Jump to content

ANOTHER COld Air Intake Thread!

Ed/2020RST
 Share

Recommended Posts

Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Firehawk T/A said:

This is a good read. https://www.hpacademy.com/technical-articles/air-intake-restrictions-explained/  Ultimately any restriction to incoming air in an engine will result in reduced volumetric efficiency. For example a dirty air filter at any rpm range will reduce how efficent the engine is at filling each cylinder with air. The same is true for a cold air intake that is designed to flow better than the stock air box. At any given rpm it will be more efficient at filling the cylinders with air, thus creating more power. 

On any vehicle I have installed a cold air intake on, I have personally noticed that I need less throttle pressure to accelerate up to speed, along with a slight increase in fuel mileage. I highly doubt I will ever recoup the investment in fuel costs, but I don't really care. I like the way it looks, sounds and feels while driving it, and thats enough for me.

This is the line to pursue. 

You just like it. Now that I can understand. 

 

 

Have you ever been able to say to yourself: "My air filter must be getting dirty as I feel it's taking more pedal to accelerate to 60 mph"?  

 

The honest answer is:

No

 

If you can honestly say yes then shame on you for letting your filter get to the point of collapse.

 

Take a hard look at the VE tables in your ECU. (If you can access them) As far as it is concerned fuel is metered by cylinder VE which is a percentage of manifold pressure. NOT atmospheric (airbox/plenum pressure). The pressure between the TB and the inlet valve. Look at those tables throttled. You can have 99% VE at 15% TPS. The MAP is placed AFTER the filter but BEFORE the  Helmholtz box because?????? 

 

Look, I've never argued that a CAI cannot make power. My argument is....it doesn't matter.....unless......

 

 You just like it, Or race naturally

This is the line to pursue. 

 

Enjoy the noise ? 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Replies 96
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

KARNUT
KARNUT

Wow both guys that have modified their trucks for their own taste are chastising people for doing the same. I’ve had several factory hot rods of late that had factory aftermarket looking CALs on them.

Firehawk99
Firehawk99

This is a good read. https://www.hpacademy.com/technical-articles/air-intake-restrictions-explained/  Ultimately any restriction to incoming air in an engine will result in reduced volumetric efficien

It's Tim
It's Tim

classactions are a boondogle... the "attorneys" make millions while claimants get a coupon for a BOGO free meatless whopper. Just end up costing consumers more in the end.

Posted Images

Firehawk99 Enthusiast

Firehawk99

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, Grumpy Bear said:

This is the line to pursue. 

You just like it. Now that I can understand. 

 

 

Have you ever been able to say to yourself: "My air filter must be getting dirty as I feel it's taking more pedal to accelerate to 60 mph"?  

 

The honest answer is:

No

 

If you can honestly say yes then shame on you for letting your filter get to the point of collapse.

 

Take a hard look at the VE tables in your ECU. (If you can access them) As far as it is concerned fuel is metered by cylinder VE which is a percentage of manifold pressure. NOT atmospheric (airbox/plenum pressure). The pressure between the TB and the inlet valve. Look at those tables throttled. You can have 99% VE at 15% TPS. The MAP is placed AFTER the filter but BEFORE the  Helmholtz box because?????? 

 

Look, I've never argued that a CAI cannot make power. My argument is....it doesn't matter.....unless......

 

 You just like it, Or race naturally

This is the line to pursue. 

 

Enjoy the noise ? 

 

 

 

 

 

You just like it. Now that I can understand. ?

  • Like 1
  • 4 weeks later...
Ed/2020RST Enthusiast

Ed/2020RST

Posted
  • Author
Posted
On 9/30/2020 at 3:24 PM, TXGREEK said:

Here ya go, here’s just one of the reasons why you should consider spending your money somewhere it would apply itself in a much more positive way. Just one of the many lawsuits consumers have filed throughout the years.

 

Don’t be taken by marketing firms paid big money to find your inner automotive desires, Research it before you buy it.

 

 

https://www.classaction.org/spectre-performance-air-filters-and-intake-systems

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think you should read the link you provided a little closer---No Where in the article did it say that a CAI doesn't do as a company may claim. It simply said that this particular company misrepresented their product! I  can only assume that the competitor that started the suit tested the Spectre product and found their claims to be false.

 

In a Spectre Performance lawsuit lodged by a competitor, it was alleged that the company made false claims concerning its air filters and intake systems, specifically the products’ fuel economy, air flow, filtration, horsepower capabilities and approval from the California Air Resource Board (CARB).

  • Like 2
TXGREEK Senior Enthusiast

TXGREEK

Posted
Posted
I think you should read the link you provided a little closer---No Where in the article did it say that a CAI doesn't do as a company may claim. It simply said that this particular company misrepresented their product! I  can only assume that the competitor that started the suit tested the Spectre product and found their claims to be false.
 
In a Spectre Performance lawsuit lodged by a competitor, it was alleged that the company made false claims concerning its air filters and intake systems, specifically the products’ fuel economy, air flow, filtration, horsepower capabilities and approval from the California Air Resource Board (CARB).

It was a point made that there’s no guarantee of any exact amount of HP or TQ gains, it’s all mystical as they’ve been proven worthless by a great number of reviewers. I also have tried on numerous vehicles throughout the years to have found zero, zip, nothing in performance gain but definitely louder and noticeable less power.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Like 1
  • 1 month later...
Ed/2020RST Enthusiast

Ed/2020RST

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I'm "ALMOST" sorry I started this thread "ALMOST" LOL---It has been entertaining to say the least. I especially like the posts that say there is no proof that a CAI works and in their second breath make claims that a CAI doesn't work without providing proof to their claim???? 

 

I ordered the S&B CAI not long after starting this thread and finally received it this past Saturday and installed it Sunday. It was not difficult to install (but I am a retired aircraft mechanic) but I feel some will have difficulties with a couple of the steps on removal and installation! Some reported having more engine noise than before--I have not noticed anything different in that department??? I have noticed better throttle response than before and it seems to pull a little harder. As far a MPGs go I need a couple weeks to see if there are any gains no matter how big or small! The true MPG test is to see what I get pulling my boat. Before it was around the 13.5-14 MPG mark. I'm hoping that will increase but we'll see!!

  • Like 2
flyingfool Senior Enthusiast

flyingfool

Posted
Posted (edited)

why bother with the CAI, , if your throttle TPS is only opening 80% , you wont feel any gains..  anyone else wonder why this is????

 

anyone know where in HPT software to go, for undoing the throttle limit? is this what is meant by our 5.3L motors are handicapped? should i install a 6.2 truck ecu file first if this is possible?

Edited by flyingfool
  • Like 1
M1ck3y Senior Enthusiast

M1ck3y

Posted
Posted
21 hours ago, flyingfool said:

why bother with the CAI, , if your throttle TPS is only opening 80% , you wont feel any gains..  anyone else wonder why this is????

 

anyone know where in HPT software to go, for undoing the throttle limit? is this what is meant by our 5.3L motors are handicapped? should i install a 6.2 truck ecu file first if this is possible?

The throttle does open 100%, the difference is in how gm reads the tps vs hptuners/efilive etc. 

flyingfool Senior Enthusiast

flyingfool

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, M1ck3y said:

The throttle does open 100%, the difference is in how gm reads the tps vs hptuners/efilive etc. 

i'll check it out on hpt scanner, i was logging with a the Torque App. i'll just do a visual confirmation to check this is true

M1ck3y Senior Enthusiast

M1ck3y

Posted
Posted
43 minutes ago, flyingfool said:

i'll check it out on hpt scanner, i was logging with a the Torque App. i'll just do a visual confirmation to check this is true

Lol, I wasn't asking you. And it's not 80 percent, it's 84ish.

  • Confused 1
Solarplex Enthusiast

Solarplex

Posted
Posted

The only way it would do anything really is if the stock one reduces air flow for noise.

If you inhale lots, you have to exhale lots, so if there is no free flowing exhaust its not going to do much. More air, needs more fuel... ecu is only going to do so much.

I would say exhaust/intake/tune for performance. Intake and or exhaust no tune is just for noise.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Grumpy Bear Senior Enthusiast

Grumpy Bear

Posted
Posted
On 12/8/2020 at 1:24 PM, Ed/2020RST said:

I'm "ALMOST" sorry I started this thread "ALMOST" LOL---It has been entertaining to say the least. I especially like the posts that say there is no proof that a CAI works and in their second breath make claims that a CAI doesn't work without providing proof to their claim???? 

 

You do know you can't prove a negative...right? 

:crackup:

 

Maybe if this gets repeated enough times it will sink in. Let's say your motor makes 300 rwhp before modification and 310 rwhp after modification. Fine, it makes more power. How do you access it? Go ahead, I'll wait....................

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

When you put enough load on the motor to 'require' 301 rwhp or more.

And when is that possible?

I'll wait again...no hurry. 

 

 

 

 

 

When you're at the RPM 301 rwhp is possible with the loud peddle on the matt.

So near red line. 

How often is that?

:rolleyes:

 

 

 

 

Wait, my dyno chart shows it makes 3 more hp at 2000 rpm.

Great!

At what throttle position?

Still waiting.

 

 

 

 

 

 

When the blade in the TB is standing straight up. 

 

 

Do you always drive with the throttle mashed?

 

 

Nothing you can do before the TB will put more air over that blade at ANY given position short of forced induction.

Not enough more to 'feel'

 

Sound is visceral

A Lion isn't more powerful because he's closer to you and sounds louder.

 

Cherry Bombs do the same thing.

Balloons in the spokes of your bicycle.

 

 

 

KARNUT Senior Enthusiast

KARNUT

Posted
Posted

If you want it get it. It makes some difference. It’s funny how most people saying it’s stupid. Drive more truck than they need to get the job done. Most of us do. They may even have more than one ride.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

rmacdona Enthusiast

rmacdona

Posted
Posted

I like the sound better, and it does feel a bit more responsive (may be the sound)...I have the K&N - worth every penny in my book.

  • 2 months later...
Dallas Kiezik Enthusiast

Dallas Kiezik

Posted
Posted

I have been looking at s&b intake. The claim of 51% less restriction is at 600 or more cfm, what rpm is 600cfm achieved and better yet what is the restriction reduction at 1000rpm to 1500rpm.

  • 1 month later...
Kickerz71 Enthusiast

Kickerz71

Posted
Posted
I have been looking at s&b intake. The claim of 51% less restriction is at 600 or more cfm, what rpm is 600cfm achieved and better yet what is the restriction reduction at 1000rpm to 1500rpm.

I went with the S&B
Love the sound, then I added a Borla SType
I’m love with the sound


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Latest Articles

  • Posts

    • Grumpy Bear
      Sugar Bears 2015 GMC Terrain SLE-2 2.4 AWD

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      286,740 Mile Services   8/6/2026   New AC Compressor. Refrigerant oil and dye, evacuate and charge system.  New exhaust system from cat back.  New Iridium plugs plus replace #3 coil Repair/rewire headlamp wiring (passenger side) and replace all forward bulbs. Polish lenses of both assemblies.  Pull rear rotors, clean and adjust parking assembly. Inspect, clean and grease front calipers. Check pads and shoes.  4 wheel power bleed of brake system. Dot 4 Reset idle speed 50 rpm higher New Serpentine belt.    Will need new pads in the rear in about 5K more miles.    Tax Title and License out the door just short of a grand.    AC clutch had bitten the dust. 1 year warranty on the pick and save replacement. Thing will make a Polar Bear cry Uncle.  He spent quite some time on the wiring. It was in the harness and he does nothing half. I got off cheap. I have considerable more light down the road. Sylvania Silver Star replacements.  Gas seal between the porcelain and shell of plug #3 was blown, cooked the coil. That was the cold miss.  Love the new exhaust. I can sneak into the neighborhood again.  Nice to have a working parking brake again. Belle Tire never got it done. That was disappointing.    This was one of her bigger bills and still way cheaper than a payment even given the oil consumption. This thing cost me under a hundred a month in repairs and normal routine costs. What is my incentive to replace it? 🤔           
    • AidenVorpagel
      cam upgrade in CA

      By AidenVorpagel · Posted

      hello I recently bought a 2012 gmc 1500 with a 5.3 and have a AFM disabler on it I'm interested in doing a cam but I'm worried if I remove the AFM system I will fail smog does anyone have info if they are able to detect that or a work around to it (not talking about hot smogging) please let me know thank you  
    • B14Sierra
      Noise after AFM delete

      By B14Sierra · Posted

      Did you figure it out?
    • B14Sierra
      Possible lifter tick after DOD delete

      By B14Sierra · Posted

      Update. I started chasing down my symptoms. Started first with pulling valve covers and looked at everything. Everything looked good and couldn't hear or feel anything different. Then a compression test. 240 psi or really close on each cylinder. I was worried I was a tooth off of timing. Not bad for an engine with 173,000. Granted I did put new heads on. I sprayed water around the injector area to see if I could hear a change. Nothing. I hooked up my new hp tuner which I should have done in the first place but I don't really know what I'm looking at just yet but am learning. I noticed the fuel trims were way off so that told me I have to have either a bad injector or exhaust leak. New injectors, so I did the shop vac on blower and in the tail pipe. Sprayed soapy water and found the exhaust flange on the drivers side was leaking. I didn't think it would be that considereding I pulled the heads and left the manifolds attached. I did have the transmission replaced not long ago. They must have not seated them properly but I guess I didn't notice. I put in new gaskets on both sides. Which by the way isn't a bad job but I had a hard time getting them to seal right. Took two attempts. Reset the fuel trims and the ticking is gone, engine runs smooth and acceleration has improved. Got to feel the real difference with that stage 1 cam. It's not that big of a difference but it does add a little more. It feels like how the truck should have been from the factory.
    • Grumpy Bear
      Some Assembly is Required

      By Grumpy Bear · Posted

      Can it still be Assembled I?    Stribeck says that we need a certain amount of viscosity under conditions of load and velocity to prevent two surfaces of a know roughness from tearing each other asunder. And we have marketing trying to tell the masses that those two surfaced require less of that commodity due to more exact limits being placed on the same old clearances. We also know that there are limits to how hard something can before it becomes to brittle to be viable and to smooth to 'wet' the surface and that both of those conditions have been known and met since about the Second World War.    That viscosity value shook out at 10 centistokes at 212 F just under a hundred years ago.  Give this a look: [Anton Parr]     What is advertised is the Kinematic viscosity (mm2/s) or that which has been density adjusted but the value we are after is the dynamic viscosity (mPa.s) or true viscosity. You can see that this number is dependent on density thus base stock and temperature. You can also see that an SAE 30 doesn't reach that value in this example. However an SAE 30 that is at the upper end of the SAE 30 range; 12.5 cSt (mm2/s), might. 12.5 * .83 = 10.375 (mm2/s). If you could find an SAE 30 at the upper end these days.   Then there is the complication of viscosity modifiers or VII or VM, whatever you wish to call them. Polymers added to very thin base oils, perhaps 3 to 6 cP oils, that will meet the SAE *W30 spec at 'tested' shear rates and 100 C/212F  target temperature. So a polymer fortified base that is a fraction of the 10 cP requirement Stribeck insist upon.   This could be all well and good if those polymers didn't have two very problematic 'features'. They shear or loose viscosity both 1.) permanently and 2.) temporality. And they do both omitted in the advertised data with the distinct  purpose of deceiving the consumer of the actual operating state of the fluid. I've shown the example of Warren Oils COSTCO 10.91 cSt 5W30 formuation several times where the 100 C HTHS value is 6.9 cP!! That's the temporary shear down and with and SSI or shear stability index of 9.4 cSt. Note the intentional deception in using mixed units?    After a short while that 9.4 cSt oil has a viscosity corrected dynamic value of 7.8 cP. But as the SSI is still within the range of an SAE *W30 whose lower value is 9.3 cSt.    This allows them to continue to call this SAE 16 weight oil a 30 weight, the cake, and still meet the API requirements for fuel efficiency IMPROVEMENT mandated by the EPA. The eating of the cake. By the time you've worn out your motor doing the responsible thing by adhering to the warranty requirements, (the stick), you get deprived of the carrot, wear control. So sad, to bad.   So what can be done? Do I need actually say? [Anton Parr]       Even this must be monitored if the oil is on the low side and the VII an organic or you opt for a 0W40 with an even lighter base oil and more / higher MW VII. (Note the lower density of the 40 weight versus the SAE 30 mono-weight?)    There is another workaround. Temperature. An SAE *W30 run at a bulk temperature of between 180 and 195 F.    Being the belt and suspenders sort I am I do both. Run it cook and run it heavy.    In Part II I'll work the AW package. 

  • GM-Trucks.com Clubs

  • Popular Contributors

×
×
  • Create New...