Before you write this thread off, I did a lot of searching for the answer to this and I couldn't quite get the right data.

Has anyone tested the stock airbox (no mod, just the stock airbox/stock snorkle, stock paper filter) with ZZP tube and compared it with the K&N SRI?

I currently have the K&N SRI and I flow a max of about 32-33 lb/min and I saw someone mention they were getting 34-36 lb/min with a ZZP Tube with airbox mod. I have HPTuners so I've tuned for my K&N SRI. But the amount of hot air it can ingest from the engine compartment has me wondering about whether I should go back to the factory cold air intake.

I monitor my IAT and post-intercooler temps and the intercooler seems to do a great job at the track, but I always wondered whether I could go back to the stock airbox with maybe a ZZP Tube to get better results due to more cold air coming into the engine.

So far the only threads I've seen are for the ZZP tube plus airbox mod, and all of the pics for the airbox mod are down. No one seems to have tried just the ZZP tube. From the text in the airbox mod thread, it sounds like the snorkle has a part that comes down to a smaller diameter in the middle?

My guess is this is for proper pressure/flow and possibly to prevent water ingestion.

My 2014 Taurus SHO runs 12.6 in the 1/4 with the stock airbox, stock snorkle, and stock paper filter, and only has my tune and colder spark plugs. I don't feel the plugs were needed, nor is the colder t-stat necessary. Everyone that has run a "cold air intake" on the SHO seems to feel they weren't worth it and have gone back to stock. This got me thinking if the SS/TC is the same way.

 

I get 34ish with the k&n it might be your tune. The stock airbox moves air fine the k&n adds noise and some higher rpm airflow.

 

How much boost are you running? When I ran 20 psi, it was a max of about 32.5-32.9 lb/min. Once the salt goes away, I'm going to test my 22 psi tune.

How much air does the stock airbox flow, and with the ZZP tube? I never datalogged the SS/TC when it was stock, which I should have done.

Does the stock airbox + tube match the K&N for flow or, will I see slower times with the stock airbox?

 

32 to almost 35 (based on tune) are pretty normal. I think the free flowing air filters help with response but I don't know that they flow more than the setup you are talking about. Even though everyone thinks they do. I run a CIA over the k&n but my car isn't driven in the rain or snow. I would agree that especially setting at a light or on a starting line, the k&n would pull hotter air, but once you get the car moving I don't know that it's as bad.

 

I have some datalogs from last April where ambient was 55F. My IAT2 never dropped below 75F but my IAT never dropped below 95F (40F over ambient) and that was basically slowing down from 110 mph at the track. Otherwise it would stay quite high. But if IAT2 was only 20F over ambient, does it mean the intercooler is taking care of the heat that the intake is ingesting from the engine compartment?

I think I need to run a bit more boost to reach the 34 lb/min flow at a reasonable RPM.

 

You wouldn't see 34 until about 5,000 and up rpm. I will look at my data logs with my cold air intake and see what they read.

 

Do you recall what boost you're running?
With about 21 psi, I saw 33-33.7 lb/min near 6000 RPM. I think I may need to step it up to about 22-23 psi. The K04 compressor map shows it maxes out around 34 lb/min anyhow.

 

Based on some math, it sounds like if I want to shift at around 6000-6250 RPM and reach 34 lb/min, I'd need about 23-24 psi of boost. Does this sound about right? If I set it for 22 psi, I'd have to shift it at 6250 or higher.

The dyno curves for the LNF don't seem to make it look like it'd enjoy shifting at much higher RPMs?

 

Currently I'm running a k04+ and I see 39 on it but it's above 5,000. Honestly on the k04 you can push 25 with 93 octane gas with a decent tune. It runs out of air past 5750 and that's where I would shift. You can go higher on the rpm but the turbo can't keep up and hp just starts dropping.

 

At 20.5-21 psi, I had to rev to 6500 RPM or higher to see 33 lb/min with the K&N SRI (Stock K04).

I ran the numbers, and I think I'll need about 23-24 psi to see 34 lb/min at 6000 RPM.
Could I realistically achieve this with the stock airbox and stock paper (well, it's actually like fiberglass / polyester and not paper) filter?

 

That sounds about right. Airflow is only part of it though as you have to have the fuel trims set correctly along with timing. Who are you tuned by?

 

I've been tuning it myself. The fuel trims are within 3%.

I'll give the stock airbox and paper filter a try and stick with the stock airtube. I'm wondering if anyone has run the stock setup with more boost? I looked at the K&N panel filter and it seems to have less surface area than the stock polyester fiber filter.

 

Buy my ZZP tube/K&N panel combo and test it out for yourself. Everyone will have differing airflow results as everyone will have a different % of skew. Same with weather variables.

$50 bucks + shipping (pics in F/S area) and they're both yours.

FWIW, on the stock turbo, I saw no difference between the K&N intake and my ZZP intake tube/K&N panel. However, once I switched to the K04R and was moving a bit more air, the factory airbox became a restriction. I found noticeable power gains between the two setups and I guarantee it would be exacerbated with a larger turbo moving even more air.

 

I think I maxed around 33 lb/min on the stock intake parts, with a K&N drop in filter. That's at 23-24psi (can't remember the rpm). I have used everything in the tune I can to hold that boost, but it will start dropping off around 5200-5300 rpm. By 6300 I think it has fallen to 20.5psi.

I tuned my fuel trims on both a new factory AC Delco filter, and a freshly cleaned drop in K&N filter and noticed a few interesting things. On the MAF correction table the AC Delco was more efficient at low and medium loads (meaning my correction in the table were a little higher in those areas compared to the K&N correction factors). But the K&N needed much higher correction numbers in the mid/high rpm high load areas. For example the AC Delco filter might need 2-3 in the high load areas, where as the K&N needed 7-10, indicating the K&N was much better at flowing at higher flow rates, but was actually a little worse at flowing at lower flow rates. So it seems the K&N drop in filter is worth a little more flow at WOT high load.

 

For your boost, did you raise your desired air load values out to 6500 RPM? There's also a Pressure RPM table that you could raise at the higher RPMs. Did you also run 100% for the max torque table?

So it sounds like the K&N SRI isn't really useful especially if the stock intake can flow the same air mass, but the hot air can't be good for power output.

 

For your boost, did you raise your desired air load values out to 6500 RPM? There's also a Pressure RPM table that you could raise at the higher RPMs. Did you also run 100% for the max torque table?

So it sounds like the K&N SRI isn't really useful especially if the stock intake can flow the same air mass, but the hot air can't be good for power output.

 

K&N intake does not take in hot air if the car is moving. I can imagine why you would need all that power in idle. Not to mention the intercooler does a pretty good job keeping the intake temps close to ambient.

 

CudaJoe: I have logs from my 1/4 mile passes last April. I think the absolute coolest IAT temps were like 20F above ambient while at speed. Usually it is about 30F above ambient at speed. When idling, it can be about 80F above ambient and that's during an early Michigan spring temperature (mid 50s). In the summer time, that K&N is cooking.

It's true the intercooler is very effective, but from what I have read, there's a big difference between compressing heated air and compressing cooled air.

On my 2014 SHO with the factory airbox, the IAT temps are averaging 10F above ambient at speed and about 20F-30F above when idling and it can go up if there's enough heat.

If the stock airbox + panel filter is flowing the same mass of air as the K&N (which seems to be limited to the K04 at around 34 lb/min), then wouldn't the colder air be better?

 

Yes DAL was kept high until 6500, along with the pressure RPM table set so that it does not limit boost under 27psi. 100% for max torque. Even pushed the WG duty cycle to 100% for the higher rpm where boost started to drop off.

I would think the turbo has a bit more left in it if I tightened up the waste gate. Any other platform I have played with (older tech) that has an internal WG turbo benefited from tightening or increasing the WG closing spring. Small turbo's pushed hard usually are blowing the WG open from excessive back pressure when pushed to the limits. If you can hold the WG closed with a little more force then there is usually a little more left in the turbo. But I asked in another thread if people have already tightened the snot out of the WG adjustment rod to try for more boost, and the answer was yes, but it did not help. Seems strange to me, but maybe the factory adjustment of the WG rod was tight enough to take the turbine side all the way to the choked flow point (which is the true max that the turbine will flow if there was not a waste gate at all).

Can't comment much on the SRI, but it might help a little, but then again increased flow might be offset by warmer intake temps before the turbo for little to no gains. I know my IAT2 is pretty close to ambient when the car is moving at all (less than 10 degrees, or better).

 

Interesting. I was able to hold 22 psi out to 6500 RPM, but I didn't try to raise it to 24 psi yet.

 

I suppose the factory adjustment of the wastegate rod will create some normal variation. Also what condition the CAT's are in, as any exhaust restriction will start to degrade the boost that can be held.

Any exhaust upgrades on your car? That would make the most noticeable difference for boost improvements (compared to intake upgrades).

 

My exhaust is totally stock. I didn't set up the tune correctly and it went into overboost at the track. But otherwise it was holding 21-22 psi out to 6500 RPM. If it is the condition of the cats, then it's probably because I haven't logged many miles on the car.

 

Older cats can become more restrictive. I have 150,000 miles on the car, so that might be one of the differences in boost held over 6000 rpm. We are pretty close really, as I was 20.5 at about 6300 rpm. Our gauges could easily be 0.5-1 psi different from the variation in new (or especially older) map sensors voltage output.

 

I was looking at my temps during my drive to and from work yesterday in 63*F weather. I did not see these giant temp swings you were seeing. In fact, both IATs were within 1 degree of each other around 68-69*F. Of course I am not running the car on a track so more load and stress could make it hotter but I cant see the IATs being that much higher than Ambient while the car is in motion.

 

IAT2 is much closer to ambient because of the intercooler. But the IAT1 readings are much higher if I'm not moving very quickly or there's stop/go driving. At the strip, it's worse because of the extra heat coming from the engine and when you're stopped in the pit lanes or waiting in line.