Jump to content

No GM certified Cold Air Intake for the 5.3 2017 Silverado 1500???

Orlando8

Recommended Posts

Orlando8 Enthusiast

Orlando8

Posted
Posted

Was going to order a GM CAI and did some research to find that the last year listed is the 2016. I even tried GM's online chat and was told the same thing and there is no GM CAI part for the 2017. I find it strange, isnt the 2016 and 17 the same engine?

I know there are other options but was going to go with GM's version since it does not void warrenty and have any grief with dealer down the road

  • Replies 30
  • Created
  • Last Reply
SuperSierra Enthusiast

SuperSierra

Posted
Posted

Was going to order a GM CAI and did some research to find that the last year listed is the 2016. I even tried GM's online chat and was told the same thing and there is no GM CAI part for the 2017. I find it strange, isnt the 2016 and 17 the same engine?

I know there are other options but was going to go with GM's version since it does not void warrenty and have any grief with dealer down the road

It's been the same engine for years. Your air sensor might be different and not fit the same hole.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Waterfowler41 Senior Enthusiast

Waterfowler41

Posted
Posted

That's why we have the Magnusson Moss warranty act. Get a reputable name brand air intake and you shouldn't have to worry about warranty issues or the dealer scoffing when there's issues.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

SouthernSilveradoGuy85 Senior Enthusiast

SouthernSilveradoGuy85

Posted
Posted

It's the same, they just haven't updated the year range yet. If you look on that K&N site and compare the '16 to the '17, the part #s are the exact same. So just order the one for the '16 and be done with it. As far as I know the engines haven't changed one bit since '14 in the 1500s.

 

Also don't feel like you need to get a GM certified system. Get the one that you want and don't worry about voiding the warranty. Maybe the stats have been updated, but as far as I know you can get just the Airaid M.I.T. and it does the same performance as a full air intake kit. You get the tube and get to keep the factory air filter box and it's half the price. I had an Airiad MIT on my '14 when I had it and loved it.

SuperSierra Enthusiast

SuperSierra

Posted
Posted

Warranty isn't just voided, the only ways a cold air intake can void your warranty is, not properly Installed, damaging the corresponding parts, or going into deep of water.

 

And even then they have to prove it was the cold air intake that caused the damage.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Orlando8 Enthusiast

Orlando8

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I completely understand all of this .

Now back to the original question, does anyone know or has anyone tired the GM CAI on a 2017?

Donstar Senior Enthusiast

Donstar

Posted
Posted

I looked at the link provided by SuperSierra and it claims that the K&N system is guaranteed to increase torque and horsepower. I imagine this is the reason for purchasing a GM certified or any brand of cold air intake. Is this improvement noticeable or does it require special equipment to verify the improvement? A phone call to your local GM parts department will confirm the compatibility of a '16 to a '17. I may make the same call if people are noticing increased engine power!

Orlando8 Enthusiast

Orlando8

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Just found out there is a different GM CAI for the 2017. Was looking through a Chevrolet Performance flyer online and there is a different parts number.

The 2015 thru 2016 is not the same CAI

 

P/N 84016022 Silverado with 5.3L V8 (L83), model years 2015–2016

 

P/N 84089441 Silverado with 5.3L V8 (L83), model years 2017

Not sure what the difference is but.........................

SouthernSilveradoGuy85 Senior Enthusiast

SouthernSilveradoGuy85

Posted
Posted

Just found out there is a different GM CAI for the 2017. Was looking through a Chevrolet Performance flyer online and there is a different parts number.

The 2015 thru 2016 is not the same CAI

 

P/N 84016022 Silverado with 5.3L V8 (L83), model years 2015–2016

 

P/N 84089441 Silverado with 5.3L V8 (L83), model years 2017

Not sure what the difference is but.........................

 

They probably just changed something on the intake kit itself. Or maybe for some reason just changed the part #. But either one should fit.

 

Also the K&N kit is the same for the 5.3 and 6.2, they just include both couplers to connect the tube to the throttle body. The 6.2 TB is a tad bigger than the 5.3, everything else externally of those 2 engines are the same.

 

By the way, any HP gain that they show is for a cold engine bay. Once it gets to operating temp there's only 2-3 HP gain. The only performance gain you MIGHT feel is a little bit better throttle response since it's a straight shot tube and not a big box for the air to go around. Again I suggest the Airaid MIT since it does the same performance while keeping the factory air fitler box and filter so you can just keep buying a factory filter. The tube also just looks better and gives better access. But, it's your money.

Orlando8 Enthusiast

Orlando8

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Price is about $100 more than the old part number also.

  • 2 weeks later...
thatryan Enthusiast

thatryan

Posted
Posted

Anyone know why what looks like the exact part is so much more money?

 

Also, and fuel efficiency changes with changing to one of these GM intakes?

Z45 Senior Enthusiast

Z45

Posted
Posted

You cannot get more horsepower from a cold air intake system and still get better fuel economy.

Archived

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

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Forum Statistics

    250.4k
    Total Topics
    2.7m
    Total Posts

  • Member Statistics

    342,758
    Total Members
    8,960
    Most Online
    Randy Ginoza
    Newest Member
    Randy Ginoza
    Joined

  • Who's Online   5 Members, 0 Anonymous, 1,769 Guests (See full list)

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Aimatdeer
      Ac not keeping up

      By Aimatdeer · Posted

      Monday looks like a good day for the dealer to test an ac issue. Hopefully it all turns out good.
    • CamGTP
      Gas Prices

      By CamGTP · Posted

      Paid $2.72 for E85 today.
    • Atlas
      Gas Prices

      By Atlas · Posted

      Welcome back! No, it definitely doesn't pass the sniff test. Even "ceasefire" needs an alternative definition these days.    $5.29 at Kroger today
    • bluev8
      Intermittent no-code issues on 2022.5+ V8 trucks — what did the shop fail to capture?

      By bluev8 · Posted

      That makes sense, and I think you are describing the real product problem. Capturing data is the easy part. If the owner or technician has to manually dig through five minutes of millisecond-level logs, the product has already failed. The device would be at the ECM harness, not at the OBD port, so I agree that data retrieval and event marking need to be thought through carefully. The way I am thinking about the architecture is: The recorder itself should not depend on a phone, app, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, or cloud connection to capture the event. It should always keep a local rolling buffer and lock the event locally. A button, phone app, or small cabin device would only act as an event marker. If the driver feels a stumble and presses the button 10–30 seconds later, the pre-buffer has to already contain the useful data. For data retrieval, the practical options would be a sealed service USB lead, Wi-Fi download, or a phone/cabin companion device. I would not expect the owner to remove the ECM-side module or work with raw files directly. The cloud or AI side would be for interpretation, not for capturing the event. The truck may have no connection when the issue happens, so the evidence has to be saved locally first. After that, cloud processing could help decode the data, compare it against baselines, and generate a readable report. For the first version, I would keep the automatic triggers conservative and objective: driver event marker bus-off error passive voltage drop / brownout device reset FIFO or queue overflow a normally periodic message disappearing side-to-side communication mismatch, if the topology supports that For “learning normal,” I agree with your point, but I would not want to overclaim it as automatic root-cause diagnosis at first. A realistic first step would be learned baseline comparison for that specific vehicle and operating condition. For example, a value would only be compared against similar conditions: RPM range load / MAP throttle position gear / vehicle speed coolant and oil temperature battery voltage AFM/DFM state, if decoded and validated Then the report could flag things like: this periodic message disappeared compared with its normal timing this value deviated from this vehicle’s normal range under similar conditions the same abnormal pattern repeated after the same type of event the anomaly occurred together with voltage, oil-pressure, misfire, or communication changes But I would still call that “abnormal pattern detected,” not “replace this part,” unless there is enough validated repair data behind it. So the intended product would not be “here is a huge log.” It would need to be an event package: what triggered the capture how much pre/post data was preserved what changed before and after the event whether the device itself reset, overflowed, or saw a bus error selected graphs around the event raw data only as supporting evidence From your perspective, what would make this kind of report useful instead of just another datalog? For example: What are the top 5 parameters or events you would want highlighted first? Would you trust a learned baseline for that specific vehicle, or would you prefer fixed thresholds? How much false-positive flagging would be acceptable before you stopped looking at the reports? What would a one-page report need to show for an independent shop to take it seriously? For misfire, AFM/DFM, oil pressure, or U-code complaints, what would you want the tool to flag automatically?
    • scotthvac.net
      2022-24 halogen - led grille swap

      By scotthvac.net · Posted

      2024 Silverado 2500 HD LTZ grille no camera Parts list   84603331 84913656 84913657 84913654 84913655 84911567 84911568 85646092 85646093 85797921 85797922   11570637  x10-15   grille/bumper bolts 11546500  x10      grille clips 11571006  x10      push/retainer clips 11546454  x6       nut retainers 11611609  x6       M5 bolts 11610700  x6       molding/trim retainers

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...