Is this from a actual Ford 5.4 owner? And if so what was his exact setup? Time and time again people are getting slammed on here about their WARM AIR INTAKES and still nobody has any physical proof themselves.

 

Hey man it looks great!! I wouldnt worry about taking it off.

 

That spark plug is NOT from a 5.4 3v! I cant say for the pistons though.

 

+1. The word fallacy comes to mind in these instances.

With mass air equipped vehicles, the thin wire in the mass air meter is heated. The amount of air passing the wire cools it, thereby telling the ecu the amount of air coming in to the engine and using algorithms adjust fuel and timing curves.

 

Yep - yer post is filled with fallacy, aight.

You forgot one very important point, bud - that MAF sensor absolutely requires to be in a calibrated venturi, as it only samples a portion of the mass of air going through. Hence - IF the region in which the MAF changes in any way whatsoever, then the MAF output is going to be skewed, no longer representative of the actual flow - and thus innaccurate.

Simple as that.

Pre-2004 'classic'-style MAF-equipped vehicles have a slight advantage here, as these MAF's are already located in a fixed venturi as a complete assembly. So - it's difficult to alter their accuracy - (but not impossible).

Slot-style MAF vehicles - example being 2004+ 5.4L 3v's, 4.6L 3v's and 6.8L 3v's being among them , are the ones at most risk - as any aftermarket intake requires removal of the factory MAF from the OEM-defined venturi that is not part of the MAF assembly, and forces it's placement in the new intake tube.

Most intake manufacturers do NOT ensure that this location accurately mimics the stock one ( a well-documented fact) - as it is usually larger, a different shape/crossection, or both. Some are better than others, though.

By disrupting a crucial , pre-calibrated PRIMARY sensor, the PCM can no longer accurately meter fuel - and this affects both closed-loop and open-loop operation (even though open loop runs primarily from embedded tables in the PCM, the O2's and MAF are still consulted).

This does not even bear discussion as it is a long-established fact. Any competent tuning shop can corroborate this - it.s the reason that labour-intensive MAF Transfer function work is necessary. And, by the way, it's also the reason a canned tuner like the Edge is NOT to be used with any aftermarket intakes - Edge themselves clearly states this.

You need to do yer research as, clearly, based upon yer response you do not appear to understand this fully, but I could indeed be wrong, and you, as I, are simply kidding/bantering with each other, much to the chagrin of the others reading this . Easily remedied, though ...

To that end, There is some good info in this thread: https://www.f150online.com/forums/ex...ir-intake.html. Please take the time to read it fully ...

Good luck


MGD

 

I agree with what you are saying %100 and I even agree with you! BUT...Is there anyone on here or that can come forward and show the actual destruction of a motor due to the use of a cold air intake? I am in no way shape or form trying to call you wrong or prove any points. But, the only way we know all this to be true is because the tuning companies have told us this. Now, call me crazy, but I believe that there is a slight possibility that this all could be one big sales pitch! Now, I intend to tune and NOT get a CAI, but Im just curious why I have never seen nor heard of this issue on any other style of truck or brand.

 

Hi sir.

I understand fully - and all I can offer is for you to call one of the highly regarded independent tuning shops or perf shops for this info _ I'm certain that they have indeed seen pyhsical evidence of over-lean damage. Me? only a melted sparkplug on my old 327, lol. Dang Holley carbs,

MGD

 

+1+1 Yes, I like this. I dont want to hear from a shop or someone who "tunes" but a actual person on this forum with pics and the exact setup of their setup

 

Anyone dumb enough to have actually grenaded an engine in this manner is either not going to be aware of how it happened, or too chicken to post an admission of same

Not on this site anyway *most* folks here are too savvy to put themselves into this situation in the first place, given the monumental quantity of data to support the need for proper MAF TF correction - perhaps go look on TMC, F150Forum, etc ... some real characters there - (just ask ol' Shotgunz, )

Let me put this into another context. Let's suppose for a moment that there is no danger with most Washoobi's. This leaves the other very real situation where running non-optinally affects performance - as demonstrated by the small graph I posted earlier.

So - if it were me, and I am spending $$$ , I'd expect to get some gains from this effort. And not actually regress what level of power I already had. So - for performance optimization reasons alone I'd get that same MAF TF corrected.

BTW - there IS NO vast conspiracy among all of the perf & tuning shops going on here. If anything, it's the Washoobi manufacturer's who are exploiting Maskirovka. Their testing regimes frankly suck. Example: K&N tests their stuff on a whopping total of about 3 trucks - this on a truck platform where there are actually hundreds of different OEM calibrations, every year. No wonder they are total joke.

MGD