[morpheus]

I dont mean to hijack this thread but....Damon, I know AEM was making big brake kits for other vehicles, any chance that your company might make a kit for the Armada considering all the problems with the stock brakes?

 

[AEMTech]

No, I'm sorry, we sold our performance brake line of products.

http://www.aempower.com/press_events_detail.asp?aid=42

 

[m4ck]

Hey AEMTech how bout helping us get our site sponsored by AEM
M4ck

 

[andy]

When?

AEMTech, when is the AEM Intake going to be available. I'm shopping now for the Volant and would love to have more info to go by.
I went to the AEM website and it's still pending.
Thanks

 

[AEM_Bako]

Need Another Test Vehicle

AEM is looking for an 05 Armada for test fitting. Car must be in the Los Angeles area. The car will be needed for a day. If you have any questions or comments please e-mail me at [email protected] thank you.

AEM
2205 126 th St.
Hawthorne CA, 90250

 

[sinnerFA]

For all those intrested I decided to finally post a pic of the AEM intake since there wasn't anyone else doing it....

Also I got mine from ebay for $236 polished....

 

[Armada]

I'm still concerned about the difference in low end performance between the stock intake and the AEM on their posted dyno run. I appreciate the AEM engineer explanation, but wouldn't that tranny issue show up in both runs? It shouldn't be limited to just the AEM. And wouldn't it be better to do several runs and average them? There can be a 10 horse difference on the same setup run back to back with no equipment change.

I don't know how AEM would be noticably superior to Volant and K&N.

I have a simple little $300 accelerometer (G-Tech Pro Competition) and play around with it a bit. The best gains, on average for a K&N drop in over the stock air filter is 2 horses, and I suspect that is within the margin of error, but it is consistent.

The best gains I am getting with a first generation K&N Aircharger are in the 8-10 horsepower range (all of this is at the rear wheels).

And, again, you can get this much variation from run to run without changing a thing, so it takes a series of runs under identical conditions and the averaging of them, IMHO before you can reliably demonstrate gains.

These runs, back in April when the weather was cool, show almost the same peak horsepower as your test vehicle in stock mode, but as much peak torque as the AEM test truck with the AEM Brute in place. However my torque curve does differ considerably from either AEM run, stock or modified, in that mine does drop off faster from peak than either of theirs. I don't know the reason for that.

I cannot get reading on this equipment for lower rpm unless I back out of the run early and then try to splice the runs together in the same chart. I may try that.

BTW accelerometers tend to read low in comparison to a chassis dyno because the testing is done at actual speed on the road and aerodynamics and wind resistance are involved, conditions not present on a chassis dyno.

My truck was using the K&N drop in that day and not the Aircharger.

 

[sinnerFA]

I am in South Central PA, Just hook me up and we can test my AEM install

I'm still concerned about the difference in low end performance between the stock intake and the AEM on their posted dyno run. I appreciate the AEM engineer explanation, but wouldn't that tranny issue show up in both runs? It shouldn't be limited to just the AEM. And wouldn't it be better to do several runs and average them? There can be a 10 horse difference on the same setup run back to back with no equipment change.

I don't know how AEM would be noticably superior to Volant and K&N.

I have a simple little $300 accelerometer (G-Tech Pro Competition) and play around with it a bit. The best gains, on average for a K&N drop in over the stock air filter is 2 horses, and I suspect that is within the margin of error, but it is consistent.

The best gains I am getting with a first generation K&N Aircharger are in the 8-10 horsepower range (all of this is at the rear wheels).

And, again, you can get this much variation from run to run without changing a thing, so it takes a series of runs under identical conditions and the averaging of them, IMHO before you can reliably demonstrate gains.

These runs, back in April when the weather was cool, show almost the same peak horsepower as your test vehicle in stock mode, but as much peak torque as the AEM test truck with the AEM Brute in place. However my torque curve does differ considerably from either AEM run, stock or modified, in that mine does drop off faster from peak than either of theirs. I don't know the reason for that.

I cannot get reading on this equipment for lower rpm unless I back out of the run early and then try to splice the runs together in the same chart. I may try that.

BTW accelerometers tend to read low in comparison to a chassis dyno because the testing is done at actual speed on the road and aerodynamics and wind resistance are involved, conditions not present on a chassis dyno.

My truck was using the K&N drop in that day and not the Aircharger.

 

[ZRMAnn]

Installed AEM Intake in Q56

Thought I'd let y'all know I installed the AEM kit on our QX56 last week. Nothing but gains as far as I can report: response, SOUND...excellent kit. Have put about 300-400 miles since install and no anomolies to report. This is a must do if you care anything about performance.

Scott

 

[SilverQShip]

whats your mpg at zrmann?

 

[ZRMAnn]

whats your mpg at zrmann?

Interesting you should ask. I just had my first opportunity in the vehicle tonight to check it! My wife is the primary driver of this vehicle and has driven all week since the install. When I flipped to the trip monitor, it read 17.1 mpg. It's never been that high, and she does a mix of highway and around town driving. Typcially, I would see around 15.6 to 16.0. I'm going to reset it tomorrow and track. So, we may have picked up better than 2-3 mpg in order for the average over the last 700 or 800 miles to have been a little more than 15 but the driving just in the last week, approx 300 miles, to have risen the overall to 17.1. I really didn't anticipate too much but hey these days I'll take any little gain. For the record, that is pretty much what I'd see when I checked the mpg in the FX45, and that is only 4-5 mpg worse than my 4 cyl Nissan Frontier!!

I'm pleased!

Scott

 

[Armada]

Here's an objective post from another board on before and after dyno runs on the AEM Brute Force. Please note that this is a chipped Toyota Tundra and not a Nissan Titan. However AEM said it would produce 15 horses more. The difference was 6-7 horses and just about no increase in torque. Here is the actual post. I can put up the link if anyone is interested. I remain skeptical. This does not seem much different than other intakes on the market.

AEM Brute Force Intake Update

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

OK, I'm back from LA, and everything is installed and running fine. A BIG Thanks to AEM Power and Tundra Solutions for the intake!!

I'm working on a full write-up of everything, however, I know some of you want some fast info so here's the quick and dirty version:

Before - 3 run average
202.1 HP @ 5000 RPM
267.9 lb/ft @ 3500 RPM

After - 3 run average
208.9 HP @ 5000 RPM
270.0 lb/ft @ 3500 RPM

The curves start to show noticeable separation around 3200 RPM for the HP and TQ curves, however, they start around 2750 RPM so don't read a whole lot into that. More explanations to come.

Sound
Normal under cruising speeds, and light to moderate acceleration
Medium to heavy foot gets you a snarling growl that quickly builds to a loud roar. Sounds sweet!

Butt-Dyno = Not much change, though the RPM's seem to build more quickly and the power seems to come on more smoothly.
__________________
Randy
'04 CC LE White, Born on date 01/04, Tundra convert,
MODS: Unichip, Hellwig


Posted by:

 

[adjmcloon]

Man, those horsepower numbers make me laugh. No way could I deal with a Toy-ota after driving the Armada around!

 

[Armada]

Man, those horsepower numbers make me laugh. No way could I deal with a Toy-ota after driving the Armada around!

Isn't that the truth! I did not post to intentionally slam the Tundra, and I'm not sure what year model it was. My intent was to raise doubts about the claims of aftermarket intake products (not just AEM, but it happens to be their product in question).

But now that you mention it, those numbers are pitiful. At least 50-60 horses down from our engines, maybe more. And that is with a Unichip, which is supposed to really help Toyota products and the intake.

 

[Rossi]

A dyno isn't set to how you a full RPM range of numbers. A dyno is run to give you peak HP and TQ numbers. The change the rpm range that it will pick up per the vehicle.

For the Armada they know that it will do it's peak numbers somewhere after 3000 rpms. You will find relatively low HP and TQ numbers at low rpms. For instance if you were going to dyno a Honda V-Tec engine....your dyno would be from 5k up....them engines are designed to do 9k in there rpm range. That variable valve stuff seems to be working for them....I think they have three stages now.

 

[92TripleBlack]

Man, those horsepower numbers make me laugh. No way could I deal with a Toy-ota after driving the Armada around!

What do you expect? Smallest motor in the class it is only a 7/8 size to begin with. Same size motor as the middle size Jeep Grand Cherokee motor. In '07 maybe they will make something worth looking at but for me, the last TOYota worth a look was the old Supra Turbo. Been almost a decade since there has been a fast TOY.

As for intakes, they shouldn't add anything. Mods are only as good as the weakest link. Intakes are rarely the weakest unless you have heavily modified the rest of the engine systems.

 

[gmartin66]

AEM Brute Force and Borla..

I should start by saying that I was cracking up at the Toyo horsepower comments. I had a 91 4 Runner with a V6 that put out 150hp! I had a 4x4 with all terrain tires, so there was significant planning required to pass someone on the freeway.

Anyway, does anyone have experience running the AEM Brute Force with Borla Exhaust on an Armada? I just do not want to run into a situation where by adding expensive extras, I wind up loosing HP or worse yet, screw reliability up!

Thanks

 

[gmartin66]

Installed AEM Brute Force Today..

After reading the AEM engineer's comments on the Brute Force intake, I bought it and had it installed today. What a difference in punch! I REALLY see a difference.

There was some increase in HP with the Borla system and I felt it, but I was NOT going to post a message lying to you all that I was chirping into second gear. I AM posting this to say that this particular combination really set the truck off.

One downside is that when you lay on it you HEAR that intake man. Driving the car moderately (most of the time for me) you do not hear the intake at all or a lot of exhaust howl. As in, I am not ashamed to drive it in my neighborhood. Step on it though, and the thing sounds scary. I actually started laughing at how muscle car it sounded.

 

[armoody]

After reading the AEM engineer's comments on the Brute Force intake, I bought it and had it installed today. What a difference in punch! I REALLY see a difference.

There was some increase in HP with the Borla system and I felt it, but I was NOT going to post a message lying to you all that I was chirping into second gear. I AM posting this to say that this particular combination really set the truck off.

One downside is that when you lay on it you HEAR that intake man. Driving the car moderately (most of the time for me) you do not hear the intake at all or a lot of exhaust howl. As in, I am not ashamed to drive it in my neighborhood. Step on it though, and the thing sounds scary. I actually started laughing at how muscle car it sounded.

Sounds killer - can you post a link to the AEM comments? Is it on their web site? Thanks!