Skip to main content
HOME   |   ABOUT   |   NEWS   |   TECH ARTICLES   |   AT THE TRACK   |   REVIEWS   |   VIDEOS   |   CONTACT ME

Saleen Grille Tested - Does It Really Increase Airflow?

730 hp Mustang Saleen 302 Black Label - Saleen ©

Most people who track their cars quickly come to recognize one of the biggest enemies of speed; heat. Heat affects tires, brakes, fluids, the engine, everything. One area that gets more than its fair share of heat is the engine bay. The most efficient gasoline/petrol engines struggle to exceed 35% efficiency - meaning that more than 65% of the energy in the fuel that is burnt inside the engine is not converted into motion or 'useful energy'.

Most of the non-useful energy left over is turned into heat. That means that your average hot hatch making 200 hp could easily produce around 300 kW (400 hp) of heat as a byproduct of making 200 hp. If you're having trouble wrapping your head around that number, that's enough power to heat a large home improvement store. In Canada. Some of that heat goes out the exhaust (thankfully) but a lot of it has to be dealt with in the engine bay through your radiator, and oil cooler if you have one. Unfortunately, there are limitations to how much air you can get into the engine bay to help you.

The main one is aerodynamics; the more air you suck in, the less air you can persuade to smoothly flow around the car to reduce air drag/resistance. That, in turn, affects your fuel economy. Plus, a large open area increases snow and water ingestion. As a result, manufacturers can't sell cars with huge open grilles (most of the large grilles you see on modern cars are fake; only a small part of the grille is open and flows air). This opens the door for the aftermarket to improve airflow if you prioritize managing heat.

2012 Mustang Boss 302 at Atlantic Motorsport Park - Graham MacNeil ©

I do, which is why I bought an aftermarket grille for track day duty in my BOSS 302. For my car, I went with a Saleen S281 grille. Ideally, I would have got the BOSS 302S (race car) grille, but I couldn't justify the extra cost, so I went with Saleen which is no stranger to Mustangs. But to verify whether or not it was money well spent, I decided to put it to the test... three tests, actually.

1st test was going 60 mph (100 kph) in 5th gear until temperatures stabilized. The 2nd test was stopping after that run to see how much temperatures rise while stationary. The 3rd test was going 60 mph again but in 4th gear to bring engine speed up a bit and make more heat. I got someone to record readings for coolant and intake air temperatures through a handheld scanner in real time. I also recorded outside air temperature from the dash readout.

For this write-up, OAT = Outdoor/Outside air temperature (ambient), ECT = Engine Coolant Temp, IAT = Intake Air Temp, and deg = degrees. Here's how the two grilles performed.

STOCK GRILLE - 60 MPH IN 5TH GEAR

OAT: 21 deg C (69 deg F)

ECT: 92.8 deg C (199 deg F)

IAT: 22 deg C (71 deg F)

After I had finished installing the aftermarket grille, outside temperature was much higher at 28 degree C. I could've waited to test in a similar temperature but I thought I'm ready to go, I might as well go out and see how it does. If it can match the stock grille in hotter temperature, then that's a pretty good improvement in its own right. But it didn't match the stock grille...

SALEEN GRILLE - 60 MPH IN 5TH GEAR

OAT: 28 deg C (82 deg F)

ECT: 86.7 deg C (188 deg F)

IAT: 27 deg C (81 deg F)

Yes, it actually beat the factory grille and by a good margin. Coolant temperature was over 6 degree C (11 degree F) COOLER, despite outdoor temperature being 7 degree C (13 degree F) HIGHER. In both cases, the car was going 60 mph in 5th gear (1:1 gearbox ratio in this car) and temperature had stabilized. I was very impressed.

How could IAT be lower than outdoor temperature? Well, Ford actually fitted the Mustang BOSS 302 with what it called a "Cold Induction System". Essentially, it's a cold air intake like an aftermarket kit you'd buy that includes tubing to get air from the lower bumper area; away from the engine bay and its heat. The only difference is that it uses a traditional filter box instead of a conical air filter and plastic tubing.

Chances are, the difference was just down to slightly different readings from the IAT sensor and the OAT sensor providing readout in the dash, in turn resulting in rounding up in the dash and rounding down in the readout, but we can still make a useful conclusion (more on that at end). On a slightly different note, this is a testament to the effectiveness of the 'Cold Induction System' Ford designed.

STOCK GRILLE - STOPPED

OAT: 21 deg C (69 deg F)

ECT: Temperature shot up to 97.8 deg C (208 deg F), then slowly crept to 98.9 deg C (210 deg F)

IAT: 23 deg C (74 deg F)

SALEEN GRILLE - STOPPED

OAT: 28 deg C (82 deg F)

ECT: Temperature crept up to 92.2 deg C (198 deg F )

IAT: 29 deg C (84 deg F)

Once again, despite outside air temperature being several degrees higher, coolant temperature with the aftermarket grille was several degrees LOWER. Moreover, it didn't shoot up initially after a sudden loss of airflow due to stopping.

STOCK GRILLE - 60 MPH IN 4TH GEAR

OAT: 21 deg C (69 deg F)

ECT: 95.0 deg C (203 deg F)

IAT: 22 deg C (71 deg F)

SALEEN GRILLE - 60 MPH IN 4TH GEAR

OAT: 28 deg C (82 deg F)

ECT: 88.3 deg C (191 deg F)

IAT: 28 deg C (82 deg F)

By now, there should be no surprise. Despite being hotter outside, coolant temperature was still several degrees lower with the aftermarket grille than the stock grille**.

WHAT ABOUT INTAKE AIR TEMPERATURES?

Overall, it's difficult to draw a definite conclusion from the IAT readings because it was lower in the first 60 mph test, which could be explained by reading tolerances (aka "rounding error") of the difference sensors. That makes exact calculations rather pointless. However, what is useful to note is the relative difference.

In the first 60 mph test, IAT was 1 deg C HIGHER than OAT with the stock grille but 1 deg LOWER than OAT with the aftermarket grille. While stationary, IAT was 2 deg C HIGHER than OAT with the stock grille but matched OAT with the aftermarket grille. In the final test, IAT was 1 deg C higher than OAT with the stock grille and matched OAT with the aftermarket grille.

If you ignore the exact numbers, you can still conclude a general advantage. IAT was consistently higher than OAT reading from the dash with the stock grille, by either 1 or 2 deg C. With the aftermarket grille, IAT was either lower or matched the dash reading. There is a clear and consistent trend of IAT being improved (relative to outside) with the aftermarket grille, likely due to lower average temperature throughout the engine bay.

NEEDLESS TO SAY...

I was very happy with the results and the grille overall. Of course, not every aftermarket grille will perform this well compared to stock, but it should be a good indication of a well designed option that truly opens the frontal area.



** For thermodynamics nerds: note that the tests were done in the sequence I wrote (for each grille), meaning that the coolant temperature with the stock grille had to cool from 99 deg C after the stationary (2nd) test to 95 deg C in 3rd test. With the aftermarket grille, it had to cool from 92 deg C in the 2nd test to 88 deg C in the 3rd test. Coolant temperature went down the exact same amount with both grilles (nearly 4 deg C), despite a much narrower 'approach' with the aftermarket grille.

Approach is the temperature difference between your 'load' and your 'source'. In this case, the load is the engine coolant - this is what you are trying to cool down - meaning that your load temperature is the coolant temperature. And the car is using outside air for cooling, meaning your 'source' temperature is your outside air temperature.

With the stock grille, OAT (source) was 21 deg C. ECT (load) was 99 deg C at the end of the 2nd test; an approach of 78 deg C. With the aftermarket grille, OAT (source) was 28 deg C and ECT (load) was 92 deg C; an approach of 64 deg C. To achieve the same amount of cooling (i.e. a drop of nearly 4 deg C) with a much narrower approach and no change other than the grille (radiator design, coolant flow, etc. is the same), airflow had to be significantly higher as a result of the grille, which is very impressive!

Follow Ram's Eye The Track Guy on Facebook and Instagram!





Comments







Does An Aftermarket Grille Really Increase Airflow?
I put a Saleen S281 grille to the test to answer that question.

Stock Suspension S197 Mustang With Square 305/30/19's
What you need to fit a proper size square tire setup.

How Limited Slip Diffs Make You Faster on Track
What you need to know about how they put power down and pros and cons.

Can Telemetry Explain Schumacher's Talent?
A comparison between Schumacher's and then team mate Herbert's data.






Cayman GT4 Track Review
The first Cayman with proper (911-challenging) power.

Is an EcoBoost Mustang any good on Track?
Two days at the track in a Mustang short 4 cylinders.

2016 BMW M4 DCT Track Review
It's quick (properly quick). But is it fun?

Can a stock Golf Diesel handle a Track Day?
Not your every day track beater.




🔥 Most Visited This Week

GTR vs Evo X vs STI: which has the best AWD system?

A few weeks ago, I made a post explaining  mainstream AWD system types and how they compare , pros and cons, etc. including some simple diagrams to show where the power goes and how much. As promised, this post will focus on specific cars and what AWD systems they use, especially ones that that have more or less been defined by their AWD systems, and the best place to start may be with a bombshell; the Nissan GT-R. Nissan GT-R (R35) The GT-R has built a reputation around having monster traction and very approachable performance, thanks to its AWD system - Advanced Total Traction Engineering System for All-Terrain (ATTESA) - and what it can do for you. But the GT-R doesn't actually use the most mechanically sophisticated type of AWD systems discussed in the previous article, namely a "true" AWD with a centre differential. Instead, it uses a clutch pack to transfer power. RWD-based clutch-type AWD schematic - Rams Eye The Track Guy © The R32, R33, and R34 Sky

2016 Mustang EcoBoost Track Review

Photography by: Graham MacNeil Ford really wants to sell you a Mustang with a turbo four cylinder. They started by derating the V6 engine in the 2015 S550 compared to the 2011-2014 S197 V6 to make the EcoBoost 2.3 litre more differentiated. Then, they offered a performance pack on the EcoBoost but not on the V6. Now, they killed the V6 all together for 2018 and will only sell you a V8 or this EcoBoost. I love a good V8, everyone who knows me knows that. This is a Mustang, which means it needs a V8. If those aren't enough reasons, I always prefer natural aspiration over forced induction. That's three strikes against the EcoBoost-powered Mustang. But I'd be lying if I said the idea never intrigued me. It's the lightest (if you account for features). It has the best weight distribution. It has the same great chassis as the GT. It's very affordable and it has a lot of potential to make more power. Aftermarket? Endless support. There's plenty of good about it.

2004 Audi TT 3.2 Quattro DSG Track Review

Before getting into this, I have to confess something... I had never driven an Audi TT before. Not until this one, anyway. But that hasn't stopped me from forming an opinion about it from the comforts of my own couch while reading and watching reviews online. After all, if you've never done that, do you even know what the point of the internet is? Now, we all interpret reviews differently. Call it confirmation bias if you will, but if you like a car, you'll read a review and look at the positives as what makes the car great and the negatives are but a few quibbles you have to live with. If you don't like a car, the positives are a few things the manufacturer got right while screwing up everything else. It's a bit harsh to put the TT in the latter category, but that's where it ended up for me... I never took the TT seriously. The problem with the TT for me isn't that it's a Golf underneath, per se. There is nothing wrong with a performance car sharing a

Limited Slip Differentials - The Basics

I'm finishing up a comparison post (link to introduction: Intro: Focus RS vs Golf R vs WRX STI vs Evo X ) and, throughout the post, I realized that I have to go off topic a lot to talk about how each type of differential changes the way the car drives. As a result, I thought I'd write a separate post to go into more detail before I post the comparison to keep it more focused on the cars and avoid veering off topic too much. By saying "Limited Slip Differentials" in the title, I am including torque vectoring diffs because, although current conventional terminology treats them differently, a torque vectoring differential is, in essence, a very sophisticated limited slip diff (LSD) that can be manipulated to actively help the car handle better. And while none of the cars in the comparison use open (without help from the brakes) or non-gear mechanical LSD’s, I’ll briefly discuss them so that the post is more inclusive. I’ll only focus on using power to help the