K&n Cold Air Intake...does It Work?

Buddy67Lincoln · May 26, 2008

I have an 06 GMC Sierra 1500. I wanted to know if anyone tried a K&N cold air system??? I was looking at the 77 series. For $350 it better help out on fuel economy by more than $300 a year! My girlfriend just installed one today on her 07 Dakota so she was convinced enough to buy one. Let me know. This would have to the only mod for an accurate response I guess. Thanks

marko · May 26, 2008

I have an 06 GMC Sierra 1500. I wanted to know if anyone tried a K&N cold air system??? I was looking at the 77 series. For $350 it better help out on fuel economy by more than $300 a year! My girlfriend just installed one today on her 07 Dakota so she was convinced enough to buy one. Let me know. This would have to the only mod for an accurate response I guess. Thanks

I have one, and it did seem to help somewhat, maybe 5% or so - up to 10%. With the new trucks and their computers it isn't always clear what they will do - on my '93 I got 3mpg on the highway, and that's no bull (Canadian gallons though, so 2.4 mpg for you).

I like it and am very happy with it. But that's only one guy's opinion.

Forsaken_id · May 26, 2008

Performance gets up'd some, but MPG increases are hit an miss. I have the GM performance one and it helps slightly on MPG and a lot on power.

--Rome

obyone · May 26, 2008

Save your money. If GM could squeeze mpg or hp increase by adding a K&N intake they would've created one or something similar. The only thing that will increase will be your in cab noise from the intake. Hardly worth $350.

TooTall1 · May 26, 2008

I've recently installed a Volant CAI and have seen about a 1-1.5 mpg improvement.I was lucky enough to win mine from Volant though,don't know if I'd spend the money on one without getting a tune also.

pennzoil29 · May 26, 2008

Save your money. If GM could squeeze mpg or hp increase by adding a K&N intake they would've created one or something similar. The only thing that will increase will be your in cab noise from the intake. Hardly worth $350.

+1. With all the stink about fuel economy, I believe GM would've done this themselves if it would better mpg.

BigJayDogg3 · May 26, 2008

Save your money. If GM could squeeze mpg or hp increase by adding a K&N intake they would've created one or something similar. The only thing that will increase will be your in cab noise from the intake. Hardly worth $350.

+1. With all the stink about fuel economy, I believe GM would've done this themselves if it would better mpg.

I agree that it probably doesn't increase fuel economy by any noticible amount, but I want to play devil's advocate.

Think about it, you are a company. You are in this to make money correct? Why would you put something on a vehicle stock, when you could sell it as an accessory and make more money on it? They have the GM accessory CAI, and I am sure it makes them more money this way than it would if they sold it with the truck.

And as for the actual CAI box, you already have one if it is a GMT-800/900 (not sure about GMT-400). It is the tubing that actually makes the difference in power. Go pop the hood and look at the intake tube and see how it is all kinked, and then go look online at the ones you see with a CAI, and how smooth it is.

FWIW If it were me, I wouldn't get a K&N CAI. I have heard many mixed reviews about them. Doesn't mean they aren't good or anything like that, but I would much rather spend my money on a "sure shot" or as close as I can get. Just my $.02

fbachman · May 26, 2008

Save your money. If GM could squeeze mpg or hp increase by adding a K&N intake they would've created one or something similar. The only thing that will increase will be your in cab noise from the intake. Hardly worth $350.

+1. With all the stink about fuel economy, I believe GM would've done this themselves if it would better mpg.

I agree that it probably doesn't increase fuel economy by any noticible amount, but I want to play devil's advocate.

Think about it, you are a company. You are in this to make money correct? Why would you put something on a vehicle stock, when you could sell it as an accessory and make more money on it? They have the GM accessory CAI, and I am sure it makes them more money this way than it would if they sold it with the truck.

It is the tubing that actually makes the difference in power. Go pop the hood and look at the intake tube and see how it is all kinked, and then go look online at the ones you see with a CAI, and how smooth it is.

FWIW If it were me, I wouldn't get a K&N CAI. I have heard many mixed reviews about them. Doesn't mean they aren't good or anything like that, but I would much rather spend my money on a "sure shot" or as close as I can get. Just my $.02

Well stated...

I have a GMPP CAI... didn't get it for expected increases in fuel economy... I would say, at best, it improved mileage 0.5-1 mpg. Now, when you take the cost of it (it was competitive to " a little more " than competing units) it'll take a looooong time to get that money out.

The performance increase was palpable. The issue with a CAI, as eloquently stated above in the quote, is to get the air to the engine with minimal losses, and to minimize any heat rise in the air travelling to the engine.

To say "if it helps, GM would have done it already" relative to fuel economy, is partailly true at best...

GM could, in my opinion, provide large trucks that have substancially better mpg than they do now. The issue is, "cost per unit". It's a delicate balance between "what's offered" and what the end cost will be. They can do it --- but would most pay an additional $5000-$7500 per unit to get it? Today, maybe. Several years ago, no way, as their competitors would have held back for the price advantage. Interestingly, as we all kow, in the large truck segment, GM gets far better mileage than the rest on a normalized basis. IMO, it's because GM's engine management is far better than other competitors.

Now, to be sure, GM and the others are probably regretting those decisions a little, as the dramatic fuel prise increases weren't anticiapted in the past when these discisions were being made.

Looking at Fords in particular, I have never seen a more rediculously dumb intake design. On a Ford modular motor, K&Ns FILTER ELEMENTS routinely got me 2-3 mpgs. Why didn't they just "put em in"? Cost. The accountants maintain tremendous cost-per-unit pressures on the engineers and programs.

The company has a fuel economy target dictated and governed by CAFE. When they get where they need to be... THAT"S IT. The smog restrictions trump fuel economy, as it's MUCH MORE DIFFICULT to get both at the same time. That's why the 5.3, e.g., have a lot of power buried in the engine that never sees day light. IT's all in the timing to control emmissions, and in the nannies to protect warranty concession. Often, when you put aftermarket tunes in your vehicle, all things being equal, you'll see an increase in economy as well. It's all in the timing. My gut is that the emmissions suffer accordingly.

05silvycrew · May 26, 2008

my theory (and I might be completely off)

A K&N brings in more air, a good thing. Your MAF senses more air and increases fuel to compensate and keep Air/Fuel ratio at a stock level. more air and more fuel means more power, but not neccesarily more MPGs. The MPG gains come from the engine not having to work as hard to maintain a highway speed. The increases are little, if any.

If you drive 12,000 miles a year and average 16 MPG (without an intake) vs 17 MPG (with an intake) you save roughly $175 a year in fuel. It will take you about 2 years just to break even.

Buddy67Lincoln · May 27, 2008

Thanks a lot for the help. I asked since I know there can be better fuel mileage like stated, but cost is a factor for GM. They even wanted to or even did take the second exhaust tip off the final year or 2 Camaro to save a couple bucks a car. I read that in Hot Rod I think. Made me think that it would be costly to have as standard equipment on all trucks. 19.5 or better on the highway is great for a 4x4 truck but my city mileage sucks. I live in the hills of Pittsburgh with stop signs and grades in every direction. I get about 13.5 and sometimes worse. Good topic, but I guess I will just keep it stock and take 'er easy. I also use my truck for work (landscaping) and I put 100 miles on it just to the site and back a few times for materials...got 14 so I was curious to see if there was any way to help me and my clients save a few bucks on gas. Thanks again for the responses!!!

C & A s Dad · May 27, 2008

I would have to agree with BJD3. My TrueFlow unit helped me .78 MPG using 8 tanks before the install and 8 tanks after as an average. This is also with no other changes and my Wife driving the truck, not me. She had no idea the unit had been put on and was not "trying to get better mileage to compensate for the expense of the new toy".

I went from 17.41 avg to 18.19 on a Yuk XL.

Not beating up on K & N but I would do my homework before buying any of these units. I would retain your OE Cold Air Box and just replace the tube and filter.

jnabq · May 28, 2008

Similiar subject, did anyone ever install one of these? http://vararam.com/tri-power/tri-power.html

Results/opinions??

nxtnlne · May 28, 2008

Save your money. If GM could squeeze mpg or hp increase by adding a K&N intake they would've created one or something similar. The only thing that will increase will be your in cab noise from the intake. Hardly worth $350.

Yes they do work.....You can get an intake system for around 200 bucks! here are the results from a dyno test that was done on SilveradoSS.com. This shows the gain in power. I did see a slight gain with just my GMPP CAI. I gained 2+ MPG on the street and 3-6+ MPG on the fwy when I added my Magnaflow Muffler!! I think it's well worth it!!

nxtnlne · May 28, 2008

I must add that I had my Exhaust dumped before the rear diff..So that right there made me lighter then stock. I avg 18-20+ MPG with 3 dirtbikes 3 kids and there gear at 65 mph!! Before the Magnaflow I was getting 13.7-14.5....

TxTruckMan · May 28, 2008

I say save your money. I installed one on my 2003 Yukon and the only difference I noticed was increased noise. The stock intake is a CAI - it takes in cooler air from the fender, just like the K&N one does. And a stock paper filter is not very restrictive until you get into the higher RPMs. So, unless you do most of your driving at 3500+ RPMs, you won't notice any difference. save your money on the CAI.

If a little restriction at higher RPMs bothers you, go for only a filter swap instead of the whole CAI. You'll save a lot of money with the same results.

Also, whenever somebody claims better mileage with a CAI and exhaust, be very skeptical. I also have a Corsa cat back exhaust and get worse fuel economy than before. You'll definitely get more HIGHEND hp, but at the expense of lowend torque. Less back pressure = less low end torque. Look at all the dyno charts that people show. Not one starts below 2500 RPM where you do 99% of your driving. Also, more air alone will not net more power. You need more fuel with the air to maintain the optimum air-to-fuel ratios programmed in your truck's CPU. Again, don't fall for the hype unless you do most of your driving at 3500+ RPM.