Author Topic: Drop in Filter and cat cat back exhaust - WHP gains (Read 6141 times)

Arabas · « **on:** August 20, 2009, 09:58:54 AM »

I found this article on the web and i thought it was a good one to post here. it matches my progress on tuning.
filter first, then catback (also cat somewhere there), then tune...
it is a good thing they dyno'd after each step. i don t know if the numbers are realistic but the whole article seemed fair enough to me.

http://www.gmhightechperformance.com/tech/engines/0909gmhtp_2008_saturn_sky_red_line_cat_back_exhaust_system_ecu_upgrade/index.html

DragonSolGXP · « **Reply #1 on:** August 20, 2009, 10:36:32 AM »

Very Good article. Thanks!

But I heard the K&N filter throws codes? Something to do with the oil from the filter clogging a sensor. Can anyone verify this?

Arabas · « **Reply #2 on:** August 20, 2009, 10:41:04 AM »

I have it on my GT for about two months now (around 1500miles) and it hasn t thrown any code. and it s very hot here (35-40 degrees Celcium - temperature MAY have something to do with oil drooling...

).
i have heard what you say, only as a rumor though, haven t actually verified it by someone..

Uranium-238 · « **Reply #3 on:** August 20, 2009, 10:47:52 AM »

I've got a K&N filter on mine, haven't had any issues.

Then again, I haven't had to clean it yet. I am concerned about getting too much oil on the filter, and that messing with the MAF sensor. Probably will just hit it with some compressed air, and make do with that till I find a solution.

rich71 · « **Reply #4 on:** August 20, 2009, 10:56:36 AM »

i have a k&n on since day 7. NO problems. The key when washing it(i only have 8500 miles, no need to clean yet and the oil hasn't dried up) is REMEMBERING, that less is more when re-oiling. FOLLOW the directions. Just like people have a tendency to overwater plants. you just need enough to cover the pleat THEN let it SOAK in AS directed. Easy. been using them on my other cars for the past decade.

lil goat · « **Reply #5 on:** August 20, 2009, 11:16:53 AM »

I have run K&N filters on everything I own for 20 years, never had an issue, been in the Solstice for 2 1/2 years with no issue. I run K&N oil filters too.

spicy3480 · « **Reply #6 on:** August 20, 2009, 11:23:16 AM »

The K and N filters don't really cause a CEL...they are not oiled enough to do so. Only the Fujita filters on their CAI were causing issues.

Arabas · « **Reply #7 on:** August 20, 2009, 11:28:10 AM »

Hey Steve, the article i posted, would be more interesting if 2nd dyno was done with a Solo cat back and HFcat....
maybe you arrange a test like that in the future for us...

spicy3480 · « **Reply #8 on:** August 20, 2009, 11:42:56 AM »

Sounds cool...I would have to check on that with Jeff. I wonder if he has a dyno near him in Canada.

snaponbob · « **Reply #9 on:** August 20, 2009, 12:07:27 PM »

Comments and observations;
1) EITHER the 2.4 or 2.0 K&N filter will fit in the LNF air box with no issues.
2) K&N's have SO much surface area that they can be quite dirty with no impact on air flow.
3) A K&N might cause a code if it is oiled excessively. The oil can slime up the MAF sensor.
4) The hp gain with the filter (before tuning) is reasonable, but the "nanny" takes 5-10 drive cycles to pull that back.
5) They stated that the Cobalt SS shows more whp and wtq due to its FWD system, but it is far more likely that it is due to ELECTRIC power steering (no engine drag) vs. belt driven PS on the Kappa.
6) The referenced article really needs to be balanced against what is already "known". Looking at the stated whp and wtq on the stock car (~234 and 246 respectively) are the highest numbers I have read anywhere. Usually the numbers are about 225 and 230 each. That reflects ~9% drive line loss vs what most consider to be a more realistic factor of 15-17%.
7) As always, the displayed results are not as important as the GAINS. After all his work they ended up with about +40hp and +60tq. Those are roughly what the GMPP tune will do on a stone stock RL/GXP.

Arabas · « **Reply #10 on:** August 20, 2009, 12:31:12 PM »

nice observations snaponbob.
4) damn that "nanny"!!
6)i cannot question their dyno chart (i don t know a lot about dynos after all). maybe it s not as "strict" or accurate as others (also maybe different temperatures, altitudes, etc..). i totally understand your point and reason though
7) couldn t agree with you more! the gains from the K&N filter and cat back are exactly what i actually was looking for and interested in, since i will have them both on my car soon. regarding the tune, i have no opinion and didn t pay any serious attention since i don t know that garage and i haven t got any tune for the moment.

lil goat · « **Reply #11 on:** August 20, 2009, 01:15:13 PM »

First off I don't like Mustang dyno's and agree with Bob those starting numbers are a bit high, should be in the low to mid 220's, Second off I have done a lot of dyno time with my car and have never seen ANY increase in HP from the K&N filter, it's a better filter for sure but in our cars I find it very hard to believe 8 hp from the filter. I tested my car against another GXP with the same tune, I had the Sol Street Race he was stock. I showed 10 more hp and that is a straight through exhaust NO MUFFLER. I saw DBG's car do a 232 with the same Magnaflow as in the test and everything else stock. So I call BS on the Magnaflow numbers too. As far as the most he could get out of HP tuners was 270, maybe we should give him Martin's number

. Both DBG and I have been in the mid 280's for a year, and that was on a VERY conservative dyno, and before we even had the 5.2 tune. This weekend back on the dyno. We have a stock 2009 Sky coming so we can get a reference, don't think the Z0K sway bar will effect HP to much. We will get an idea of how accurate this dyno is from his numbers.

Uranium-238 · « **Reply #12 on:** August 20, 2009, 02:00:39 PM »

Well, stock except for the drop-in filter.

I'm changing the oil on Friday, and resetting the ECM as well. We'll see what the numbers look like.

lil goat · « **Reply #13 on:** August 20, 2009, 02:09:14 PM »

You do not want to reset the ECM before a dyno run, Lyndon has always told me he wants at least 500 miles on the tune before a dyno run to get an accurate reading. It is better to leave it as is if you want accurate data, our cars are slow to learn sometimes.

Uranium-238 · « **Reply #14 on:** August 20, 2009, 03:49:02 PM »

Then the battery cable stays on lol.

Arabas · « **Reply #15 on:** August 20, 2009, 03:53:09 PM »

Looking forward to see your numbers guys!!! that will be very interesting! plus u will have some fun too with your cars on the way to the dyno

bluemangxp · « **Reply #16 on:** August 21, 2009, 12:24:41 AM »

I've had a Fujita CAI/filter on mine for nearly 14,000 miles. Never a problem.

Arabas · « **Reply #17 on:** August 21, 2009, 01:33:46 PM »

Snaponbob and lil goat got me thinking on dynos, so i checked a July 2007 magazine i have kept that has a dyno for Opel GT.
again Mustang dyno and their result is 230,3whp/5.600rpm.
so i suppose Mustang dynos may not be accurate and precise, but they all show the same thing. so their count is reliable but not accurate (i believe that is the term used for such cases-remember it from statistics at university). it was good to know that the Redline and GT had almost the same outcome (redline being a little more powerfull).
i have alot to learn about dynos !

Kelu · « **Reply #18 on:** August 22, 2009, 04:07:37 AM »

I think Lil goat's dyno day will be more relevant about real numbers on dyno than this article.

1LILNDN · « **Reply #19 on:** August 22, 2009, 01:01:53 PM »

The next Dyno pull you go to take the P/S Belt off if you can and see what the differance will be

News:

Welcome Guest!!!

Author Topic: Drop in Filter and cat cat back exhaust - WHP gains (Read 6141 times)

lil goat

lil goat

lil goat