luigisho
SHO Member
As a former GenIII SHO owner, good luck with suing Ford
Is intake mandatory for tuned SHO?
- Thread starter tech10002
- Start date
Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.
As most of you guys probably already know, Moss Magnuson requires them to prove your modification caused the damage, not you prove that it didn’t, but we all know that never happens. They just deny the claim, and the ball is in your court to sue. Good luck with that. Think about worst case where an engine, both turbos, etc were replaced. It would cost you $100,000 to get them to pay a 10k bill.
MHW100
SHO Member
...yes as mentioned the cost benefit wouldn't warrant an action . That's the problem with high performance cars where they can 'claim' you abused the car and then deny the warranty . Damned if you tune it and damned if you don't but just ride it hard.
Yeah, one of our other cars is an MT82 equipped Mustang. In the early 2011s and up they had a lot of catastrophic trans failures and were denying claims on totally stock cars claiming the owners were abusing them for driving them like they were designed. If power shifting is abusing a 400hp car what is the point of even buying one? The reality was the design was flawed and it was Ford’s fault for putting an under engineered Chinese transmission in a 412hp performance car. Ford really alienated a lot of customers on that brain dead move. It probably would have cost them a lot less customers to just eat the warranty replacements.
subdocgtp
New Member
Just put in a good filter K&N or the green filter just don't over oil the K&N as far as sound differences with a cold air intake I can't hear any difference he's intakes are pretty quiet
twobitcoder
Member
There's actually a lot of misinformation on this forum, and I tend to not comment often, but frankly, use your common sense and ignore useless opinions. More oxygen into the throttle body = more power. If CAIs were useless, the GT350 and Hellcat would not have them. The question may be are the current offerings for the SHO any good, not whether a CAI increases power. It absolutely DOES increase airflow. The problem with the SHO may be the 180 degree bend in the tube which slows airflow.
RonPorter
SHO Club of America
It's not misinformation. The engine will always get the air it needs, the issue is how much power it needs to use to get it.
Many CAI packages, as on the newer SHOs, suck hot air, which is counterproductive. The factories are getting far better, as evidenced by the examples you mentioned, the GT350 and the Hellcats. For many cars, the aftermarket CAIs just add intake noise, but no power, and less power, in many cases.
Companies keep making them because they are high profit, and there's enough idiots around who keep buying them.
Many CAI packages, as on the newer SHOs, suck hot air, which is counterproductive. The factories are getting far better, as evidenced by the examples you mentioned, the GT350 and the Hellcats. For many cars, the aftermarket CAIs just add intake noise, but no power, and less power, in many cases.
Companies keep making them because they are high profit, and there's enough idiots around who keep buying them.
SM105K
Streetlight Grand Prix Champ/ IG @fafomotorsports
I disagree. Most of the CAI are useless and they have been proven to not pick up crap on the dyno (or very little) for the SHO. Strike ONE. The problem is most are in the engine compartment which is not a cold air source even "sealed". Strike TWO. An actual ram air (like the stock air box combined with the snorkel) with a high flow drop in filter is best for these cars. It't been proven. Add into the fact most CAI dont have revisions for the correct UPR CC connection is just another reason in my book to not own an over priced (Strike THREE they are out) CAI. My CC working properly (Esp since my car is an E30 car) is more important then the trivial HP produced by a CAI.
Now debating CC's can be a complete different topic. Any BOOSTED application needs a CC....period. Change my mind.
SM105K
Streetlight Grand Prix Champ/ IG @fafomotorsports
I cant love this enough.
StealBlueSho
SHO Member
So me proof that the SHO platform needs a CC? One of the guys on here talked to the ford engineers who helped develop the transverse 3.5 and they told him a cc was not needed for these cars iirc...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
SM105K
Streetlight Grand Prix Champ/ IG @fafomotorsports
Simple, put a CC on your car and empty it after 3k miles, then you tell me if you want that crap to be re-introduced back into the motor....the GDI motors have a dirty secret and we all know about it. Ask those Ford engineers why they are putting regular injector setups pre intake valve, on the GDI motors NOW.......
The proof is in the can....literally.
Last edited:
SHOinVa
SHO Member
-There's a lot to unpack in your very short post, Yes there can be misinformation an a whole lot of conflicting opinions, Not proud of it but I myself have been in more then one SHO Forum xxxing contest BUT in the end someone who ether has the experience of expertise usually comes in and sets us straight. If you read the whole thread the truth is usually buried somewhere in there.
-Your statement that CAI must work because FMC and Dodge used it, doesn't work, Factory CAI are engineered to help a vehicle meet required performance an mileage requirements. there part of an engineered system. For the most part aftermarket CAI's are built to make money, they have sound engineering principles behind them, and yes there is some research, BUT in the end as long as they make money, look cool and "could" work, that's about all that is required of them.
- Additionally a CAI on a forced induction engine is only there to try an cool the incoming air, they do nothing for air flow that is controlled by the amount of boost your system makes.
"So" you the proof, God I hate auto correct, "So" Steel now we are trusting Ford Engineers the same people responsible for the Edsel. I have a question, if FMC had to choose between meeting EPA requirements and engine life, Which one do you think they will pick. I'm not saying your wrong but its possible they just don't care as long as the motor lasts long enough to trade in.
C/
StealBlueSho
SHO Member
Yes auto correct got the best of me, it happens. It was an honest question, I haven’t seen anyone with an SHO yet go to a dealer with carbon build up issues. The F150 EB has a documented issue with it yes.
I’m not arguing for or against, just simply looking for data that can be referenced showing that a CC makes a difference for our specific platform.
I personally go back and forth on picking one up.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
SHOinVa
SHO Member
Last time I checked your a meth head, or will be, your first shot will clean everything up just like new.
BUT
I agree with you I also go back an forth, there seems to be two camps, one of them says you could harm the motor if you do an one that says you could harm your motor if you don't PLUS one kit is $120 and the other is almost $400. I think I will try the cheap one and see if it works and go from there, Good to see you Steel TTL
C/
SHOs generally do not have a "severe" problem with carbon buildup, as SBS said. But if you notice pooling crud in the intercooler, say more than 1/4" on the dipstick test between oil changes, then a catchcan would be worthy of consideration. Assuming of course you have tried the better low-volatility full synthetic oils, replaced the pcv valve and separator etc. first.
I would also like to note the dearth of knowledge the public has about GDI technology in general. The dearth of knowledge in the MANUFACTURERs of vehicles with the technology. And especially a dearth of available SOLUTIONS to these problems. GDI presents these issues, and GTDI literally turns up the pressure on these issues even further.
Commonly available and idolized fuel injector cleaners - why are they mum on the benefits in GDI engines? BND's Aces IV is the only exception that I know of.
Why are engine oil formulations moving towards better base stocks with better heat/shear resistance and less additives?
And how many know that gasoline with the least additives runs the cleanest in GDI engines?
Yes, we are finding ways to deal with the issues on a practical level - ethanol and methanol, catch cans, what have you. Dual port fuel injection systems have arrived at Ford, first with the GT, n0w with the F150, Expedition, Navigator, etc. And definitely grateful for that.
I would also like to note the dearth of knowledge the public has about GDI technology in general. The dearth of knowledge in the MANUFACTURERs of vehicles with the technology. And especially a dearth of available SOLUTIONS to these problems. GDI presents these issues, and GTDI literally turns up the pressure on these issues even further.
Commonly available and idolized fuel injector cleaners - why are they mum on the benefits in GDI engines? BND's Aces IV is the only exception that I know of.
Why are engine oil formulations moving towards better base stocks with better heat/shear resistance and less additives?
And how many know that gasoline with the least additives runs the cleanest in GDI engines?
Yes, we are finding ways to deal with the issues on a practical level - ethanol and methanol, catch cans, what have you. Dual port fuel injection systems have arrived at Ford, first with the GT, n0w with the F150, Expedition, Navigator, etc. And definitely grateful for that.
Last edited:
SaveMelMac
SHO Member
- Additionally a CAI on a forced induction engine is only there to try an cool the incoming air, they do nothing for air flow that is controlled by the amount of boost your system makes.
This statement is fake news. Generally speaking a less restrictive intake allows for more flow. There maybe some trade offs depending depending on the platform, some platforms aren’t really concerned with air intake temps and want more flow. They rely on the intercooler more to keep the temps down. But to say an intake does nothing for air flow is wrong.
This statement is fake news. Generally speaking a less restrictive intake allows for more flow. There maybe some trade offs depending depending on the platform, some platforms aren’t really concerned with air intake temps and want more flow. They rely on the intercooler more to keep the temps down. But to say an intake does nothing for air flow is wrong.
SHOinVa
SHO Member
- All performance vehicles are concerned with intake temperature, that is why even cars with huge intercooler's try an move the actual intake to as low and as far forward as possible. I agree with you its important not to have restrictions in your intake system BUT as long as your turbos are spinning up and your able to reach peak boost which is controlled by your computer there is no kind of fancy intake that's going to make extra boost for you. Maybe on a race car where a split second in turbo spin up will make a difference there could be some benefit.
As I stated, I am talking about forced induction motor, in a normally aspirated engine everything that help's feed air to the carburetor can help your performance.
As I stated, I am talking about forced induction motor, in a normally aspirated engine everything that help's feed air to the carburetor can help your performance.
SM105K
Streetlight Grand Prix Champ/ IG @fafomotorsports
Put the $120 dollar CC on your car for 3-4k miles.....watch what comes out of it. You will be a believer. The reason I have a UPR CC is because I got mine for a killer deal. Not trying to discredit you or argue either. I was astounded what came out of my CC after 5K miles.......I personally do not want that trash/sludge/junk recirculating through my motor. Knowing what I know now, I would have gladly shelled out the $400 for a new UPR CC.
SaveMelMac
SHO Member
Boost and flow are 2 different things. Unrestricting the intake can help you achieve higher boost. On a forced induction engine this is even more important, think of an engine as just a huge air pump, less restrictive the better. On another platform, Mazdaspeed 3 upgrading the intercooler I was able to pick up 1.5 psi. Also putting a larger 3.5 inch intake gained me something like 50 grams per second in airflow. I might see if I still have the logs to post. I’ll check my computer. While I know it’s a different platform the principals remain the same.
Similar threads
