CP-e MAFci : why not ?

[PXLpainter]

Also guys - let's not compare Apples to Oranges here either - the 3.3 V6 in the Gen 2 without any boost is a very different animal here (and of course this IS the Gen 2 and 2.5 thread)

I'm sure there are other very different comparisons one can do on the Gen 1 - 1.5 with CAI for the S/C and possibly neither the PC-e nor the Injen Short Ram would be the answer for you.

I only wish I had that problem! hehe

[Sebas007]

Thanks man...it makes really sense !

Why no upgrading the exhaust system with headers...fix the tiny connection of the 3 pipe in 1...must be very restrictive.

Nice briefing Mr Swindler !

^
i remember from reading a while back that the s/c was never made because of the VVTI being the weak link. Cool slight bump in hp for N/A but the complications with forced induction + the inability to hold boost with the valve overlap.

[Down2TheC]

I think cp-e photoshopped their dyno....
Remember, Injen isn't a new company trying to get started. Why would they lie about this? Unlike cp-e, Injen has been tested and proven for years. Besides, they did dyno at 10-11 HP. Did you even dyno the Injen yourself? I'll bet they'll be on it if not close (depending on dyno) to those numbers.

The cp-e is track tested vs. stock independantly (me). Also cp-e doesn't use their in house dyno for publishing results. They use an off site DynoJet so there's no question. Check Injen's dyno pics...
Plus it doesn't add up that CP-e ran the 3" pipe, no tune, and had <2hp gain. They did the tune to get the gain. Unless the air in CA is special...
Those are my reasons for questioning Injen. And they aren't a new company. Injen has been around long enough to not like competition. They did your proto and said "Maybe in a couple years". Then mysteriously they tossed the pipe into the market once they heard another intake was being made for us. No CARB cert, so that's not the reason. I'm guessing it's because it's just a noisemaker and they knew it.

But it's true, I have not had the opportunity to track-test or dyno-test the injen. Hopefully someday I'll get to the track with an Injen owner and I'll be able to slap the injen on my car for a couple runs.

I'm sorry, I understand this is the best all you gen2 owners got. Is this why you're so biased on this?

Because they have it. Once you try it you know.

P.S. You're right... CEL can't be caused by the INJEN. It's the same cross section as the stock airbox at the MAF. It's basically like replacing the filter box with a round filter.

[PhreakdOut]

I'm not so sure the diameter of the intake pipe has anything to do with the difference in performance between CP-e and Injen. Both pipes have to go through the same diameter throttle body housing. Therefore the maximum flow is determined by the smallest cross section. (When you pinch a garden hose in near the nozzle or the water tap, the maximum flow is the same.)

The 3" diameter Injen pipe should flow more than enough air at atmospheric pressure. If you added forced induction and a larger throttle body then 3.5" would be more ideal. On the filpside, the diameter will definately have an impact on the induction resonance. This explains the difference in sound.

It would be interesting to flow both Injen and CP-e on a Superflow bench while they are still attached to the throttle body. My bet is the flow results are very similar. What would be further interesting is to measure the voltage of the sensor during the test. What voltage is seen at what flow rate. With the CP-e sensor tip being .25" off center of the pipe (pipe is .5" larger in diameter / 2) it would be difficult to get a true reading without the customizer.

If Injen only gains 2 Hp, this can be attributed to more flow to the airfilter. (Ridding the 'Lara of the restrictive intake box.) Certainly 2 hp is nothing to sneeze at. Gains are not very easy on one part alone. Usually you need to replace more than one related item to get a gain. This is where CP-e has the advantage. Retuning the MAF can allow for more fuel to be added. (More air means more fuel is needed. - Duh.) This mod is the easiest thing to do short of remapping your fuel program.

To summarize in simple terms:
- Both give you gains compared to the stock intake box.
- Both increase induction sound.
- IMO - induction pipe diameter will not increase flow through the same throttle body. (This theory needs to be tested)
- CP-e's MAF customizer is the key to their advantages. (Flow, dyno and drag test need to be performed.)
- Injen's pipe will not throw you a CEL if you disconnect the battery before restarting the car. (This was in Injen's instructions. I don't know if the MAF relearns the new flow rate but I didn't get a CEL at all after installing it.)

Just my 2¢ on such a controversial topic.

(Keep in mind, I have no preference either way. I see potential in the CP-e, but it was not available at the time I bought my Injen. I do prefer the polished Injen pipe for asthetics. I did notice increased performance and throttle responsiveness but again, this is compared to the stock air box.)

[Sebas007]

hehehe I like the Duh at the end !!

....This is where CP-e has the advantage. Retuning the MAF can allow for more fuel to be added. (More air means more fuel is needed. - Duh.)....

I like your briefing ! I tested CP-e on dyno and drag I post my result...the best would be to test both product on the same car and same day like swindler and down2thec said.

But one thing is sure...CP-e gives more HP than Injen exactly because of the MAF customizer that allow more air/fuel to get in. All that with keeping a good AFR graph !!

[Astro]

So, I'm curious. Since you're trying to compare them, it would be better to make it fair. I know you can find a used Injen and S-AFCII for about the same price as a new tunable cp-e, why don't you test it this way? I know tuning the S-AFCII may be a little more, but it's more comparable. Also, why not compare the untunable cp-e with Injen. I'll bet here you won't find that much difference.

[Sebas007]

I don't get your point unless it's trying to bash CP-e. I mean tuning the Injen and S-AFCII would cost the their own value in dyno tuning time. Injen 200$ + S-AFCII 300$ + Dyno tuning 500$ (easy 500$)...why don't take a product that is already made and tune for your specific car...that isn't hard to install (3M connectors ) for just 500$ ???????? BTW NEVER run CP-E intake without the MAF Customizer !!!!! Strange as its looks the AFR becoming so but SOOO LEAN that you will damage your engine !

So, I'm curious. Since you're trying to compare them, it would be better to make it fair. I know you can find a used Injen and S-AFCII for about the same price as a new tunable cp-e, why don't you test it this way? I know tuning the S-AFCII may be a little more, but it's more comparable. Also, why not compare the untunable cp-e with Injen. I'll bet here you won't find that much difference.

[Astro]

I'm not trying to bash cp-e. I'm trying to put money aside and compare what would be considered equal. A s-afc tuned Injen vs. a tuned cp-e. Or, even a SS FTC tuned Injen vs. a tuned cp-e (this would apply to gen1 only). This would be a great comparison, I'd love to see how cp-e would fair. For the budget tuner, like most on this forum, this would be great to see, actual results. If I was just starting out, this would certainly help me decide what route to take. If cp-e was out when I started, I'd want to see a comparison, not just what a few people say. Wouldn't you? So, do you understand where I'm coming from?

[Sebas007]

Yeah now I understand what you saying.
I can't wait to see the results !!

I'm not trying to bash cp-e. I'm trying to put money aside and compare what would be considered equal. A s-afc tuned Injen vs. a tuned cp-e. Or, even a SS FTC tuned Injen vs. a tuned cp-e (this would apply to gen1 only). This would be a great comparison, I'd love to see how cp-e would fair. For the budget tuner, like most on this forum, this would be great to see, actual results. If I was just starting out, this would certainly help me decide what route to take. If cp-e was out when I started, I'd want to see a comparison, not just what a few people say. Wouldn't you? So, do you understand where I'm coming from?

[Biggi_e]

i need to make some new clips of the CP-E intake and me making fly bys. i have a fly by but the sound doesnt work..

[Down2TheC]

Phreak nailed it. The 3.5" pipe does nothing on it's own but make deeper sound. The tune is the only difference. But by the same logic, you have to assume that the tune does make a difference, yet both claim the same gain. Someone is wrong. That's all I'm sayin'.

But you're 100% right Astro. They are two different products and I've stressed that for over a year now. Intake vs Intake/pretuned AFC kit.

Until we get a head to head, there's no point comparing them. (dead horse has been thoroughly beaten I think) Still looking for IL or WI Injen owners to head to GLD w/ me. My treat.

P.S. When I said cp-e hooked up the 3" and the 3.5" w/o tune and saw no gains, they did have to hook up the customizer to make a linear conversion to the new flow rate at the MAF. Like Sebas said, you can't run that pipe w/o the chip.

P.P.S. Just to be a pain for Phreak, there is a minor difference in how the two pipes would flow. Bernoulli would have something to say about your post.

[swindler]

P.P.S. Just to be a pain for Phreak, there is a minor difference in how the two pipes would flow. Bernoulli would have something to say about your post.

Down2TheC is right there. For one, air (as a gas) is compressible, whereas water generally is not. While air is being drawn in, there is suction through the intake which can cause compression of the air. If you read up on your fluid dynamics, you'll see that air is considered a compressible fluid, whereas water is considered a non-compressible fluid.

Which is why the comparison of an intake and a water pipe doesn't work.

[PXLpainter]

Which is why the comparison of an intake and a water pipe doesn't work.

That is, unless you're making a bong!

[---CAMRAZY---]

Astro,
I'm just curious...on which facts you base yourself to tell that the 3MZFE is weak ?? I heard too that it cannot take so much boost...but on what you base yourself to tell that ?

After watching JoeB, Rizal, Greg, and Gabe struggle to max out power on the 1MZ over the past few years, I know the 3MZ is in the same boat, if not worse. This is why I think TRD didn't put a s/c on it, I'm surprised they even built one for the 1MZ. Also, someone here blew their 3MZ using a relatively low amount of NOS...

Oh yeah I remember that!!!!! Larry, I agree with you.

[Sebas007]

The main problem is the VVT-i management under boost. The A/F must be tuned to avoid a too lean mixture. I made some research about it...have a future project to put a 6-8 PSI turbo...but first need to manage the VVT-i and find some solution to keep the auto tranny working correclty without slippery...long term project.

Astro,
I'm just curious...on which facts you base yourself to tell that the 3MZFE is weak ?? I heard too that it cannot take so much boost...but on what you base yourself to tell that ?

After watching JoeB, Rizal, Greg, and Gabe struggle to max out power on the 1MZ over the past few years, I know the 3MZ is in the same boat, if not worse. This is why I think TRD didn't put a s/c on it, I'm surprised they even built one for the 1MZ. Also, someone here blew their 3MZ using a relatively low amount of NOS...

Oh yeah I remember that!!!!! Larry, I agree with you.