Mikula

Brush. I never liked the spray stuff. I didn't tape a single thing off, just removed the pads from the calipers (they pop right out, no tools required to get the pads out). really simple project.

well.. y'all successfully derailed this thread.

Mine is a 2016 2.7 ecoboost, and is a different design than the 2014. it is true dual from the turbos back, no y-pipe. I did not change the stock cats, but from the cats back, I fabbed a 2.5" exhaust, so that is no longer an issue. I'm interested to work together to see if we can do something about this intake. I have a few ideas I need to bounce around!

I have been a flowmaster guy my whole life. You couldn't tell me a damn thing to change my mind.. Then, after my brother swapped flowmaster for magnaflow on his wifes v6 camaro, I've been hooked. Flowmaster on a v8, all day long. my mustangs have all had flowmasters, 78 chevy truck, flowmasters. 74 duster, also flowmasters. but in reference to a 6 cyl or a 4 banger, I haven't heard an exhaust note that magnaflow didn't make sound better. granted I haven't tried all that flowmaster has to offer. Keep in mind, the DBX by flowmaster is a HUGE 6" diameter, and It was a tight fit squeezing the 4" magnaflow mufflers under there. you would have to change the angle of the exhaust coming back. It could probably be done, just a bit more degree in the bends, and I wanted it as straight as possible all the way back.

well then.. kick me in the butt, i'm out of ideas. I would question LMS to see what their response is. obviously every car is different, but not even an additional 10hp seems like a very LOW number for the v3 tune.

Got my intercooler grill today! good enough for me! Thanks to snmjim and special K for reaching out to make it happen

That can be true, but the main thing here is that the stock tune for both xtra, and LMS were basically the same number. The tuned number after the baseline is where it got out of hand for LMS My thought is that Xtra had his car on the dyno, after driving it in, getting it good and hot, then did the stock pulls, everything got even hotter, then did the V3 tuned dyno pulls. In that case I can see how the temperatures may have been skyrocketing by then, and there was probably a whole bunch of timing being pulled at that point. Anyone that has ever hot lapped one of these with the LMS tune knows how god awful your runs get after the first one. I ran a 13.41 (after a 60 mile drive to the track) and under hood temps were screaming. Hot lapped it, and it ran a 13.96 That was with 93 aggressive tune. So you can see, if the pulls were done hot, in succession, it probably skewed the numbers a bit. My understanding is that it does not matter the gear. Even if the transmission is 1:1, you take into account the gearing, as well as tire size, and the final drive ratio is not 1:1 anyhow. The dyno compares drum speed to engine rpm and makes its calculations of overall gear ratio. However I believe a 1:1 pull is best for the transmission because generally that is where the least amount of loss occurs. Hard to explain simply, but on a chassis dyno, the rpm of the dyno drum, along with the rpm of the motor, and the time it takes to rotate that drum, all are taken into account by the software, which is why a different ratio doesn't affect the numbers much. For example (with made up numbers): 2 dyno pulls, 3k rpm to 6k rpm on the same exact motor, just changing the final drive ratio 1st pull has final drive ratio of 3:1 2nd pull has final ratio of 7:1 Pull 1 spins the dyno drum 400-800rpm in 2 seconds Pull 2 spins the dyno drum 1000-2000 rpm in 4 seconds yes, it took longer to finish the dyno pull, but it was spinning the drum more revolutions, equating to the same power numbers For those who don't know or didn't realize: Torque = (hp x 5252)/rpm Which is why every dyno you see, the torque and HP numbers cross at 5252 rpm The main reason LMS doesn't do a 1:1 may be that a 4th gear pull will get you to the top speed limiter on the dyno before you finish the pull, giving you skewed numbers.

Added a bit of color behind the wheels today. adds 7hp and allows you to stop 12ft faster 60-0mph. wait, maybe I made that up...

It is clear their dyno numbers are... well... different.. than yours. This is their dyno sheet for the 93 octane V3 tune. They say pulls were done in 3rd gear. I would assume stock dyno run was after the car was driven into the shop and probably a bit heat soaked, while the v3 run was most likely well after it cooled down and ideal fan blowing conditions. Maybe even 100 octane running with the 93 tune just to be sure no detonation or KR or any of that. Not that I don't trust them. I just don't trust anyone selling a product. wait, that means I don't trust them! Stock hp 220@5240 Stock tq 253@3480 V3 hp 312@5380 V3 tq 423@2640

makes you wonder where livernois pulls their dyno numbers out of (I can muster a guess) What gear were you in during the pulls?

I've read, and most tell you exactly what I said. Changing early is good, helpful, but not "necessary" by their standards.

need some more info, I can't quite picture what I'm looking at

I read an article once (wish I could find it) that was talking about how the EPA and some other environmental type agencies were the ones that began the switch from 3k mile oil changes to the new standard of... well, whatever it is now. What I gathered from reading the article, is that the 3k mile recommendation was there, because it actually had merit. It was suggested to be changed because of the argument on fossil fuels, pollution, and baby seals (or something of that nature). I'm sure it wasn't the only reason the 3k mile oil change went out the window, but it makes sense. Though engines and oils are built quite differently these days, I still agree with the old way (sort of) I won't be caught dead with oil that has went unchanged for longer than 5k miles (8k kilometers) Am I overkill? Yes, you bet I am. Because I've seen the difference between engines that get regular "early" oil changes, and ones that have stretched that out to 8k miles or more between changes. Is it catastrophic to leave the oil in for that long? absolutely not. Akirby is spot on about the sticker meaning nothing. Here is my unproven theory/thoughts... If changing the oil every 5k miles or less yields an extra 30k miles of longevity out of my motor, I'm fine with that. For me, that is 2 extra years of driving the vehicle. for the $90 a year it costs to change the oil at 5k miles, I'll do it.

cold weather I'm assuming? They say they tend to catch more during the colder months. I don't get much for cold weather here, but makes me want to pick one up anyhow. I've been talking about it for months.

How did this all end up for you? Did you install the TS? I'm looking at picking up the 170, but since LMS does my tune, and sells the 160, I'd imagine they have a better idea of what their tune is going to require to run at its best.

I was going to pick one up. will probably help me some, being in texas and all. Would you suggest a 160 or a 170?

the primary purpose failed the real world test performed by chris. SOME of us wanted the aesthetics as the primary focus, knowing the cooling capability was not enhanced by his tests. Yes. Yes I am. I like to spend that kind of money on things that have been proven to help performance. I went in on this for aesthetics only. What's the big deal? you got your money, he got his money, I got the part I wanted, I just paid more than I would have liked for it all said and done. Lesson learned for me. also note: I'm a cheap bastard

I'd hate to be the guy to get that at lease end

I can imagine it won't do much, especially for the price, but I went for it anyway. even with a larger intercooler I can't see a whole lot of gains coming from a few extra holes, but the looks of it is more of what some of us were concerned with. Now that it is symmetrical, it is much more appealing to the eye.

Boy, I was really assuming the price was including shipping. I should have counted my pennies better....

I was concerned about the same thing, which is why I abandoned the zip tie and ended up with the wire. They seem to fit very tight in there, no play at all, so I'm hoping no vibrations to shake them loose.

I've never used anything like that, but it seems like more effort. With my windows computer, just put a CD into the drive, and it rips the music, usually in less than a minute, to my computer. I can then just plug my phone in, and drag all of the music to my phone. or as akirby said, to a thumb drive. or a $13 16gb mp3 player from amazon. No fancy programs or anything to download, as CDs are almost always ripped to your computer as an mp3 file anyway. Basically I've ripped nearly 1000 songs from CDs to my computer, and put them on an MP3 player, and had them in my car in far less time than playing/recording each song one at a time. that just seems silly to me. It still has the capability to select artist and song by voice command, and I just leave the MP3 player plugged in because it was cheap. I guess some people just don't like change