MMR CAI Dyno results inside!!!!

Dyno testing of the MMR CAI is complete and the results are dissapointing to say the least. ALL DYNO PULLS WERE DONE ON STOCK TUNING. Airfuel measurements were taken post cat with a wideband.

Hot off the street with the stock airbox the car made 365.69/345.39 SAE, stock tuning. Backup pull 5 minutes later 366.31/346.72.

23 minutes later after installing the MMR CAI..... 375.60/337.30 but those hp numbers are misleading. When you see the graph you will understand why. The car is down on power thruout the entire pull and there is a spike at the very top that gives that max hp number. Tq is incredibly down with this intake the entire pull.

Backup MMR CAI pull 5 minutes later 370.54/329.05 with the exact same spike and down on tq. The backup pull to that one is identical.

Spent 5 minutes putting the stock airbox back on and got.... 368.53/350.57 and the spike was gone plus torque was back up 20.

Its a nice fit and finish CAI but they obviously built it with CA emissions in mind because I had one extra fitting at the metal elbow that needed to be capped off (no cap included or mention of that in the one sheet instructions). Also there is no hardware or instructions to secure the heatsheild to the fender and it does not pull air from the stock airbox feed tube. Overall I would rate it a 3 out of 10 only because it looks nice but does not perform anywhere near as advertised.

Some youtube video's will accompany this information later.

I have attached the graphs with as much information on them as possible. Now its on to the next product to test and to continue our WMS Custom tuning that we started immediatly after the CAI test today with some very promising results that will be posted later.

Thanks,
JJ

Wow that's weak. Fuck MMR!!!!

Thanks for the testing and the results. That is very helpful info! I can't even figure how it could have such quick spike @ 6500rpm level. The importance of "Area under the curve" is definately obvious on these graphs!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHe-llQcWtQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mANI0PKr3wE

JJ

I was looking at a buddy's 5.4L 4V twin turbo engine yesterday for his Lightning that is still being built. It has MMR Stage 3 heads and custom MMR ground cams. They have already had to have some machining done on the heads to get the cams to clear something in the valvetrain. They were trying to reinstall the cams yesterday when I was there and they are still having problem with the cam lobes. The lobes are hitting on the cam cap bridges! Of course they didn't send any specs for the cam either. I have not had an issue personally with MMR products (only got one or two items several years back tho) but this is the first time I have personally seen a problem with they products. Not trying to bash but thought it was relavent. I only say something if I have direct personal knowledge that I feel is relavent.

Good Info.

I ordered their BOSS Stroker 900S shortblock and had them P&P my heads with their Stage III service, GT40 Cams, and MMR SS valves. I have to replace the oversized MMR valves after 5k. Bad lash adjuster. Putting in FRPP FR500 camshaft kit instead comes with ferrea ss valves.

This is great info, thanks for sharing.

Is there any reason to believe the results would be better if the car was tuned for the MMR CAI? Is the MMR CAI advertised as "no tune needed"?

Doesn't the mmr cai require a tune?

JJ@WMS said:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHe-llQcWtQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mANI0PKr3wE

JJ

Click to expand...

The intake looks just like my old MMR intake just with some new elbows and heat sheild design...



Those numbers are very disappointing....

Twinscrewgt said:

Doesn't the mmr cai require a tune?

Click to expand...

Yes, it does....at least on the S197s it did.

S197steve said:

This is great info, thanks for sharing.

Is there any reason to believe the results would be better if the car was tuned for the MMR CAI? Is the MMR CAI advertised as "no tune needed"?

Click to expand...

Twinscrewgt said:

Doesn't the mmr cai require a tune?

Click to expand...

It is advertised as "no tune needed" and I did exactly that, dyno the car before and after with no tuning, just the stock calibration in the car.

JJ

No tune, cai's don't produce much on the 2010's and this new 5.0 ford already did a great job on the intake, a tune is needed to get a gain IMO if you use a no tune cai and it's bigger than the stock one, you are just losing your torque without supplementing the larger tube.

We have spent a GREAT deal of time working on the 2011 GT air intake assembly, and full details (including multiple dyno charts) can be found on our website. Although the 2010 and 2011 factory air intake flow better than what was used on 2005-2009 GT's, there is still room for improvement. If you look at our test data, you will find that we were able to achieve clear gains from the installation of our "no tune" intake assembly for these vehicles while still at the EXACT SAME air/fuel ratio, timing level and engine temperature. The datalogs are included in the dyno graphs...

Lee

I just read mmr website. " 15-20 hp increase no tune needed"
what a crock. I'm definately considering the c&l for my 2011

JJ, good information and showing us how the MMR CAI works with the 2011 5.0, this is going to help those out there choose the better CAI for there applications. The car looks very good. Them wheels are very sharp!


Brandon.

In the interest of accuracy, in my OPINION the lose in power is not due to the CAI. The lose of power is due to torque reduction that is unrelated to the CAI swap.

I just spent the last 2 days on our dyno logging and tuning a 2011 and I saw the same power lose on a stock tune and stock airbox. It did not happen everytime and I can not say exactly what is triggering it, but I will. I verified with the logs that the throttle is closing some in that area. I'm no MMR fan but just thought I would share what I learned over the last 2 days working on one of these. There is no way a flow issue would cause such a steep step in the graph. My graphs look exactly the same.

Is C&L going to make one that deletes the CET? (cabin excitement tube) it's a cool feature but it's damn ugly

KenB@MD said:

In the interest of accuracy, in my OPINION the lose in power is not due to the CAI. The lose of power is due to torque reduction that is unrelated to the CAI swap.

I just spent the last 2 days on our dyno logging and tuning a 2011 and I saw the same power lose on a stock tune and stock airbox. It did not happen everytime and I can not say exactly what is triggering it, but I will. I verified with the logs that the throttle is closing some in that area. I'm no MMR fan but just thought I would share what I learned over the last 2 days working on one of these. There is no way a flow issue would cause such a steep step in the graph. My graphs look exactly the same.

Click to expand...

And just to clarify my position our test car has not ever experienced any kind of power loss during any of its "totally stock" dyno pulls. Its been on the dyno twice with atleast 10 full pulls totally stock with no decrease in power save the heatsoak. The three back to back pulls with the MMR all had decreasing power and tq. I agree that something else might be happening here with the throttle but so far it is eluding us as it is Ken. I will continue to test this CAI as we learn more about this calibration, however I will stand behind my initial results. Just bolting on an MMR CAI for this car does not give you the advertised "no tuning required" gains.

There were no leaks or anything wrong with the installation of this CAI today, I followed the instructions closely and made sure my installation looked just like what was in the pictures. Considering MMR never even released a dyno sheet proving their gains I am highly skeptical that this was even tested to begin with.

I am also of the mindset that this is some kind of flow related problem and if you dont believe me Ken, take the air filter out of the stock box, put the lid back on and do a pull on your test car. You will quickly see what I mean. I tried that today for the hell of it and the car will not even accelerate so flow thru the housing and how its directed does make a difference.

Keep in mind everyone that I paid full price for this kit and have no axe to grind or any affiliation with MMR. I'm the one that is out of pocket $430 bucks and want to see it perform as advertised, all I can do is provide you guy with exactly the same procedure and testing that you would do if you were to have purchased/installed it. Lets hope a few more make it on some cars so we can get a comparison.

JJ

Twinscrewgt said:

Is C&L going to make one that deletes the CET? (cabin excitement tube) it's a cool feature but it's damn ugly

Click to expand...

+1 cut the umbilical cord.