one myself.

I was doing some looking around the other day and found the intake that you had made with your Supra intercooler piping and really liked it! It was perfect IMO.
03-25-2016
cobaltssoverbooster

it needed a reducer coupling to not cause problems at the turbo but if you want to make it i slaughtered a gm fuel filter to get the pcv tube that got jbwelded into place