May take some time for the MAF to appropriately calibrate for the change, but a few dyno pulls probably isn’t enough time for anyone to pass judgment since adequate enough time has not passed for the computer to compensate. Take for example someone lives in Denver, what happens to them when they decide to pack their bags and move to San Diego where there’s a massive change in Altitude, are they screwed, is their truck going to run forever lean? Or the other way around, both scenarios can be looked at and I’m sure the computer compensate, that’s what Ford spent lots of money ensuring. I’d rather be the dude moving to lower ground but the point is it will still make adjustments. It's not like we're dealing with a carburetor here were I need to bring my jet kit with me when we travel, that's the beauty of computers, they take care of it all in most cases. For a simple bolt on piece like this, I'm sure there is no change over the long run when installed. If I'm wrong post some long term results, I'd be interested to view them. I’m sure there aren’t any so I don’t expect much, but I thought I’d ask since this seems to be where the confuse lies. I know I'll catch serious flak over this but I don't roll over that easy. Besides, what kind of power loss are we talking about here anyhow, 1-2 HP? I’m thinking there’s some serious hair splitting going on here. We’re talking a CAI on a low hp application, not 4 stages of nitrous on a limited street car. Oh, and I'm not attacking anyone here, there's just lots of false info out there and it needs to be addressed appropriatly.

 

Not giving you flak, but briefly, a MAF's job is to correct for density changes, as in altitude change, temp changes baro change. That's not the issue here.

You are talking about an architectural change, which results in a MAF transfer function change - which is hard-coded. That's what the MAF cannot 'compensate' for. The exact reason that custom MAF TF functions have been written.

You need to search/read; because this has been discussed in depth - I'm not gonna do it for you - your call. Too bad you don't believe a lean condition can have potential long-term effects.

 

I'm not disputing a long term lean condition would cause a problem, as I know it would if it were to actually occur. Before I put on the Volant my buddy gave me I did mild research and just wasn’t convinced as most all information was not fact based. Lots of talk, but nothing conclusive, must not have been looking at the right info. The Ford Tech who gave this thing to me did a before and after pull on the in shop dyno from stock to Volant and had a 12 HP increase, he was pretty jazzed. I’m not sure of that since I didn’t see it, but that’s what he claimed. He stated that had he not fallen into a free blower he wouldn’t have given it to me. I'll see if he can produce the dyno results on paper so I can take a look. I didn’t care one way or the other, since this is my daily drive, but I know the value of opening up the nostrils. I liken the stock intake system to running a gas mask vs. running the same stretch of road without one. Not sure if you've ever had the opportunity to exercise in all out combat gear like that, but I assure you it's restrictive as hell and anything that you can do to open up the airway is helpful. The car will only pull what it needs, it's not a blower, I can see a blower scenario causing many of the issues everyone talks about because it’s cramming. I’ll search again and see if my result net anything different from that I’ve already read on this board which was not sufficient evidence to make the claims observed.

 

OK. Understood.

Your next course of action would simply be to call Troyer Performance and discuss your concerns with them. They've had several customers switch away from Volant's on the spot while attending dyno days. They also know what the're doing, and genuinely concerned for their customers.

The issue is real. As are the results.

 

It's funny how the only people you ever see on here talking down the Volant, are either this Mike Troyer feller, or the people drinking Troyers cool aid. Seeing these folks try to pimp out the AF-1 by belittling Volant is disgusting. I'm sure the AF1 is a good intake but come on, you are splitting hairs. I've never seen a Volant owner with a complaint about performace.

 

...except the ones who ditch the Volants at the dyno days

Sorry if the facts don't agree with you - the issue is real. Disbelief/stubborn denial will not alter that fact. Difference between you & MT is, he's actually done the controlled testing - you ??? Call him & ask (but I know you won't lol)

Stay below 4,000 rpm & you'll be fine. That's a waste of 1,500 rpm of powerband, though.

Good luck. I like coolaid when it's good for you

 

My Volant runs just fine over 4,000 rpms, I think I will keep it. Have you ever had a Volant? I doubt it, otherwise you wouldn't be suckin AF1's ****. I'm sure Troyer gets a kickback from the manufacturer if he sells a certain amount of units, either that or he is sponsered by them. There or other people that dyno so I will compare their #'s to his and then draw my on conclusions. The kool aid was good in Jonestown too.

 

All of this and no REAL data. People use the term "fact" to loosely. I just bought my truck 2 days ago, and just ordered the Volant. I like what I saw, how the system was set up. I looked at AF1's, didn't care for them. I may be new to the truck world but I have years of experience in the mod world. I have built several cars and have done countless hours of research on different intakes, my job duties allow many hours on the internet, and Volant has come out on top. I am also a member of many forums, opinions will vary with each one. You talk to any Dodge guy, the Volant is the way to go. Here obviously, people think differently. I always love it when people compare things and will pick out one thing.......so Volant is a great intake for below 4000rpms, but not above? I don't know about you, but I do 90% of my driving at lower rpms. If I wanted a high end breathing monster that I was at WOT all the time, I would go centrifugal S/C or Turbo.

In the end these are all opinions, even dyno results must be taken lightly. There are crooked people in the world who only care about themselves or feel they need to justify to everyone why they bought something becuase they lack self-esteem. Do what makes you happy, not the majority, but keep facts and opinions seperate.

 

If you want facts, why not simply call them?

Read: https://www.f150online.com/forums/sh...5&postcount=12

BTW - be careful who you call a crook, son.

 

I didn't call anyone a crook "son", I said their are crooked people. I didn't even say they (Troyer) wasn't correct. I simply stated that people should think for themselves and take what they read/hear lightly. I am sure the differences between the two are minimal, you will be lucky to feel 20whp if you were to pick it up (anyone who says they can feel that needs there head checked) , so one getting 12whp and the other getting 14 whp would be negligible and to the point of the difference could be measuring error. Take two runs back to back (cool down of course, no changes to the car) and you won't get the same results, so to test either one and say one is better than another by 1-2 whp is silly.

 

What part # is the 3.25" and 3.5" AF1 intake.