I don't know about everyone else, but I cut the bottom of my air box out. So it's not just pulling air through the factory hole.

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">Originally posted by hohl:
<strong> How does the UPD make more power than the K&N package?


Does anyone have any Dyno pulls comparing the performance of both intakes? </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif">At the risk of having Red53GMC come in and gripe about my numbers, I'll tell you mine. Better yet show you. These were 2 months apart with the ONLY mod between them being an intake change.

DYNO 1 K&N FIPK

DYNO 2 UPD & 3" Hole in bottom of box

That's max 7.7 rwhp / 8.6 rwtq
And it was 10* hotter on the second time, but this is what I got.

There is your proof RED, 4k more miles and an intake change. Dynos 2 months apart can have many factors (and I know that, I seriously agree <img border="0" title="" alt="[Cool]" src="gr_images/icons/cool.gif" /> ), so I guess more miles made it more powerful huh! <img border="0" title="" alt="[Razz]" src="gr_images/icons/tongue.gif" />

 

i think it makes more power cuz the tube is bigger in diameter...

the only person that can for sure how it works is UPD, and i doubt they're giving up their secrets that easy

 

How does the UPD make more power than the K&N package?

Using the stock air box, intake is limited to the small, approximately 3.5" X 1.5", stock hole. How can changing the angle of the air tube really create that much more flow?

Does the engine compartment heat that the K&N kit picks up really negate any better flow characteristics it may have? Does it even have better flow characteristics?

I like the idea of keeping a closed box for engine noise and will likely ditch my K&N in favor of a UPD simply because of the people on this board.

Does anyone have any Dyno pulls comparing the performance of both intakes?