Cold air intake

I'm checking to see if any one has replaced their stock air intake with a performance cold air intake? If so did you think it was worth the $$$. I have a 08 2500 HD Sierra with a 6.0 gas engine. I pull a 10000# 5th wheel with it, most of the time with no issues. There are times when I could use just a little more power to get up some hills. I'm considering installing a K&N cold air intake to get a few more HP. ( K&N claim 11 more). I was wonder if anyone tried this or know who has and if it was really worth the investment. I really don't want to plop down 350 bucks for something that don't pay for itself....


Thanks

Eeezeegin

Performance Cold Air Intake. That phrase is not very definitive. Most (almost ALL) aftermarket intakes would further define that "Low Performance" in actual practice.

Forget the sales hype, testimonials, and all the other tricks that used to be typical of anything chrome, Slick 50, Rebuild-In-A-Can, Teflon Motor Treatment, SeaFoam, "Prime vacation land in Florida" for sale, and any other scam you might conjure.

Any intake which places the inlet in the engine compartment behind the radiator support is a LOSER! That area under the hood is designed by automotive engineers smarter than either of us to be a LOW-PRESSURE area so that air is forced to flow through the radiator. Ever wonder why electric fans are programmed to shut off at 40MPH? Ever wonder what that lower air deflector is supposed to be for? Ever wonder why there are rubber seals between the radiator support and radiator core? The pressure is not substantially lower, but it IS lower, by about 2-4" WC at highway speeds.

Personally, I don't wonder why almost all vehicles since 1990 include these design features.

Secondly, that area is necessarily hotter than the air in front of the radiator shell, which makes it a "Hot Air Intake" instead.

Lower pressure, higher temperature, and the result is LESS dense air. Charles Law, Boyles Law, Gay-Lussac, Pascal, and other laws of physics and fluid dynamics (they are LAWS, not opinions or hypotheses) clearly show that to be a wonderful LOSER for performance.

The only groups that won't acknowledge that are the people selling these marvelous marketing pieces of crap, and the people ignorant enough to actually BUY them. Dynos won't show the difference since there is no 60MPH+ ram air when a car is chained to a dyno.


There are precious FEW of them which source the air from in front of the radiator support, where it SHOULD be and where almost all factory systems take their air (look for the slots, holes, or ducts through the radiator support feeding the filter box).

In short, be very particular about the type of system you consider. An open cone element surrounded by a couple of baffles in the engine compartment is almost assuredly going to be a performance loser.

If you are interested in more related facts:

https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/pdfs/Air_Filter_Effects_02_26_2009.pdf

Performance Cold Air Intake. That phrase is not very definitive. Most (almost ALL) aftermarket intakes would further define that "Low Performance" in actual practice.

Forget the sales hype, testimonials, and all the other tricks that used to be typical of anything chrome, Slick 50, Rebuild-In-A-Can, Teflon Motor Treatment, SeaFoam, "Prime vacation land in Florida" for sale, and any other scam you might conjure.

Any intake which places the inlet in the engine compartment behind the radiator support is a LOSER! That area under the hood is designed by automotive engineers smarter than either of us to be a LOW-PRESSURE area so that air is forced to flow through the radiator. Ever wonder why electric fans are programmed to shut off at 40MPH? Ever wonder what that lower air deflector is supposed to be for? Ever wonder why there are rubber seals between the radiator support and radiator core? The pressure is not substantially lower, but it IS lower, by about 2-4" WC at highway speeds.

Personally, I don't wonder why almost all vehicles since 1990 include these design features.

Secondly, that area is necessarily hotter than the air in front of the radiator shell, which makes it a "Hot Air Intake" instead.

Lower pressure, higher temperature, and the result is LESS dense air. Charles Law, Boyles Law, Gay-Lussac, Pascal, and other laws of physics and fluid dynamics (they are LAWS, not opinions or hypotheses) clearly show that to be a wonderful LOSER for performance.

The only groups that won't acknowledge that are the people selling these marvelous marketing pieces of crap, and the people ignorant enough to actually BUY them. Dynos won't show the difference since there is no 60MPH+ ram air when a car is chained to a dyno.


There are precious FEW of them which source the air from in front of the radiator support, where it SHOULD be and where almost all factory systems take their air (look for the slots, holes, or ducts through the radiator support feeding the filter box).

In short, be very particular about the type of system you consider. An open cone element surrounded by a couple of baffles in the engine compartment is almost assuredly going to be a performance loser.

If you are interested in more related facts:

https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/pdfs/Air_Filter_Effects_02_26_2009.pdf

Thanks for your input Blue bowtie, Your opinion and the article was very interesting. It really makes me look at this at a different perspective.

Eeezeegoin

What "Blue" said xx 2!! Put a K & N on my '99 7.4 Sub. The pre oiled filter screwed up the MAF. Had to clean that and reset the PCM. As far as performance, man that thing made a bunch of noise like it was a rocket ship, bur not faster or more power. Mileage dropped 1.5 mpg. $350 went right out the exhaust.

Stay with stock. If you want more power for your 5th wheel get a Cummins.

What "Blue" said xx 2!! Put a K & N on my '99 7.4 Sub. The pre oiled filter screwed up the MAF. Had to clean that and reset the PCM. As far as performance, man that thing made a bunch of noise like it was a rocket ship, bur not faster or more power. Mileage dropped 1.5 mpg. $350 went right out the exhaust.

Stay with stock. If you want more power for your 5th wheel get a Cummins.

Thanks Stickman
Hearing from someone who had a experience with a K&N makes my decision a whole lot easier. But as far as getting a cummins, sorry but I would go Duramax, just because I have driven GM's my whole life and had no regrets. No offence I hope. Thanks again..................No positive feed back yet so it sounds like no one to defend the K&N



Eeezeegoin