[mwebb]

document this -
if you can - do not show some horse poop unverifiable alleged trace on an alleged dyno , allegedly with the car in question

show me graphed scan data
you can use enhanced data for the car or simple generic obd2

ready begin

IF you are not fibbing the calculated load value at WOT will be 5% greater with your modification than without , STFT or real time lambda will be adding slightly -
do not BS me lad - i will know

We tested a MAP-equipped car with a short-ram and it made 5% extra at redline and nearly 10% less at 3k rpm (cruising), with AFRs going pig rich in the area of loss but slightly leaner (as you'd expect) at the area with gains.

Originally Posted by niky

It's more believable, actually, for a MAF-equipped car to show improvement than a MAP-equipped car... especially as so many MAP-equipped cars nowadays adjust to any filter changes by dialling back power right away.

Air filter changes are like voodoo nowadays. We tested a MAP-equipped car with a short-ram and it made 5% extra at redline and nearly 10% less at 3k rpm (cruising), with AFRs going pig rich in the area of loss but slightly leaner (as you'd expect) at the area with gains. Even with the stock box in, replacing the filter with a less restrictive medium resulted in the same change.

Computers. Meh. They're too smart.