An Open Challenge to the Aftermarket
 

Intakes - show us it can at least outperform a K&N panel filter on the OEM airbox. Who cares if you can outflow a paper filter element on a totally stock set up.

Exhaust - Show us head-to-head comparisons with other aftermarket CBE's or TP's, not just a comparison with the OEM set up. You can easily find folks who will have other exhausts on their car already who will probably be thrilled to assist you in testing for a discount or free part.

Actually, just showing it will outperform the OEM nismo exhaust (bolted to a Non-Nismo Z that is) or the the S-tune would be useful info.

For LTH's, show us it can outperform a set of test pipes, which can be had at a fraction of the cost.

Wheels - Tell me the weight. If I don't know the weight, all I can base my decision on is bling factor. A lot of guys want to know this simple piece of info that is rarely ever listed.

Would also be helpful to know the range of tire widths that will fit.

For those of you who are already good enough to prodvide this info and make these sorts of comparions on independent dynos, THANK YOU :tiphat:

Hopefully other ambitious developers in the aftermarket will follow suit.

If aftermarket manufacture did that, then no one would purchase their products. It is part of advertising and marketing to exaggerate numbers and capitalize on customer's wishful thinking. All manufactures are there to make money. None of them make products because they care about you and want to help your car make the most power.



That's why the forums is here. It allows individuals to post independent numbers and comparisons.

Captializing on wishful thinking is not acceptable. That's what a scam is.

Hence my challenge.

Consumers who care about where their money is going (and Z parts are, in general, not cheap) should make the same demands.

Listing wheel weights, for example, is not fvcking hard to do...

Likewise, it's not that hard or all that more expensive to demonstrate your intake can outdo a high flow panel filter on the OEM airbox.

If it can't, why should I buy it?

Wheel manufactures intentionally do not post weights. This is a tactic that is used especially by Vossen. Even if you call the manufacture, they will not give you an exactly weight. Reason? They know exactly how much the wheels weight, but the heavy weight factor will deter many buyers. So they try to hide it.

In the end, you just have to do your own research. Manufactures and most vendors are just after your money.

our cars seem to all get to the same spot after full bolt ons regardless of what brand with hfc/intake/exhaust

also jnaut who ran 12.2 has LTH, as well as gears and flywheel, but no one is even close...

I will be doing a test pipe/PE LTH comparison some time in the next month or so, so one of your questions will be answered..

also Stillen has shown countless dyno graphs by them and customers that show gains with the G3 Intakes.. all in which would be more than just KN filters...

there's a ton of dynos on exhausts too, i don't fully understand your beef here..

One this i DEF agree with you on is wheels and there weight... that I never understood... all thought discount tire direct had all the weights on hand when I called of there wheels when I was looking for winter wheels... which was nice

but if its the first mod our cars gain a ton, than dwindle down... but in the end 325whp on a dyno jet seems to be the number with I/HFC or TP/Exhaust

^^^ This is the point of my thread: To call out the BS artists and demand they do a little better.

I do realize some companies post good comparison data/ wheel weights -- I'm neither singling out the heroes or the villians by name, just calling attention to the issue.

Public service for newbies :p

I agree with your comments on the converging numbers as you approach the upper limits, regardless of the specfiic brand of parts, but anyone over 310 on a dynojet is either using STD correction, or has LTH and pulleys.

I haven't seen too many (any?) SAE corrected numbers for a dynojet in the 320's with I/TP or HFC/CBE and a tune (maybe Nismos, but I'm convinced they have different VVEL tuning to help out)...

Keep it on Topic. No Politics!

Any further disregard to the Forum Rules
Will earn the lucky one some time off!!
<<<<<<

I think for the most part the numbers given are pretty close. I'm pretty happy with the results so far

YOU need to do some research yourself. Make an effort. If what you want is what you've said, then it's up to you to make an effort and find the "best" parts for your car. The facts are all over the place. The reviews are everywhere from a very wide range of drivers/owners. (Especially here on this forum.)

I'm not trying to be rude. But you can't expect someone else to do the work for you since you're the one who's spending the money.

And remember..... caveat emptor!!

Yes I can -- they are making the money I'd be spending.

How exactly does a consumer make this determination without buying multiple sets of everything?

If a manufacturer is going to take the time to build a product and gather evidence of its effectiveness on the dyno, he might as well at least show it's better than a high flow panel filter -- that is not an unreasonable request.

Neither is it unreasonable to ask that dealers selling wheels provide some basic info about the wheel. They have them on hand to weigh; I don't until I buy it.

Some companies/dealers already do this -- I'm humbly asking that more do the same.

I'm not asking for exhaustive R&D here...

1) I think the gains of long tube intakes are very well documented at this point and that I have yet to anyone running K&N filters matching power levels of those running long tube intakes even when matched with the intake coupling.

2) Exhausts: you have to consider that it can never be an entirely fair comparison because unless every exhaust manufacturer uses the exact same dyno and the exact same car on the exact same day with the exact same temperatures and ambient conditions... Well, you probably get the drift.

3) I agree whole heartedly, the weights of wheels are very important in my personal decision making and have noticed a fair amount of ambiguity surrounding this topic even from vendors and manufacturers selling them.

it would be nice.

The wheel weights is my biggest complaint, and that one just makes no sense.

Same here. :tiphat:

Really. I have yet to see clear evidence of it outperfoming it -- links? Dynos?

Where is the back to back comparison? SO far all I know is that piping airfrom in front of the radiators (LTI/CAI) makes more power than drawing in in from behind (SRI). However, the OEM airbox also draws air from in front.


Shops have lifts and techs -- invite someone over with their current CBE, swap it out, and face off against the competition.

Now to be fair, that is more work ...

But facing off against a set of K&N panels is NOT a big deal or expense.

There's a new intake under development even as we speak -- I hope they keep this open challenge in mind. :tiphat:


^^^ Hear that, wheel salesmen??? :stirthepot: :stirthepot: :stirthepot:

If you don't know, break out the scale! For 2 - 4K for a set, I think this isn't too much for consumers to ask :tiphat:

The manufactures knows the exact weight of the wheels. It's part of the process of getting the wheels DOT approved. They purposely hide it because they know that once you find out the weight, you will not buy the wheels.

Yes, but the the internal structure of the factory air box is more convoluted than simply having a filter leading into straight pipe. That is where the limitations of the stock intakes are found even with new filters come from and that is why I believe that they can't produce the same power gains as a set of long tube intakes.

Thus, I am calling them out. I am hoping other potential buyers will do the same.

I agree 100% with the theory -- but I have yet to see clear evidence of it. Actually, I was surprised to see the panel filters plus smooth tubes making approximately equal gains.

Also, you keep making reference to the longer tubes as if the tubing length itself (rather than where it pulls air) is important -- it might be, but longer tubes tend to move peak torque down not up. Does that appear to occur with the longer tube intakes? Do they mainly gain in the midrange?

Again, I am looking for clear empirical evidence of performance differences -- how hard would it be to test?

Sounds pretty reasonable to me.

Do you honestly expect manufacturers to do back to back comparisons against competitors parts? You seem more focused on proving all of us Gen3 owners wrong with your k&n drop ins, find someone local and have at it, post up the results.

where are these links of K&N making equal gains ? I have seen numerous G3 dynos.. I have yet to see a single dyno of K&N making 7-8 whp on any car site that I have ever looked at. 350zs did tend to make similar power with stock intakes compared to JWT short ram and same with 370z short ram intakes. But the LT intakes (more a year or so ago ) had dynos popping up with power being made repeatedly... most of it is way up top but power is made... G3 , AEM, and Injen

Here is a link to a dyno, that was the very first thread that popped up when I google searched... made 20 WHP , yes 20 WHP

http://www.the370z.com/intake-exhaus...pressions.html - from RCZ ( repuatable forum member )

and here is one from Semtex, another repuatable forum member who had HFC and Berk CBE + 14.8 WHP

http://www.the370z.com/intake-exhaus...eview-etc.html


ummm, i think that argument should be over :tup:

Go back and look at my dyno thread. Between the K&N and smooth intake tubes I picked up easily in the 10 -12 range total.

I've also seen dynos where the change from G3's is less than 10 whp. Then there's at least one member who gained a whopping 12 whp just from the smooth intake tubes (part of this, is that the first breather mod always seems to make a little extra than the same mod would added later).

In any case, it's not the raw values that matter, it's the % improvement from baseline that matters.

Anyway -- this is why I'd like to see a back to back comparison, same car, same dyno.

If you feel there's no question, and I'm just off base, then don't worry about what I have to say on the matter.


Sure, why not? Why is the burden of proof on the consumer? Why bother to show gains over stock?

I am not the first person who has made the case for the OEM airbox+high flow filters+ smooth tubes -- I'm just going on data.

Anway, I am completely confident that your intake performs better than a SRI and better than the OEM airbox with a paper element. I have no interest in making you feel bad about your purchase.

What I don't want to see are people shelling out over $500 bucks for something that may not be worth it.

But you are right -- in the end, they can decide for themselves. I'm just putting this out there as food for thought.

Anyway, I've said my peace. If no one agrees or cares, so be it -- I'll shut up :rolleyes:

It's not that I don't agree on some level. It would certainly be nice if manufacturers only put out the best products that showed pros and cons against competitors products, but its completely unrealistic, there would be no market.

Regarding the specific comparison we were discussing, g3 vs panels, burden of proof does not apply here. Stillen does not claim to be better than any specific competitors parts, they claim an increase in power over stock. Which is proven. Thats all any part manufacturers do. Why should they be required to prove that their part is better than anyone else's? What happens when a new intake comes out? Is stillen now obligated to do a comparison against EVERY intake that competes with their product? You mentioned "at least compare it to drop ins" but why only drop in filters, where do we draw the line and who decides it?

In the end, it's up to the consumers to decide, as it was and always will be.

No of course not -- I would just like to see clear evidence of how much better the pod does than the panel.

Hell, even K&N won't do that -- and they actually sell both types :p

Of course they're not required, just like wheel salesmen aren't required to post weights -- it's an open request (if challenge sounds too unecessarily aggressive) to the aftermarket to go the extra mile.

Sorry to hammer away once more at the horse's corpse, but just wanted to clarify something regarding K&N panel+smooth intake tubes vs. CAI.

I just went and reviwed 6 different dyno threads, and the average gain from baseline with the CAI was about 5.33%.

I would estimate (based on what few dynos we have) that K&N+smooth tubes will net about 3.5-4% gain.

So what does the extra 1.83% to 1.33% gain in power mean?

Well, on a 275 whp car, it's 4-5 whp.

Thus, the CAI's should net about 4-5 more whp than the high flow panel filter+smooth tube set up.

Is that worth more than double the price ($200 vs $500+)? That's up to the consumer to decide I suppose...

So....

If you are on a budget and want very good bang for the buck -- K&N+smooth intake tubes should get you within a few whp of the pricier CAI.

For the few extra whp, if you have the cash or can get a really good deal on a set, the CAI will slightly (by ~1.5%) outdo the OEM set up with high flow filter and nicer tubes.

:tiphat:

P.S.
All of these are on untuned Z's... it is quite possible that the difference will be less or greater once tuning is brought into play.

However, considering the high degree of convergence for top numbers on fully bolted-on tuned Z's, my guess is that the two set-ups will be closer in gains once tuned, not further away, but it is an empirical question for which more data is needed...

EDIT: I've recently seen evidence of gains closer to 6-8 on the average -- that's quite a bit better than I had found based on other dynos.

So... bang for the buck, the winner is still the tubes plus high flow panels, but IMHO, if you can grab a set of the G3's on sale (say, < $350) it's definitely worth it. Still a bit pricey for the gains at retail, IMO (nearly $500!), but worth it if you can find a set at a good price :tiphat:

I'll see if I can eventualy track down a set for myself, and will share clear back to back runs to better resolve the issue... assuming I can find one on sale... :p

This thread is fairly hilarious - its like the lazymans approach to car modding. Like you should be able to walk into a McDonalds and see everything you wanted to know about every part all nicely laid out for you on a buffet table to choose from.

With your previous post, you've spoken the obvious that everyone already knew - the price/value relationship will generally be drastically inverted the more power gains you have. Of course, this is related to similar parts (you cant compare the value of a 100WHP gain from juice to the cost of 100HP from a supercharger...).

You are not entitled to have all the information you want, simply because you have cash. Sometimes, its even like comparing apples to apples, and its all preference.

Tell you what...how about companies do exactly what you want on one condition: they do it on the same day that every single car/motor from a manufacturer is IDENTICAL to each other, down to the tenth of a horsepower. Enough that whatever mod you do will give the EXACT SAME RESULT on another car. And that is yet another reason why they dont advertise numbers - your results will vary. You even said it yourself - "on average", "should net", "should get you within a few whp". Can you guarantee? No.

Who said anything about entitlement?

This is a request.

Average (or maybe modal) gains are more telling, provided you have enough data points, than extreme outliers (the gain "up to" argument). That doesn't make the information useless. Every car is not all that different -- it's the same motor with only one of two drivetrains (and limited evidence of any loss differences between them).

The biggest variable factors will be type of dynamometer and correction factor. I have a feeling miles of break-in may play a role too. Anyway, that's why I look at (and talk about) % changes rather than raw values -- it's much more consistent.

What's hilarious is the degree of outrage this thread has inspired by consumers... you guys should demand more info not less.

Ironically, the food info analogy is fairly apt: Yeah, I do like knowing the calorie, fat, protien, carb, etc content of the food I eat.

Why is that a bad thing?

Having more info enables you to make smarter choices about what suits your needs, no?

Does that spoil the magic and the mystery for you or something? :icon17:

Are you saying that every hamburger at McDonalds has the exact same caloric count? Or do you think that, for the most part, its "up to" that many calories?

More information never hurts, but you can only realistically demand so much from a company, not to mention if they start throwing numbers around that is just asking for some kind of lawsuits potentially...

Now that you mention it, I have no idea how much variance there is food labeling -- hmm.

Anyway, I'm not demanding anything. No company is even obligated to provide a single dyno to demonstrate the potential gains from its product -- it's entirely a matter of marketing.

In other words, because consumers have "demanded" (requested? Challenged?) additional information, many manufacturers of aftermarket parts provide before and after dynos.

If a new intake comes out, I think it would be interesting to see a three way comparison with paper, high flow, and their new set-up -- that's all I'm saying (hint -- a company is in the process of making one, and the design is promising).

Who knows if anyone will bother to take my challenge/respond to my request -- but if they did, it would be more compelling than providing nothing or simply showing that the new product outperforms a bone stock set-up.

For example, AEM provides comparison data (or at least they used to) for their dry flow filter vs paper vs other high flow competitor products, so what I am asking isn't really all that outrageous.

Likewise, I'd like it if more wheel distributors would provide the weights.

Again, just a request :tiphat:

Honestly, I'm not sure what fired me up enough to make this thread -- but it's generated some interesting discussion :D

The food thing was something I ask myself all the time at the chow hall lol. They post nutritional facts, but in the end, I just have to accept that its an approximation, and I cant expect to know the SPECIFICS for each meal I have.

I agree with all of this but let me say this (and I am gonna catch flak I know), all these peak power measurements are next to worthless on a car driven on the street. One needs to look at the total area under the curve of the useable RPM range. My guess, and no I have not done the math, is that the K&N drop ins (or in my case the AFEs) and HKS tubes
are even closer than that.

Some of you guys are crazy. A dude comes on here asking for the aftermarket to give some validity to their claims, and you say he's lazy?

The sort of **** the car aftermarket pulls on consumers wouldn't fly anywhere else.

I don't think he (or anyone else) is looking for real world track time comparisons. He's just looking for base statistics that are a crucial part of all of these components.

I mean, imagine for a second if Intel or AMD didn't give consumers info on their chip and just sold it as is? Or if an electric guitar maker didn't tell you what sort of pickups you were getting? Or if you bought food and they refused to tell you the ingredients? You get the picture.

It's pretty ridiculous that wheel manufacturers are shady with weight -- especially when they are in the forged market that basically markets to performance buyers. Same for every other type of performance part. I'm not asking for comparison tests -- I just want to know basic figures.

They tell us what we are getting, though. Dyno gains will vary from car to car, and so there isn't really an answer. You wouldn't expect a pickup maker to advertise the exact signal gain that will be experienced in your situation, and AMD/Intel can only tell you how the chip performs on its own.

There isn't enough demand for companies to bother extensive testing. Stillen sells plenty of intakes without much documentation, and they would sell only a marginal amount more if they showed the results of extensive testing.
Most people are more concerned with price than performance. Would you be willing to pay an extra $100-150 for intakes just to have documentation on them?

I agree 100%



:tiphat:

They won't vary that much.

Again, read my comment on how many air filter manufacturers do comparions with competitors.

It won't raise the cost $100 per unit -- frankly, they're way overpriced as it is.

Not really. Are you familiar with the profit margins most of the companies have? They are high relative to most mass-produced products, but pretty low considering how custom they are, and how much R&D goes into each platform.

i gained 10rwhp with AFE drop ins and Post mafs...dyno are here somewhere

Oh? Then why did Stillen go through 3 versions of their intake and sell all three versions. If they had done all of this behind the scenes as R&D only the final one would have been sold.

(Although, credit where credit is due -- Stillen does appear to do much more R&D than other companies.)

This whole argument is reminiscent of the exhaust system discussion...

Again, I suggested that comapnies should consider making compariosns with other competiing products using the products other people already had (no cost for them, maybe a discoun on a part they sell) or a set of inexpensive panel filters -- that's not much more than is already done, but the information would be very useful for consumers.

Remember, we only get the dynos we get because consumers wanted t osee some evidence of gains before buying.

What's fair and sufficient is arbitrary.

That sounds about right -- I bet more at some points under the curve too.

Like I said, about a 5% gain for CAI and about 3-4% for panel filters plus tubes. Very, very close.

Because there is a limit to how much research they can do, and it's fundamentally limited by their funding. The product was good enough to sell at all three points along the way, so it's not like it was some halfhearted effort.

Even if manufacturers were to post comparisons with competitor's product, there is no way in hell they would post a comparison that shows some other company's product is better than their own or even relatively close to their product for a much lower cost. That would just be stupid and kill their business. Why would any company advertise on it's website "here's our product, but it's not as good as this other company's product" or "here's our product, but you can get almost the same results for half the cost". That would kill most if not all of their sales. With that being said, if manufacturers only show comparisons with products that aren't as good while ignoring those that are better, what is the point of the comparison? It does not really give you any useful information. Just my :twocents:

I do agree about the wheel weight issue though. I wouldn't buy any wheels from anyone who won't tell me something so simple and important in my decision making process.