K&N Cold Air Intake

[MT-2500]

Originally Posted by JoulesWinfield

Ok, I know what a cold air intake is. Most of what is sold at Autozone and all the other auto parts stores do not fall into the category of a cold air intake. The factory intake for a blazer is set up to warm the air before you use it. There are extra areas that are located over the radiator and next to the exhaust manifold that will warm the air intake system.
Yes is does start with fresh cold air from behind the grill, but after it is combined with all the pre warmed air in your engine compartment it is not cold any more.



And my whole point is that the test shows nothing reguarding Horse power.

So if Cloud Strife wants to purchase a "cold air intake" why try to baffle him with all the BS about the difference between types of air cleaners? His question was not "Which air filter is best".

Well to prove the point about the air being cold or hot when it reaches the Just take it down the road and watch your air intake air temt sensor.
You might be supprised how it cools.

As to Horse Power if a filter is not to restive and is large enough to handle the volume it is not going to affect hores power.

The posted was not asking about HP he was asking about the filter.
And we were not trying to blow his mind.
We were just pointing out facts to him to help him out.
MT

[Cloud Strife]

Well the airbox i have now works good. I have a K&N drop in filter there and it seems to be just fine. So I may just stick with that and work on getting an exhaust eventually. I have to deal with a hub assembly that went bad again. I had it replaced in June so I still have a few months warranty left.

[Moser97]

Again, I think MT-2500 put it best when he said that if these things were a true HP, or MPG improvement tool some manufacturer would have paid to have the testing done and would be screaming from the rooftops about his great product. I read Hot Rod every month and they roll whatever they are testing onto the dyno and check it out before the product is installed. Then they do the modification and test it again. The improvement, or lack of improvement, is there for all to see. When someone can show me this kind of test for one of these products, and show that it helps HP and MPG, then I'll buy one. Until then, this thread and the tests shown in the link, have convinced me that a cold air intake system will only make the Jimmy sound more like a 440 cop car. I'll pass on that alone. I may poke around and see if I can find some more test results for these products.

[strongboy2005]

Originally Posted by Moser97

Again, I think MT-2500 put it best when he said that if these things were a true HP, or MPG improvement tool some manufacturer would have paid to have the testing done and would be screaming from the rooftops about his great product. I read Hot Rod every month and they roll whatever they are testing onto the dyno and check it out before the product is installed. Then they do the modification and test it again. The improvement, or lack of improvement, is there for all to see. When someone can show me this kind of test for one of these products, and show that it helps HP and MPG, then I'll buy one. Until then, this thread and the tests shown in the link, have convinced me that a cold air intake system will only make the Jimmy sound more like a 440 cop car. I'll pass on that alone. I may poke around and see if I can find some more test results for these products.

I did my own idependent testing of the K&N FIPK Kit.

Here were my results:

1/4 mile times before:
17.11 @ 80.2
17.11 @ 80.2
17.25 @ 79.3
17.18 @ 80.1
17.29 @ 78.9

Avg with stdev: 17.19 sec +- 0.08

1/4 mile times after:
16.45 @ 84.8
16.52 @ 84.5
16.53 @ 83.9
16.45 @ 84.9
16.59 @ 82.8

Avg with stdev: 16.51 sec +- 0.06


I improved my quarter mile times by 0.68 seconds (on average). I would say this is a significant improvement...

More info on my cardomain...
http://www.cardomain.com/ride/2257682/

[Moser97]

No disrespect here strongboy, but from your cardomain page it looks like you have been throwing lots of mods at this Blazer all at once. Are you saying you made 5 passes and then changed out the intake, and made 5 more passes immediately afterwards (same day, same temp outside, same relative humidity, same gas in car, no tweak of tuner) and showed the .68 second ET improvement? If so, that is a significant improvement.

[herkyhawki]

Strongboy, Very interesting results. What was the engine coolant temperature, air temperature, track temperature, wind speed and wind direction for each of your 1/4 mile runs? This is not to be argumentative, but something as simple as a shift in wind direction could affect your results. If you have an opportunity to repeat the testing, it would be great if you could switch back to stock and run again right after the KN run.

[strongboy2005]

Originally Posted by Moser97

No disrespect here strongboy, but from your cardomain page it looks like you have been throwing lots of mods at this Blazer all at once. Are you saying you made 5 passes and then changed out the intake, and made 5 more passes immediately afterwards (same day, same temp outside, same relative humidity, same gas in car, no tweak of tuner) and showed the .68 second ET improvement? If so, that is a significant improvement.

Yes I have been doing a few mods. Those times I showed (the first ones) were with the Hypertech tuning, shift points, and after a seafoam treatment. Because I didn't install the K&N straight from stock, I compare it with my numbers before the install. It was installed on a rainy day (Friday the 17th) and tested for time on the 19th (after it finally stopped raining). The first set of times were taken on a similar day, and that's the best I really can do for testing purposes.

Originally Posted by herkyhawki

Strongboy, Very interesting results. What was the engine coolant temperature, air temperature, track temperature, wind speed and wind direction for each of your 1/4 mile runs? This is not to be argumentative, but something as simple as a shift in wind direction could affect your results. If you have an opportunity to repeat the testing, it would be great if you could switch back to stock and run again right after the KN run.

Engine coolant temperature was approx 210 degrees, air temp 56 degrees. This test was taken by a G-tech on a country road. I try to eliminate the headwind/tailwind scenario by running down the road and up the road (in both directions). This tends to even out my average. I take all my tests the same way, using the same procedures and location every time.

I think I should also be frank about one more thing: this install was in conjuction with cleaning my MAF sensor and changing my oil to synthetic. Even then, I would still estimate the gains to be around half a second from my previous tests. Cleaning a sensor (my engine only has 25000 miles on it, so the sensor wasn't that dirty) and changing oil to synthetic (maybe 1 hp freed up?) MIGHT account for a tenth of a second or so of that improvement.

[ZL1power69]

i installed an fipk on my truck a few months back. i did not really notice a mpg improvement but it it feels a tad stronger from 2500rpm and up. my factory airbox was damaged and i thought this was a nice upgrade. heres a link to a dyno sheet for this specific intake system;
http://www.kandn.com/dynocharts/57-3009.jpg

i say it depends on the vehicle and the design of the factory airbox. some vehicles may benifit from a cold air intake system, others already have a good factory system and may benefit only from a drop in.

i got my fipk from completeexhaust.com for $220. thats cheaper than ebay, summitracing, jegs.

[JoulesWinfield]

...

[MT-2500]

Originally Posted by JoulesWinfield

Why to people need to bash on "upgrades" that others are asking about?

It seems that Strongboy2005 and ZL1power69 are happy with their CAIS.
Why isnt that enough?

Well good grief I am sorry if I hit your sore spot but.
What Bashing or baffling are you referring to there JulesWinfield?
I thought everybody was doing a good job of informing Strongboy2005 of the facts and trying to help him out.
MT

[OverBoardProject]

JoulesWinfield, I took a quick look and didn't see any bashing, please point it out to me.

strongboy, that's pretty intresting stuff there, I'm a little busy at the moment, but will have to take a better look at it sometime soon.

Can you possibly download some of your tests from the G-tech onto a web page and let us see what it sayes?

[2000blazerls]

I got my kit off of Ebay (chrome pipe deal with a K&N cone filter). I got better gas mileage and I could feel a slightly higher kick when accelerating. I am happy with my purchase. I did keep my original box with drop in K&N filter just in case though.

[Moser97]

I work in a manufacturing environment where we are constantly trying to improve the way we do everything. I am used to making decisions about making changes, and or keeping changes in place, based on performance data. I was asking for performance data from people who had made changes I am considering making myself. I did not bash anything that these people did, and I hope they are very happy with the products they buy. I also appreciate everyone who shares their experiences and knowledge on this site. I'm sorry if I stepped on JoulesWinfield toes, I hope he gets over it soon. Did anyone else notice that the improved, after installation, Dyno on the K&N site was run in temps about 3 degrees cooler than the before test? The drag racing gearheads at work say 3 degrees air temp difference is good for the 5% improvement shown.

[herkyhawki]

[quote=strongboy2005] The first set of times were taken on a similar day, and that's the best I really can do for testing purposes.
I try to eliminate the headwind/tailwind scenario by running down the road and up the road (in both directions).

I agree with Moser, by pushing other posters to clarify their data, we are helping all to understand it better. Blindly accepting 1/4 mile times without accounting for air temp, pavement temp, wind speed, wind direction is foolish and will lead you to wasting $.
Strongboy, the idea of runnning down road/ up road to eliminate wind effect is a good idea, but I would then expect to see an even number of data points instead of five that you show. Let me know if I'm missing something. And I hope you don't take this as bashing, I really appreciate getting info from guy's that are in a position to throw the buck$ at their trucks. It helps us poor folks decide where to spend ours.

[JoulesWinfield]

...