Cold Air Intake Benefits?

[ShadowsPapa]

I really don't understand the whole learning thing with the engine, but I look at the intake , like I do Quarry discharge water piping, larger pipe gives less head per foot, much better performance, sort of like milkshakes when they give you the oversized straws, much easier intake , less work! Everyone says the 3.6 engine sucks, well mine sucks less, Haha!.....Jack

Long term fuel trim and short term fuel trim. I believe they are averaged. That means that if you do something of benefit, you'll see the result later rather than sooner unless it's totally night and day.
The only personal example I have are my testing 91 octane - zero difference at all for the first quarter to half tank, then as time went on I realized there was a slightly different sound both out the exhaust, the bottom end, and a tad bit more growl under the hood. Likely it decided it could change valve opening and timing as time went on. Was it night and day at all? Naw, I've gone back to 87 - but I did use 91 while towing just to see how things went or might go.
Part of the MPG increase after you first get your truck for the first miles is actually the system learning, it's not just "wear in" like everyone says. I saw a very small amount of MPG increase OVER TIME with the 91 octane. It wasn't instant but after some miles I saw a slightly better pattern. (not enough to save the cost differences for sure, not in IOWA where it can be HUGE differences)
I noticed a similar pattern after they flashed my PCM last fall because my VIN came up on needing the later flash (perhaps to ward off problems others were seeing?)
My MPG dropped like a ROCK after the flash. I mean it wouldn't get out of the teens for nuttin'.
Now I'm back up again, 20-21-22 at times. It slowly crept back up after the flash. Can't say it was miles on the truck because it was at 10,000 miles or so when they flashed it - and it dropped big time right after the flash, then slowly climbed back up with time. Engine already well "worn in".

Sponsored

 

[ShadowsPapa]

I use a CAI on my old '12 3.6L Charger. I bought it for the looks and sound. But, after 250k miles on that car that I realized that it paid for itself due to the washable filter. I clean it every 20k as recommended. If I changed it, at $15-$20 per filter, I'd have spent more than the $350.00 is cost me in the first place. So, looks, sound, and savings would be the reasons to add one. I also did used oil analysis on that car and it has always shown lower than average silicone in the oil, which is a sign of low dirt intrusion, so the filter is effective as well. Lots of highway driving up and down the central valley in CA so there is plenty of dust in the air.

If you waited to clean that filter at 20K here you'd be in trouble. Pulled the filter on my truck at 19K and it was NASTY. I was shocked! IT was all but plugged. But then we've been in drought, it's always WINDY here and field work really stirs up really really fine dust that gets through almost anything - including well-sealed buildings.
I figure that based on scientific testing of "washable filters" such as the K&N, I'd have to clean it at every 8,000 to 10,000 miles since they can only go half as long as paper before they drop airflow badly.

My JT filter was put in the trash last week - I should have taken pictures.
I ended up changing the cabin filter as well as it was black with a lot of fine nasty dust. I figured it would have gone much longer based on where it is and what it does. I was really wrong.

 

[Fastwake]

Waste of $$$$$$$$$

 

[Iamstubb]

If you waited to clean that filter at 20K here you'd be in trouble. Pulled the filter on my truck at 19K and it was NASTY. I was shocked! IT was all but plugged. But then we've been in drought, it's always WINDY here and field work really stirs up really really fine dust that gets through almost anything - including well-sealed buildings.
I figure that based on scientific testing of "washable filters" such as the K&N, I'd have to clean it at every 8,000 to 10,000 miles since they can only go half as long as paper before they drop airflow badly.

My JT filter was put in the trash last week - I should have taken pictures.
I ended up changing the cabin filter as well as it was black with a lot of fine nasty dust. I figured it would have gone much longer based on where it is and what it does. I was really wrong.

That does sound hard on any air filter system. Where I am at the dust is not as big an issue. Just when driving up through the central valley, then similar to what you describe. But the UOA suggests it was working well enough for me, the miles on the engine also suggest things are OK. And the car still beats the sticker on mileage, which is why I was OK buying the 3.6 in my JT. I figure it is a good solid engine. Like I said, I bought mine for looks and sound and got the added bonus of it paying for itself over teh years.

 

[ShadowsPapa]

I'm beyond the days of buying something thinking or hoping it will pay for itself. Now I buy because I need it or want it.
Sometimes it's nice if something will pay for itself, but.......... the odds of living long enough to realize that are growing fewer. So time to just enjoy things.

 

[dcmdon]

Never redline, last time i was close was pulling the 5500lb. Whaler up a grade, still was under 5,000 and could pull more, but long, long hill. I know you have much more experiance with engines then I do, I think I've been pretty clear, cleaned up trhe engine bay, has a nice sound are the two proven things, my seat of pants when flooring it up to eighty is just that my feeling that it is better, cause it sounds good and I spent all that money. I know I've done all the wrong things... CAI, taking off engineered decorative engine cover, but I have never told someone that it makes even two percent improvement that you just did, they sound good and makes you think your going faster, good enough for me!
Guess I'm ducking outta this thread.....Jack

Ha. At least you are honest with yourself. They do sound great and look cool when you pop the hood. I had one on my Subaru STi for just that reason. But my CAI was only $100 more than a K&N drop in filter. And it was an STi. Not a truck known for being slow. There's no reason to pop the hood on a Gladiator other than to check the oil and coolant levels before a trip.
;-)

 

[dcmdon]

I use a CAI on my old '12 3.6L Charger. I bought it for the looks and sound. But, after 250k miles on that car that I realized that it paid for itself due to the washable filter. I clean it every 20k as recommended. If I changed it, at $15-$20 per filter, I'd have spent more than the $350.00 is cost me in the first place. So, looks, sound, and savings would be the reasons to add one. I also did used oil analysis on that car and it has always shown lower than average silicone in the oil, which is a sign of low dirt intrusion, so the filter is effective as well. Lots of highway driving up and down the central valley in CA so there is plenty of dust in the air.

You could have achieved the same thing with a K&N drop in filter. No CAI needed. But if you like the way it sounds, fantastic. Just don't delude yourself into thinking that it saved you money.

I don't want to bother cleaning reusable filter. I'd rather pay the money and just swap it out. If you add up the time it takes to clean and re-oil the filter and then the fact that you have to do it at about half the interval of a disposable filter. . . .I'll pass.

 

[ShadowsPapa]

As noted in dyno testing, and the link I posted earlier, the K&N filters do NOT make any difference until above around 3,000 RPM (will vary with engine, etc.) plus - the K&N gains drop off very fast - so you really only have any gain above 3,000 and then for the first miles. Dyno and other testing proves that those filters are more marketing hype than anything and the improvement, as high in the RPM band that it is, is very short-lived. In other words - an average vehicle will gain nothing, especially on the highway.
Racing, yeah, if you keep cleaning it constantly. They lose efficiency - they lose air flow advantage exponentially, the curve is very straight up while the loss of other filter types is more of a straight line ramp, gradual over time.
So if you race your Gladiator, and/or constantly run it above 3,000 RPM and want to clean it every 4 or 5 thousand miles - go for it. But also note that they aren't as good at trapping the dust and dirt people claim they are - again, proven in scientific dyno testing.
I'm sticking with a quality paper filter. The filtering is far better, and they maintain efficiency for thousands of miles longer. I don't race my truck. (except when trying to get through Des Moines on I235 at 7am)

Based on these, since I prefer engine life long-term to short term gains of miniscule HP at 3,000 RPM and higher - it won't be K&N for me - It's one of the worst filters out there for letting real dust and dirt pass through. (and this is a scientific test, not some youtube DIYer looking to monetize their amateur tests)

Here is total dirt allowed through vs. time it took for them to reach maximum capacity - pretty sad for a certain popular filter. It lasted half the time of the better filters and passed 7 grams of dirt compared to .4 (4 TENTHS) of a gram.

IF I did a CAI, I'd use one of the better filters as based on scientific tests.
I would want one I could run my choice of PAPER filter in, that could use a standard size available through Jeep dealers, parts stores or online and not a proprietary filter.

I know, I know - I was talking FILTERS, not cold air intakes. But it seems that filters got brought into this as a cheap way to gain power. This pretty much debunks that - so might as well keep it at cold air intake discussions since the filter arguments are pretty much bunk.

 

[Jeepin' John]

They do work (high rpm / power and low rpm / gas mileage) because they allow more moles into your engine

 

[ShadowsPapa]

Time for the traps........ crush those little suckers.

 

[Jeepin' John]

too cryptic

PV=nRT (ideal gas law)

P is measured with MAP sensor
V is given
n is calculated (solved for) moles (amount of) air
R is a constant
T is measured with IAT sensor

cold air intakes positively affect P and T at high rpm for peak power increase, and they positively affect T at low rpm for gas mileage increase. It has to do with maximizing "n" moles (amount of) of air

thermodynamics is coming back to me now, and it's making sense as to why you need the MAP and IAT sensors. Man, it WAS useful to learn!

 

[be77solo]

Y'all can flap all you want about blablablalbalbal......

I just simply love the glorious sound they give us back ha, particularly with a manual.... not to mention the cleaner looking engine bay, but, for me it's the sound!!!

 

[ShadowsPapa]

Y'all can flap all you want about blablablalbalbal......

I just simply love the glorious sound they give us back ha, particularly with a manual.... not to mention the cleaner looking engine bay, but, for me it's the sound!!!

Ya like to hear those moles LOL

 

[DPF140]

Sorry, a little late to this discussion. (Just joined) I’m the Engineering Manager responsible for the Clean Side Duct from the AB to the TB. Long story short, unless you want a full blown novel, the stock system is optimized considering many items.

Cold Air intakes on their own only let you hear the engine more. In order to get the full performance benefits you have modify the mapping of the ECU.

My suggestion, just make sure you keep a fresh Wix filter in your box. The amount of testing we go through to optimize the entire system for that specific engine is pretty intense with years of development.

 

[Jaxmax]

Way Cool Doug, thanks!.....Jack

Sponsored