Through the intake ports on the side and through the black ports on the left and right rear bumpers. You can see the ICs through the ones on the bottom of the bumper.

wrs,

Thank you for sharing your data and real world results. Although the dyno numbers according to Cobb with their custom dyno tune were far superior, real world ¼ mile data from your runs at SAR proved otherwise. Your best runs at SAR from this post , were:

wrs FVD - 10.65 @ 135.4 – FVD Sound Exhaust, FVD Headers, IPD Plenum, FVD Software, OEM Tips.

wrs Cobb – 10.72 @ 133.45 - FVD Sound Exhaust, FVD Headers, IPD Plenum, Cobb Custom Dyno Tuned Software, FVD 2 3/4 Tips.

While some will argue about differing conditions, I just want to point out that some may want to rethink their positions on our “piggyback” module. A few said that the computer would relearn deeming the piggyback null and void, etc. You see the data, decide for yourself. Many have claimed that an off the shelf map is not as good as a custom file. You see the data with our off the shelf map vs. a custom dyno tune, decide for yourself. Many sited the fact that software engineers are available on a whim to adjust, etc. That may be great for some, but our stance is to give you power with peace of mind, software that changes on the fly with differing conditions. No hassle, no switching maps, etc. Just enjoy the car and your time at the track. And when you are ready remove our unit, do so without a trace.

Also, I was curious you didn't mention that you added your larger diameter FVD tips that I sold you a few weeks back. The runs you did with our Software were with the smaller diameter OEM tips. As most are aware a bottleneck in the exhaust can rob quite a bit of power. Just wanted to mention that so all factors were included so the data is more accurate.

Hey Rhonda, I did make a post on he cool tips and got props for it. I don't have it on the list as a mod however.

Now just so you know, I have a theory about why the FVD piggyback gave the numbers it did and I will say here that the reason is because it's not as aggressive with the torque and I probably got less or no TC intervention. However, it does have good horsepower up top and for whatever other reasons, it does well in the second half the quarter mile. I don't have datalogs with the FVD so I can't tell what the IAT was either but I am guessing lower as it was 7:30pm when I made the FVD run and 1:30pm when I made the Cobb 100 octane map run.

I hope to get to SAR Friday evening and give the Cobb 100 Octane map several good runs. I only have one with it and it was made in the middle of the day on a sloppy track. My best time with FVD was when I was the first car on the track. Note that slip shows me as car #2 and so I raced car #5 as we were the first two in line and the first two to use the track. I circled around and made those other two 135mph runs in a total of about 20 minutes. On Saturday I had to wait a long time between runs and so I turned the car off and the tires didn't stay hot which resulted in a lot of wheel slip and TC intervention on takeoff.

Anyway, I am still chasing a sub 10.5s ET and hoping to see 136 or 137 trap speeds along with that ET using Cobb. Indeed there has been a tremendous amount of misinformation about piggybacks that has been disseminated in a lot of places and certainly my FVD trap speeds are better than all of the flash tunes so far.

That is only one comparo, it's not that the FVD Piggy it better or worse than COBB... Let see more comparos

So here is where I switched from FVD to Cobb. I like the AP because I can collect data and I see what the issue is but have no idea how to fix it and I am not sure tires will help.

This has jack all to do with Carlos.