This might be sticky worthy...
This will most likely be my only post for the day
Im plotting everything in the Excel right now, but long story short:
I did both tests on the same stretch of road at the same ambient temps,
with 2nd and 3rd gear pulls. I warmed the car up on each run. The car would not get above 167° coolant temp on the first run, I tried to get it above 170°, but to no avail. Ambient temps were read using my digital thermometer.
I did the K&N test in the following conditions: 11:00PM
Start: 49° - Ambient temp, no wind, Coolant - 167°, IAT1 - 50°, IAT2 - 72°
K&N Max Maf lb/min = 27.93 @ 6400 RPM
End: 49° - Ambient temp, no wind, coolant - 170°, IAT1 - 50°, IAT2 - 86°
Stock Intake: 12:00AM
Start: 49°-48° - Ambient temp, no wind, coolant - 170°, IAT1 - 49°, IAT2 - 71°
Stock Intake Max Maf lb/min = 28.78 @ 6250 AND 6421 RPM
End: 48° - Ambient temp, no wind, coolant - 172°, IAT1 - 48°, IAT2 - 82°
Which brings me to my conclusion. The stock intake flows just as well as the K&N intake. I know that it was colder during the second run, but the car was warmer, and the 1lb difference in Maf lb/min could be attested to the colder ambient temp (or intake temp) on the second run. I will post the graphs in a moment.
On another note, on the K&N the Boost Bypass would kick in at 6K rpm (according to the boost gauge), with the stock intake the boost bypass did not kick in until 6.5K (according to boost gauge). Food for thought.