Well, yeah, I guess that's what I'm saying. Unfortunately the associated power increase isn't there. I'm not sure if they are actually working that much harder, or if the ECU only sees them as working that much harder. All these results were taken from data logs on a UTEC, so that only reports the information the ECU sees.

 

i ahve had a CAI, short ram, and Stock box, both with and without a snorkelectomy. with the CAI, my inj duty cycle was 98%, but dropped to 89% when i replaced the uppipe with a catless one. the air pulses freak teh MAF out, giving the engine a lean signal...which in tuen makes the injectors go rich...even with tuning..it is REAL hard to get that out. at point in the fuel maps, it actually does run the engine lean...

besides...a CAI doesnt do shit on a WRX. cool air..right into the HOT turbo. yes...your IAT is going to be lower, but the ECU takes readings off of both the IAT, which is in the MAF, and the IAT in the intake. that is what i have come to the conclusion, judging by my experiences with it. you get more HP increase with a better IC setup. bottom line is that the factory air intake system on the WRX is WELL engineered, no iomprovements are needed untill you start makin a lot of power, or run a FMIC which takes up the spot of the airbox.

on a side note: if you have the AEM CAI, it works well as a short ram, just remove the lower portion of the tubing. it fits nicely. i am making a bracket up to hold it solid, just to keep it off my IC piping.

 

You started it when you called me a jackass. Again, go read my original post, and you'll see its not me being an ass, just making a correction. And if you are never corrected in life, you will never learn. So excuse my "civic" ass for trying to help you.

 

You still don't understand Rguy. It did not need to be corrected. Subaru owners call it an intake silencer. Therefore it is fine if I call it that, since it's my car. I'll call it whatever I want, and you didn't need to post to TRY and correct me. To mpg, I did not remove the intake silencer for cold air, I simply removed it so that I could hear the car better. I like driving around w/o the radio and just listening to the car. That is the ONLY reason I removed it. I know it does not improve performance. But thanks for your input.

 

damn.....this is goin on for ever. let it go.

 

Resonator/silencer...either way I'm faster than you all!

HA! Now get back to telling Ben how cool he is for buying a WRX and where he can find some altezza's!

 

really? we may have to see about that......if i can get her to stay together long enough.....

 

If you're calling it by the wrong name, it needs to be corrected. And i dont care if every subaru owner calls it that, it does not make them right.

 

98%!!!!! That istn safe! I have a question for ya. Where is the MAF sensor located on your car? Just after the filter, or further back? Turbulent air will mess up MAF sensor readings. Example. Mike Kojima working on the Z car. It did great on the dyno, but when they took it to the track they had problems. When the car is going 100 mph, the filter was being hit with 100mph air. They simply made a shield for the filter so the air didnt hit it directly. Problem solved.

-Mike

 

its not like a dsm....its right before a nice sharp turn for air to flow. a CAI changes the radius of the bend...henceforth, creating turbulence. but...when you rid yourself of the exhaust restrictions...it goes away. funky..but works well.

the MAF is about five inches away from the filter. stock. two feet on a CAI.