View Poll Results: Which Intakes should we develop maps for?
COBB Tuning SFI



39
12.83%
Injen



53
17.43%
AEM



106
34.87%
K&N Typhoon



35
11.51%
ARC



22
7.24%
AMS



117
38.49%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 304. You may not vote on this poll
Poll: What intake maps for your AccessPORT? AEM avab now!
Probably not a huge difference in performace between intakes, some have added features which drive up the cost (heat shields, better couplers, welded-in bungs). I would go with whatever your tuner recommends, if they have more experience with one particular brand it may take less time tuning your Evo and thus save you money there as well.
My X will still leave Blk smoke under boost (WOT) but less than factory tune
I'm running the AEM map right now (Stg-1) w/Harman Motives intake. My X runs real good.I felt an overall improvement throughout the entire RPM band over the Reg Stg-1 map.On the top end is most difference (biggest gain)The AMS is almost identical to my HM intake ,except for the HM keeps the MAF futher away from where the factory BPV connects to the BPV tube.
My X will still leave Blk smoke under boost (WOT) but less than factory tune
My X will still leave Blk smoke under boost (WOT) but less than factory tune
Is it safe to assume most of your intake maps are basically the same for each type (CAI vs. shorty) when computing MAF % changes (assuming the diameter of the tube is the same and the placement of the MAF is similar on different brands)? The reason I ask is I have an AGP CAI and would like to put a map(have AGP U/LICP, CAI, Agency Power catback twin can, Hallman MBC and Synapse BOV) made for the AEM CAI. Would that work? I don't want to run lean and get P01071 (I think that's the right code) after the tune.
Thanks for your hard work on making all these map variations for all kinds of brands of aftermarket products...must be mind numbing computing all these permutations of product combinations.
Thanks for your hard work on making all these map variations for all kinds of brands of aftermarket products...must be mind numbing computing all these permutations of product combinations.
Is it safe to assume most of your intake maps are basically the same for each type (CAI vs. shorty) when computing MAF % changes (assuming the diameter of the tube is the same and the placement of the MAF is similar on different brands)? The reason I ask is I have an AGP CAI and would like to put a map(have AGP U/LICP, CAI, Agency Power catback twin can, Hallman MBC and Synapse BOV) made for the AEM CAI. Would that work? I don't want to run lean and get P01071 (I think that's the right code) after the tune.
Thanks for your hard work on making all these map variations for all kinds of brands of aftermarket products...must be mind numbing computing all these permutations of product combinations.
Thanks for your hard work on making all these map variations for all kinds of brands of aftermarket products...must be mind numbing computing all these permutations of product combinations.
I'll try the Injen as it seems to be similarly made (lower than normal MAF placement and cone filter is in fenderwell...will have to keep an eye on my afr's too.
Another variable is the MBC. Most every modded evo x is going to have one on there. Question is , is it going to be equivalent to the "boost pill mod" which I assume is just removing one of the three pills. In the MBC scenario, all three of my stock tubes are not used (both lines from both boost solenoids are T'd off...but both solenoids are still plugged in so I don't throw any codes). I'm running relatively stock boost pressures (~22psi) at 5 turns out of 13 on my Hallman MBC.
Thanks for the reply kozmic!
Another variable is the MBC. Most every modded evo x is going to have one on there. Question is , is it going to be equivalent to the "boost pill mod" which I assume is just removing one of the three pills. In the MBC scenario, all three of my stock tubes are not used (both lines from both boost solenoids are T'd off...but both solenoids are still plugged in so I don't throw any codes). I'm running relatively stock boost pressures (~22psi) at 5 turns out of 13 on my Hallman MBC.
Thanks for the reply kozmic!
There's no reason to go with a MBC on the Evo X. ECU controlled boost will give you excellent results, and if you feel the need to spend some $ on new hardware, get a 3 port solenoid and tune.
I'll try the Injen as it seems to be similarly made (lower than normal MAF placement and cone filter is in fenderwell...will have to keep an eye on my afr's too.
Another variable is the MBC. Most every modded evo x is going to have one on there. Question is , is it going to be equivalent to the "boost pill mod" which I assume is just removing one of the three pills. In the MBC scenario, all three of my stock tubes are not used (both lines from both boost solenoids are T'd off...but both solenoids are still plugged in so I don't throw any codes). I'm running relatively stock boost pressures (~22psi) at 5 turns out of 13 on my Hallman MBC.
Thanks for the reply kozmic!
Another variable is the MBC. Most every modded evo x is going to have one on there. Question is , is it going to be equivalent to the "boost pill mod" which I assume is just removing one of the three pills. In the MBC scenario, all three of my stock tubes are not used (both lines from both boost solenoids are T'd off...but both solenoids are still plugged in so I don't throw any codes). I'm running relatively stock boost pressures (~22psi) at 5 turns out of 13 on my Hallman MBC.
Thanks for the reply kozmic!
Travis
COBB Tuning


