Jump to content

Cold air intake for 2016 2500HD

Grumpy Tooch

Recommended Posts

Grumpy Tooch Enthusiast

Grumpy Tooch

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I would save your money for a tuner... I'm putting my stock air box in. All the cold air intake does is make alot of noise.

Diablo is still working on a tune for the 2016, not out yet. I like them because there are multiple tunes and i can remove it when needed.

I seem to be having trouble finding any aftermarket items for this truck...lol

  • Replies 36
  • Created
  • Last Reply
bersh Enthusiast

bersh

Posted
Posted

I guess for the price its worth it to spend it on a tuner.

So maybe just get high flow air filter and keep box. But why does the inlet have so many routes and is not direct. What is GM's thinking on that?

They do it to reduce intake noise. I put a GMPP CAI on my 2004 and ran it for a short time. No increase in mileage, no seat of the pants increase in power, but it did sound faster/louder, added a drone at steady highway speed, and looked cool. I pulled it off and sold it at a huge loss. The stock setup is already a CAI. I have no intention of putting one on my '15, but I am shopping for a tuner.

Grumpy Tooch Enthusiast

Grumpy Tooch

Posted
  • Author
Posted

They do it to reduce intake noise. I put a GMPP CAI on my 2004 and ran it for a short time. No increase in mileage, no seat of the pants increase in power, but it did sound faster/louder, added a drone at steady highway speed, and looked cool. I pulled it off and sold it at a huge loss. The stock setup is already a CAI. I have no intention of putting one on my '15, but I am shopping for a tuner.

Thanks for the info! Very illuminating. What about just replacing the filter?

MW2500HD Enthusiast

MW2500HD

Posted
Posted

Don't get me wrong, I believe cold air intakes have a purpose and do make small hp improvements/gains. But a small gain in a 7000lbs truck at high rpm isn't ideal for me. I think the drop in K&N stock replacement filter is worth the $60.

rocnrol Enthusiast

rocnrol

Posted
Posted

A pricier option, but one I feel that actually has a benefit is the addition of a functional ram air hood, using the stock air box and a K&N filter. I had this set up on my old dually with the 7.4l and it made a noticeable difference in milage and power. I will be doing it to my current truck too at some point.

 

post-84385-146377026739_thumb.jpgpost-84385-146377028663_thumb.jpg

 

Sent from my Z30 using Tapatalk

post-84385-146377026739_thumb.jpg

post-84385-146377028663_thumb.jpg

post-84385-146377026739_thumb.jpg

post-84385-146377028663_thumb.jpg

post-84385-146377026739_thumb.jpg

post-84385-146377028663_thumb.jpg

Cowpie Senior Enthusiast

Cowpie

Posted
Posted

It is a mixed bag. Going with a higher flow filter can also mean more particulates are getting in the engine. As for filter effectiveness, Numerous studies have shown that a filter has to be virtually caked with dirt before air flow and power is negatively affected. The stock AC Delco air filter does an exceptional job in both filtration and flow.

 

Here is a study on how bad a filter has to get before mpg and power take a serious hit.....

 

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/pdfs/Air_Filter_Effects_02_26_2009.pdf

 

As for OEM, in our case AC Delco, vs something like K&N.....

 

http://www.nicoclub.com/archives/kn-vs-oem-filter.html

 

Based on that, and experience with filters on my commercial stuff, I just use the stock AC Delco, and I also use a Filter Minder to determine when to change it. When the filter minder starts to show a change in vacuum due to the filter, I change the filter. Not before.

 

http://filterminder.com/products/visual-mechanical-indicators-gauges/air-filter-restriction-monitoring-gauges-indicators/air-filter-restriction-gauge-grommet-mount.html

Grumpy Tooch Enthusiast

Grumpy Tooch

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Well being there is NO kit on the market for my truck i do believe i will keep air flow stock for now.

...hmm now what can i do to improve HP and TQ? Do i do let it exhale better even though i cannot make it breath better?

rocnrol Enthusiast

rocnrol

Posted
Posted

Well being there is NO kit on the market for my truck i do believe i will keep air flow stock for now.

...hmm now what can i do to improve HP and TQ? Do i do let it exhale better even though i cannot make it breath better?

I too have been going down the path of what can I do to get more out of this engine. I have come to the conclusion that GM took care of all the things a guy used to be able to do to gain some HP & TQ. I've come to these thoughts, change the muffler, but only for sound, at 3 1/2" GM did their home work here. One area that has had some discussion on this forum is the use of long tube headers, typically good for increasing TQ, but no one has been able to find any yet and provide some feedback.

 

The factory intake is more than enough too, my personal feeling is the ram air hood might have a benefit... but it'll be a bit before I get one on.

 

Getting a tune done has shown to be of benefit, but not huge and at the expense of needing to use high octane gas to take advantage of it. There's a thread going on now about the benefits of using high octane in the stock engine, and it seems to be unclear if there's any gain in doing that. I've only used regular since new, so I might try this, and if I feel there was a benefit, I don't mind using the good stuff for towing, which might lead me to pony up the $400 ish for a tune, and just run premium gas while towing.

 

Going a little deeper into the gear head side of me, I started thinking about maybe a new cam. Because of the VVT, there's not a lot of options available right now. Reading about the applications that are available for some cars, there appears to be gains to be had by doing this. It's one thing I'll be keeping my eye on for sure.

 

I plan on having this truck for awhile so don't mind making the investment in it. And just to thwart the inevitable " should have bought a diesel if you're doing that much to your engine " argument, trust me, if I had a DMAX, I'd be the guy whipping it up too. I'm a hopeless gear head and can't leave anything stock. ;)

 

Sent from my Z30 using Tapatalk

  • 4 weeks later...
SMiller Senior Enthusiast

SMiller

Posted
Posted

When the stock air cleaner assembly flows 150% of what the motor can use there is zero gain in a "cold air intake".

  • 2 months later...
scz71864 Enthusiast

scz71864

Posted
Posted

I had an air raid intake tube with k/n filter in the stock box. That was the best bang for the buck paired with my tune from black bear. This was on a 2011 5.3. Sadly air raid won't just make the tube for the newer trucks anymore.

Tjeli Enthusiast

Tjeli

Posted
Posted

When the stock air cleaner assembly flows 150% of what the motor can use there is zero gain in a "cold air intake".

 

^^ THIS ^^ The factory box and high flow A/C filter flows MORE than enough to support this engine. The only thing an intake will add is noise.

 

-Eli

SouthpawHD Enthusiast

SouthpawHD

Posted
Posted

Diablo is still working on a tune for the 2016, not out yet. I like them because there are multiple tunes and i can remove it when needed.

I seem to be having trouble finding any aftermarket items for this truck...lol

Still nothing from them. Very frustrating. I have an In Tune, just need the 6.0 tune from them. Argh!

Grumpy Tooch Enthusiast

Grumpy Tooch

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Still nothing from them. Very frustrating. I have an In Tune, just need the 6.0 tune from them. Argh!

Good news, I did find canned tuner from Hypertech. I installed it, and it is comparable to Diablo, same adjustable features. I am happy with it so far. I use the 93 oct tune. Summit racing website.

Grumpy Tooch Enthusiast

Grumpy Tooch

Posted
  • Author
Posted

 

^^ THIS ^^ The factory box and high flow A/C filter flows MORE than enough to support this engine. The only thing an intake will add is noise.

 

-Eli

Im sorry, thats just not true. It is proven it does increase performance while increasing air flow. The factory setup has restrictions to keep mpg down, and thus performance down as it has for generations. And I like the sound, if you dont..then dont buy it...lol

Cowpie Senior Enthusiast

Cowpie

Posted
Posted

Well then, show us the substantial performance increases. Forget the 1-2 hp stuff, I mean some real increases to substantiate your claim. Not the marketing stuff from the folks who make the products either, but independent testing that validates your point. And that seems really stupid of an OEM, with EPA and CAFE breathing down their necks every day, to design their setup with restrictions designed to keep mpg down. That sounds like a ludicrous marketing gimmick from the folks who make the 3rd party stuff. It might have been more appropriate to say that the OEM's don't include some stuff that would improve fuel economy more than they do, because they still have to make a vehicle that doesn't price themselves out of the market.

 

But there is always room for improvement. The heavy truck OEM's have improved fuel economy on trucks by over 25% in the last 10 years, and done so while increases average hp and torque numbers. I have to give them credit for the R&D those folks have done. It might be a good thing if GM would give Cummins, Detroit Diesel, Volvo/Mack, and Paccar a call and get some tips on how to do the same thing. Already, the heavy truck engine guys are putting out stuff that will move 80,000 lb of truck and trailer, and get as good of mpg as many here state they get with a little 2500 6.0L pulling a camper.

 

It is something for a commercial truck with a engine pumping out 475 hp and 1850 lb of torque, 10-13 gears, riding on three times the tires (and larger ones at that), to break 9-10 mpg cross country pulling a 53 ft van trailer with a gross of 70,000 - 80,000 lb. And to think that the 2500 with a motor cycle engine in comparison to the big trucks can't do any better than that when pulling at near max gross or even half gross. If I was a engineer at GM, I would go hide.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • PunchT37
      Would this CV Shaft be bad?

      By PunchT37 · Posted

      Yes. You need to check out that thing, and the hub further.
    • anthony2558
      Would this CV Shaft be bad?

      By anthony2558 · Posted

      Would this be normal or a worn CV Shaft? 51K miles 3.5" lift? Boots are intact and no visible leaks showing. Attached is a the video I took. Thanks     https://youtu.be/ZnW7PPRmjJY?feature=shared    
    • Jsdirt
      2010 Avalanche 5.3 not running correctly after engine swap.

      By Jsdirt · Posted

      If everything checks out at the MAF, then the MAF is BAD, new or not.   You don't need a signal generator to troubleshoot this. PCM needs ALL powers and ALL grounds able to light a halogen headlight bulb - if it can light the bulb bright, then the wiring is good enough to run the PCM.   Best thing you can do for yourself is spend some time here: scannerdanner.com - Check out all his YouTube videos on similar issues. If you decide to subscribe it's the best bang-for-buck ratio in the automotive world, hands-down. He's got TONS of free vids on YouTube, too.
    • Tyler Gibbs
      PF63 Oil Filters Going Away?

      By Tyler Gibbs · Posted

      You got that Hengst D110??
    • contrabombarde
      2010 Avalanche 5.3 not running correctly after engine swap.

      By contrabombarde · Posted

      Yes, I used my multimeter to probe all of the wires at the MAF, both with the sensor connected, sensor disconnected, key on engine off, key on engine running, etc etc etc. I probed all of the wires again at the PCM, at the connectors, etc. All voltages are what they should be according to the service manual/wiring diagrams. All grounds are good, less than 20 millivolts from the battery negative under load. Both at the connector of the MAF, at the PCM connector etc.      I know this throws a pretty big wrench into things, but this truck was acting up before the swap. I don't have very much information, if any on what was causing it, but if you cleared all of the dtcs it would do the same thing where it would crank, fire, then die. And it would do the same thing a dozen or so times, and eventually it would start and run, but the difference is that it would run and actually be drivable. Whereas now if you can drive it at all, it goes into reduced power mode almost immediately, and even then it's not running correctly. When you come to a stop at a light it stumbles down to for 500 RPM before catching itself and returning to the smooth idle. And if you go more than about 50% throttle then it immediately goes back to doing the misfire thing.    Like I said, I know that throws a wrench into things, and unfortunately I was not able to pull any data or anything like that before I did this work, so I don't have much to go on.    I'm trying to not fixate on one particular thing as the cause of the problem, but it seems like all avenues are pointing me towards the PCM. Like I said I have tested the wiring extensively (see above), and during cranking the sensor does produce seemingly legitimate values at least according to my multimeter, but as soon as the engine fires those values quickly descend into gibberish. I've tried it with multiple different known working sensors, I have done literally every test I can think of multiple times on the wiring (probing the signals, probing the pins with the sensors unplugged, probing the pins at the PCM, voltage drop, voltage drop under load, continuity, ohms, and double-checking everything against the wiring diagrams/ proper values in the service data.)    Another thing that pushes me towards a possible PCM failure is, I have noticed in troubleshooting a little bit taking a break and coming back, that when I leave the truck to sit for a while and cool off, it starts and runs smoothly when I first start it up. However once it warms up. It starts having problems. For example, when I went out to the truck this morning after it had been sitting overnight, I was actually able to drive it down the block. And then once I got on the throttle a Little bit after going about a thousand ft, it started misfiring again. I pulled it back into the driveway, shut it down, and started it back up. It idled smoothly. As soon as I touched the throttle it did the misfire thing again. From then on as soon as I started it it would misfire. I shut the truck off and went to go get a coffee and do a bit more research. When I came back out I started the truck up and it immediately went into the smooth idle. After a couple of minutes of playing around with it, it would not idle smoothly anymore. Let it sit a couple of hours, rinse and repeat. This makes me think with temperature change something is going wrong inside the PCM. I have the PCM out of the 2007 donor vehicle and I'm thinking of getting a one-day subscription to the ACDelco programming service to try and program that and see if it helps.   Like I said, I'm really trying to not fixate myself on one potential cause, but it seems everything is pointing me towards PCM failure. I would really like to try to confirm that, but unfortunately I don't have an oscilloscope or a signal generator to do the GM service procedure where you feed 5 khz into the signal pin. 

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...