Mazda 6 Forums banner

1 - 20 of 78 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
998 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Woke up this morning hoping they dynos would be up for the AEM and I guess it was my lucky day. So I put up a sheet that shows the information broken down to $ per HP and $ per TQ.


http://www.santown.com/speed6/intake/AEMvsCPE.htm


Now only if AEM would produce the polished one so I could purchase.

jason
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,056 Posts
great graph - thanks alot
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,056 Posts
both the hp and tq are there...click on bottom left of page to navigate between them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
998 Posts
Discussion Starter #5

·
Registered
Joined
·
856 Posts
The AEM seems to be listed at $372.09! I am looking at the correct part number right? 21-641

For some reason I cannot make a whole lot of sense of your chart. Is the CPE data missing?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
998 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
There is no CPE data as their graphs suck. They don't show any RPM's so I can't input the data. I went by the MAX gains as provided in their images. For the AEM I used the Average gains to compute the cost, so by that assumption, the AEM provides better gains per dollar than the CPE.

You can get the AEM intake from ebay for 208 plus 25 shipping. Red, Blue and Silver are available now, and Polished is on its way. THe company has those three in stock.

Jason
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
856 Posts
There is no CPE data as their graphs suck. They don't show any RPM's so I can't input the data. I went by the MAX gains as provided in their images. For the AEM I used the Average gains to compute the cost, so by that assumption, the AEM provides better gains per dollar than the CPE.

You can get the AEM intake from ebay for 208 plus 25 shipping. Red, Blue and Silver are available now, and Polished is on its way. THe company has those three in stock.

Jason
[/b]
So that is the correct model number?
I would like the polished as well....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
998 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
21-641B - Blue
21-641R - Red
21-641C - Silver
21-641P - Polished
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,217 Posts
You're comparing two completely different dynos and trying to draw a similarity between them. You just can't do that. The variance between dynos can be as much as 25%.

Your spreadsheet also ignores the fact that CP-Es gains are focused largely between 3000 and 5000 RPMs while AEMs is largely focused above 4800. CP-Es gains are much larger in the area where it really matters.

There is no CPE data as their graphs suck. They don't show any RPM's so I can't input the data.[/b]
Cp-E does have the RPM on the TQ graph and though they were cut off by the screenshot on the HP graph, it's clearly evident where each RPM is at.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
815 Posts
You're comparing two completely different dynos and trying to draw a similarity between them. You just can't do that. The variance between dynos can be as much as 25%.

Your spreadsheet also ignores the fact that CP-Es gains are focused largely between 3000 and 5000 RPMs while AEMs is largely focused above 4800. CP-Es gains are much larger in the area where it really matters.
Cp-E does have the RPM on the TQ graph and though they were cut off by the screenshot on the HP graph, it's clearly evident where each RPM is at.
[/b]
I thought CP-E was also understating the gains due to the massive variance in dyno pulls. Didn't their initial numbers show 20+ hp and ft/lbs gains similar to the AEM?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
998 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
You're comparing two completely different dynos and trying to draw a similarity between them. You just can't do that. The variance between dynos can be as much as 25%.

Your spreadsheet also ignores the fact that CP-Es gains are focused largely between 3000 and 5000 RPMs while AEMs is largely focused above 4800. CP-Es gains are much larger in the area where it really matters.
Cp-E does have the RPM on the TQ graph and though they were cut off by the screenshot on the HP graph, it's clearly evident where each RPM is at.
[/b]
I couldn't find what dyno AEM uses, maybe you know? I'm comparing changes, not actual numbers. Yes there will be a degree of error, but that's known since I'm looking at a graph and pulling what 'I think' is the correct number.

I'm assuming AEM used the same dyno for pre CAI and post CAI numbers, just like CPE. Yes dyno's will vary, even dynos from the same company side by side will vary, as will continuous runs, it's all a given.

I'll go through and add the TQ from the CPE graph and see what that comes out with.

I'm sorry for going through the trouble of putting it together for it to be useless.

Jason
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,217 Posts
Both used Dynojets obviously, but there's still an incredibly huge variance. The same car on different dynos of the same type can range by more than 20%. Different cars on different dynos can have an impossibly huge variation and no reliability in measurement for comparison whatsoever. I just did the TQ spreadsheet and found that the difference between stock pulls between AEM and CP-E were as much as 20%, and averaged over 5%.



Notice that the AEM only dominates in 2 small areas -- at 3000RPM and above 6000RPM. And that huge AEM jump at 3000 looks like a dyno hiccup to me. The CP-E goes from totally dominating in the area to suddenly down by almost 20whp. On the top-end you can see the CP-E petering out until the AEM dominates it. This is traditional for an AEM -- very strong high-end gains.

Average gains are virtually dead-even. But that's considering that you'd even wan to compare these cars, which you don't. The CP-E was consistently and significantly higher as noted in the "Diff in Stock" column, making it virtually impossible to compare the two dynos. The only thing that it's really useful for is comparing where gains are, where the CP-E is the clear winner, not for comparing the amount of gain, particularly not a measure as exact as "$ per HP".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
998 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
Updated with CPE TQ numbers


On the top-end you can see the CP-E petering out until the AEM dominates it. This is traditional for an AEM -- very strong high-end gains.
[/b]
And considering our close ratio gearbox, we're constantly in the top-end of the tach no?



Either way, here are some numbers, make your own conclusion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,217 Posts
No. By the time the AEM really kicks in you've already lost your boost.

Close ratio keeps you in the powerband, whatever that may be. For the MazdaSpeed6 that's not north of 5500RPM.

Even when you're track racing you're not going to want to sit at 6000RPM where you've finally see the big AEM gains. And for everyday purposes you're going to spend 95% of your time between 2500 and 4500, where the CP-E is the clear winner and have you ready access to all your boost.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
998 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
The only time Im at 2500 is if I bog the launch. Shift at 6500 where I still have 15psi of boost. It all depends what you want, if top end is what you want then go AEM, if you want everyday driving then go CPE.

Ill personally take a little less middle of the road power for high end power I can have at the track. 4500-6500 is typical range for 1st, 2nd, and 3rd at the track; at least for me.

Jason
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,748 Posts
One thing to really make note of on MPS 6 dyno's.

As CP-E pointed out, the stock cooling system is insufficent for repeated dyno runs. This means there can be a sizable difference in performance between two runs as the interwarmer gets cooked from the fact its sitting on top of the turbo manifold and engine.

As such, it can be extremely easy for a manufacturer to setup a dyno cheat to artifically inflate numbers. Heck even a bag of ice on the intercooler for 30 seconds after a run would be enough to give you a nice umf in power.

Now I know CP-E didn't post their maximum gains, instead they went with their median ones, a number they felt would be more reproducible across the line. Based on the Mafci system's, their dyno numbers are generally very reproducible in member dyno's. More then one owner has dyno'd a mafci system and gotten gains within a few % (or even over) their original dyno claims.

Not to bash AEM and Injen...but based on their original dyno's for the 6s and 6i's, I wouldn't exactly call their numbers completely accurate. You can search through the old forums and dyno graphs and see for yourself. A good place to start is all the intake cel threads...as both injen and aem claimed their intakes didn't throw check engine lights. :sarc:

Here's the 6tech dyno list if you want a quick browse.
http://forum.mazda6tech.com/viewforum.php?f=42

As everyone know's I'm pretty pro CP-E, so I encourage everyone to search for themselves and compare charts instead of taking my word for it.

Here's some articles on the variance of dynos.

First off is an article comparing a 4 wheel dyno to a 2 wheel dyno.
http://www.sportcompactcarweb.com/editors/...bble/index.html

Second is an article taking a 350Z (same car) to 7 different dynos.
http://www.turbomagazine.com/tech/0306tur_...dash/index.html

This article is especially eye opening, as there is a 228.9 whp to 265.7 whp variance...on the exact same vehicle.

Here's an article which talks about how varied a dyno can be.
http://www.sdsefi.com/techdyno.htm
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,217 Posts
If that's how you want to make your purchase, more power to ya. But I look at those stock graphs and I wouldn't want to spend any money wholly based on those results from either of them.

The AEM stock graph peaks 4% higher than the CP-E stock one, but ends up 20% lower at the end. Something is clearly going on there.

Fron the beginning allt he way until 5000RPMs the graphs are pretty even. Perhaps somewhat comparable -- the CP-E one only average 5hp more over that range. But then the AEM one plummets and the CP-E stock averages 20hp more. And, coincidentally, there's where AEMs gains over the CP-E show up. It's easy to show gains when you're starting from a baseline that's a full 30hp lower.

Since the AEM stock graph is so unusual on the high-end can you really say that the car went from 116hp to 141hp, or was it simply that the 116hp run was a bad one and the runs should have been closer to the stock CP-E run like it was all the way up to that point? Since it's so unusual of a curve, I would say it's not the best run that they had.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
998 Posts
Discussion Starter #19
Personally Im not going to buy either as of right now, nor am I going to promote one company over another due to loyalty. Considering there are obvious issues with these vehicles (boost dropping off, lack of boost, etc) you cant technically compare anything.

Based on the truths different dynos will be different for the same car and different for different cars, we can NEVER do anything based on dyno graphs since all of them will be different due to different situations. Why do we even look at dynos again?

Now lets look at the AEM ending graph. The aem is 20% lower then the cp-e, maybe thats due to boost falling off, which could happen for both runs. If thats the case, imagine what kind of gains could be had IF the car DIDNT loose boost past 5500rpm. Or it could be the boost fell off with the stock pipe, but not with the AEM and thats why theres a big difference. Anything is possible, and we all need to think about things like this.

Again, here are the numbers, make your own conclusions.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,540 Posts
Wow! Very interesting!!

Jsehlms, Thanks for posting AEM numbers. Good job. :thumbup:

I have read the above postings and conclusions can be made all over the place. There are alot of variables from Dynos, to subject MS6s, to different CAIs. Very hard to draw which CAI is better. I can make a conclusion that a good CAI is better than stock air box. I think CP-E, AEM, Injen, K&N etc. are going to make good CAIs.

I know the purpose of this thread is make a comparison. I already placed an order with CP-E for their CAI. So it's moot point for me unless I purchase every manufacturers. I'm no track racer nor a performance fanatic. I'm an everyday driver who likes to dapple a little with modding. My Butt Dyno probably can not tell the difference between the manufacturers. And yeah, I might have paid a little more with getting Xcel versus AEM off ebay but I'm alright.

BTW Crossbow, Welcome back :D .
 
1 - 20 of 78 Posts
About this Discussion
77 Replies
26 Participants
jsehlms
Mazda 6 Forums
Mazda6club.com is a forum dedicated to the Mazda6 / Atenza. Come and discuss reliability, performance, modifications, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Top