lxgs4

I'll call them again and see if possible they are willing to trade mine in.

I'll have to agree about both the gas mileage and sound of the SRT. It is quite loud compared to others imo.

sbgs400

i have to agree with lee, there are a lot of people who post negative things about the SRT intake but can come up with no quantative evidence to support their claims.

there is, however, a design flaw with the SRT intake. if you've ever touched one after running the engine you'll know exactly what it is.... i did some tests this weekend. with the SRT intake on i went out for a short (approx 4 miles) drive, at a leisurely pace. stopped and measured the intake air temp, it was 46C. went out and drove about another 5 miles, this time pushing the car very hard. intake air temp was now up to 60C.

swapped out the SRT intake with a K&N fipk and let the car sit for about an hour. repeated the same tests. after the first run the IAT read 35C, after the second 46C.

the tests were done here in GA, temp was 94F, relative humidity 74%. clearly the heat is a problem, but even with the heat the car pulled harder with the SRT intake (butt dyno). the original plan was to G-tech 1/4 mile runs with both intakes, but i can't find my darn G-tech

when i get done with my more important projects i will dyno both the K&N and SRT in addition to a custom piggyback solution that i'm putting together now. if i didn't have a custom solution planned that will take care of the heat (hopefully) i would definitely use the SRT intake over the K&N.

GSteg

iTrader: (15)

As I posted earlier in the thread, I use to have an SRT but sold it shortly after because the Difference between K&N and SRT was not significant enough for me to pay double the price, especially when I bought the brand new K&N for 180 shipped. A simple SAFCII for another $180 will fine tune my car and will take into account every performance mod I have on my car. There were a few guys who took their cars to the track and resulted in a lower ET but increased trap speed. The increase of 2mph or so in trap speed is not significant enough for me in the real world because I hardly ever need to pass someone at 100mph. Some people like to street race so maybe it matters to them.

sbgs400

i recall one guy posting that he saw a slightly lower ET, but he went to the track on different days. impossible to account for atmospheric differences and track condition differences. that's why i was very careful to run these tests only 1 hour apart. running the SRT and K&N back to back there is a very noticeable power increase with the SRT, K&N doesn't come close.

GSteg

iTrader: (15)

I'd like to see an SRT vs K&N with SAFCI. that would be a more fair comparison since the K&N doesn't come with anything to modify the fuel curve.

I honestly think the K&N plus SAFC is the better route. if you have a custom exhaust piping done on the car, the SRT ecu wont even know it's there. with the SAFC, you can dyno the car and adjust the fuel curves with the exhaust mod taken into account.

To the butt dyno, the SRT does feel much quicker, but people are only gaining 2-3mph @~100mph over stock. However, the SRT does make daily driving much more fun

sbgs400

well it's nobody but K&N's fault that they didn't do anything to modify the fuel, no? i have plans to try two things, K&N with a fuel controller (probably not SAFC for a variety of reasons), and a completely different style MAF. i'm doing a top end refresh on another car right now and barely having time to get anything done, so don't expect results soon but i'll get to it eventually.

GS FONZy

iTrader: (6)

did you also remove the SRT ECU during the swap?

sbgs400

yes of course, the SRT ecu is not intended to be run with the K&N.

GS FONZy

iTrader: (6)

i had K&N and liked it, but hated the fact that it was plastic. i got a used srt without ecu and tryed using it, but engine light came on, so i now have akimoto. however; i will soon sell because i got something else comming. hope everything works out for you on your project, hope it works out for me

GSteg

iTrader: (15)

call me crazy but i prefer K&N's plastic over the SRT metal tubing.

I wonder if anyone tried putting insulation over the SRT tube before. It could help with heat soak.

GS FONZy

iTrader: (6)

what about if it's fresh CHROME srt pipe?
i also wonder if SBGS400 has the TB bypass

sbgs400

gsteg, yeah the plastic is definitely preferred, that's why i got the lower temp readings with the K&N. if you look at the picture i posted the material laying on the front is header heat blanket. i didn't measure the temp without it, so i don't know if it helped or not, but if it did it wasn't enough

JBrady

Yes, the resonator chamber is definitely a noise/sound enhancing part but it is interesting that Peter Scotts testing showed the stock piping with modified airbox being the best performance.

On the SRT MAF, I mean the larger MAF body with the ECU not just the ECU on say the K&N or Injen piping that would of course perform poorly as the ECU mostly compensates for the signal change due to the body increase.

Suggesting that the low end suffered with headers is still surprising but a report is a report. You definitely are a very good contributor to the forums on your mods. The board thanks you

GILLEXUS

iTrader: (14)

Wow! I always knew a plastic intake tube was better for heat but did not think it was that big. I had my srt intake tube ceramic coated. I don't know how much that helped.

The ultimate would be a 3 1/2" tube in plastic intake tube With the SRT ECU or S-AFC.

Pearlpower

iTrader: (2)

Thanks jbrady, I do appreciate the kind words, especially coming from you as I follow your stuff over on Lextreme.