Cold Air Intakes. Debunking false claims.

https://youtu.be/gCi2yo4UqPI

 

Another observation that I haven’t seen mentioned:

The intake on our trucks is passive...the engine draws in the air it needs to operate at the parameters programmed into the ECU. I believe the MAF sensor is what tells the ECU whether it’s getting an appropriate (minimum) volume of air.

Increasing the available volume of air should make little or no difference in engine output, as the ECU is only looking for a specified amount or range to make the specified power.

 

My plan is to drive the truck until everything is already hot, then go run the 1st dyno. That way the 2nd run should be closer temperature wise. I am still learning a lot, and threads like this (even though full of smart assery and shit talk lol ) always encourage me to research more, fact check more and I always end up learning something new. Even if that means admitting I was full of shit

 

It will be interesting to see your results , I see by the charts that the K&N CAI chart already shows more HP gains than the OV tune charts posted . There are tricks to change the dyno's results like has been said above though. Who knows what the the manufacturiers are doing , maybe pumping airconditioned cold air up to the intake or having a air conditioned dyno room . I saw that the Dodge Demon does this in the car by redirecting the cars AC to cool the intake charge lol. I remember seeing the fuel lines on drag cars that had a copper coil in a coffee can that had dry ice in it on race day to cool the fuel .
http://autoweek.com/article/new-yor...enger-srt-demon-uses-its-c-cool-intake-charge

 

These guys did a 2nd version with naturally aspirated car too. They showed gains too.

 

The Australian version of Roadkill !!!

 

True, my cousin runs Dyno's for a living and told me they can change the vehicles weight in the computer so it "thinks" the car weight more than it does, which could yield false data. If K&N has done this, they are very bold buy handing out a giant "HP GAIN GUARANTEE " document with every purchase lol.

 

Anything credible to back that claim up? lol

 

Like a cool can from Moroso , I'm running one in my Camaro and use a bag of ice

 

Don't know about power but I gained 1.7 mpg after adding TRD cai to my 05 prerunner.
That's the gain in average mpg over 15 tanks, not just looking at a single tank. Data.

After a few years, switching from the old TRD oiled filter to an AFE dry filter on the same cai gained another 1 mpg on my average mpg.

 

Elvis still alive and well

 

I saw a little increase in MPG too. The OVTune made the biggest gain on MPG tho because 6th gear is not usable lol

 

I am going to attempt to mirror as much as possible from the K&N Dyno test for fair comparison.

 

Remember also that the dyno operator is running your vehicle on the dyno not you . So make sure you've got an agreement on max rpm for the pulls !!

 

Rofl tight

 

So even the guy that runs the dyno is saying that it's very difficult to get accurate dyno info? Doesn't that alone make you question the validity of the info being provided by a company (K&N) who's only purpose in life is to try to sell you a product? UP TO 18hp gain does not mean a 18hp gain, it means they got 18hp on dyno runs that were manipulated in their favor. Make a few runs when the engine is cool with the K&N and take the best one then make a bunch of back to back runs in hot humid conditions with the stock intake and take the worst one and boom, 18hp difference.
Do I think there is a gain, yes. A couple hp is possible in best conditions, in the real world I'd say no difference on your day to day drive but It'll sound much better which is worth the price of admission to a lot of people and that is ok.
I am totally open to the results of doing a dyno test (and thank you for doing it) although the debate of your final output will be debated even after the hard numbers come out. This won't be the final word on CAIs.
As for the stock intake, the charcoal filter (the filter after the actual air filter) is not a resistance point because it's before the intake tube and the surface area is greater than the intake tube size so unless that filter has a really high flow resistance the amount of air available to the tube itself should be the same regardless if the filter is there or not. People have removed it and reported zero gains but if that's what you wanna do then feel free and since your emissions system is now not 100% stock don't forget to add an oil catch can as others have done to get rid of the recirculated oil as I'd think that would be a better performance move since oil in your intake charge will possibly retard timing affecting performance.
The resonator in the intake system isn't a "flow through" design. The intake air does not have to go through that big box as K&N implies with their email to you. Look through a tube, there is nothing in there to divert airflow into the resonator. The resonator is basically an air spring. Intake of the pistons create a low pressure in the intake system (a pulse, also a soundwave). With multiple pulses in the intake tube it creates some resistance that is more apparent at certain RPM. The resonator just tunes out that airwave thereby minimizing the resistance by providing an extra air space that equalizes the low pressure pulses making it quieter. Look at it as a muffler of the intake. That is the reason that the stock intake is quieter and when you put on a straight pipe it sounds so sweet. The performance gain is minimal but the sound is big. Customers and the government want quiet cars, that's why they have resonators and big ol mufflers on cars. They don't necessarily hurt performance by much cause they are designed to work together. This is also the reason you don't get much performance out of a cat back exhaust (another can of worms to debate over endlessly).
Without a FULL exhaust (not a cat back because the cat is still the resistance point) and an intake plus a tune to make it all work together harmoniously you can't truly reap the benefits of a free flowing intake or exhaust, it's just a sound thing and even at that, it's a upper RPM thing not something that'll affect you in day to day traffic with normal RPMs, your vehicle is already more than equipped to handle those CFM requirements.
I'm still interested in your results though, you may have some positive results, some negative results or it may be a wash. Nothing as big as 18hp but I'm in to see the outcome

 

That's for sure where I started. There are people out there who has tested this idea on a Dyno but either fail to post the results or did not document it. So I am hoping to dig up that data one way or another. Whether it proves no gains, less gains, or more gains. I myself will be running my truck on a Dyno to contribute to the data on this thread. Cheers!

 

Found a guy willing to "not charge too much" already. $90 each run so $180 total. Not too bad.

 

So even the guy that runs the dyno is saying that it's very difficult to get accurate dyno info? Doesn't that alone make you question the validity of the info being provided by a company (K&N) who's only purpose in life is to try to sell you a product? It absolutely does make me question the validity, which is why I am going to mirror that same test they did.
Make a few runs when the engine is cool with the K&N and take the best one then make a bunch of back to back runs in hot humid conditions with the stock intake and take the worst one and boom, 18hp difference. Did you look at the Dyno printout? There was a 2 hour cooling period between runs. The air temp was hotter with the k&n and humidity was only 5 degrees less with the k&n run. I could be wrong but I doubt 5 degrees less humidity would drastically change the results.

And I agree with you, even If my results show gains, some people here will never except it and always find a way to argue about its validity lol. At least I am getting my kicks from doing this. I am super excited to find out the results.

 

on a different note, Former 1st lady Barbara Bush died the other day. may her soul REST IN PEACE.