To CAI or not, that is the question - Page 3 - Jeep Wrangler Forum

Go Back   Jeep Wrangler Forum > JK Jeep Wrangler Forum > JK Tech Forum

Join Wrangler Forum Today



Like Tree3Likes

Reply
 
Thread Tools

Please support our sponsors and let them know you heard about them on WranglerForum.com
Old 06-24-2015, 05:07 PM   #61
A-14

WF Supporting Member
 
1Topp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: BarkCamp Ga.
Posts: 1,567
1Topp is on a distinguished road
__________________


A-14 Build
A-14 Profile
A-14 Pics
1Topp is offline   Quote
Old 08-05-2015, 02:18 PM   #62
Supporting Member

5-Year WF Supporting Member
 
jwalters2522's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 554
jwalters2522 is on a distinguished road
so..... did you ever fit the snorkel to it?

__________________
2012 JKUS "R.E.V." 3.5'' RK X Factor, Synergy Balljoint, Synergy Tie rod, Synergy Drag link flip, JKS Discos, 4.88, sPOD, Genesis Dual Battery, 35x12.5x17 MTR's, Method Bronze, ARB twin compressor, Klien Train horn lol, Focal Audio.

There is no end........
jwalters2522 is offline   Quote
Old 09-18-2015, 03:08 PM   #63
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 74
jsmith807 is on a distinguished road
I think adding CAI and nice muffler just make it sound better, never have I gotten better MPG from doing so. Not sure on power as it was always put on big V8 trucks that had a lot of power to begin with
jsmith807 is offline   Quote
 
Old 09-18-2015, 04:14 PM
Thread Starter
  #64
Supporting Member

5-Year WF Supporting Member
 
TerryC6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Everett, Wa
Posts: 2,707
TerryC6 is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by jwalters2522 View Post
so..... did you ever fit the snorkel to it?
Sorry for the very late response, no I have not, yet.
TerryC6 is online now   Quote
Old 09-29-2015, 09:11 PM   #65
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: New Lenox, IL
Posts: 33
mike2ss is on a distinguished road
A CAI is only going to provide power at the upper end of the RPM range. An area where most Jeeps will never see unless you're racing. As for mileage increase, most legitimate manufacturers have dropped that claim. I have experience with cold air intakes on performance cars that I track. My current car is a Camaro with an LS3 with long tubes, tuned, ported throttle body, performance exhaust, etc.
When I started to mod this car I had it dynoed at each stage to see what if any gains were had. The CAI I have is a true cold air intake as I pull cold air from the lower grill into a sealed air box. The CAI showed modest gains around 3500 RPM and climbed slightly to redline.
I've been debating about getting one for the Jeep, but I can't see the point when it's power benefit is in a range that I'll never drive in. The only benefit I can see is the ability to pull cold air outside of the engine compartment. I have not really seen any designs for the jeep that do that as well as my Camaro. In an earlier post someone mentioned heat soak. That is definitely something a well designed true cold air intake can help with.
mike2ss is offline   Quote
Old 09-30-2015, 06:51 PM   #66
chp
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 77
chp is on a distinguished road
I’ll offer another CAI opinion. First, the stock airbox has a few issues:

1) The airbox doesn’t flow too well. You are only using about half of your air filter.
2) The tube from the airbox to the throttle body flows OK. However, the resonator tubes sit directly in the hot air path from the radiator/AC condenser/tranny cooler and gets hot.
3) The air inlet air temperature sensor gets heated externally by the same hot air as in #2.

On an 85F day I have seen IAT temperatures at 165F in stop and go traffic. The ECM has a couple tables that modify the ignition timing based on inlet air temperature. You can lose 1 degree of timing for every 10F increase in inlet air temperature. So, an 80F degree rise results in 8 degrees of timing loss. What does this mean:

1) Less dense air making less power
2) Lower timing resulting in making less power
3) To get the same acceleration feel you have to press the accelerator down more resulting in:
a) Less pumping losses for slightly better engine efficiency (this is a good thing)
b) Your transmission control module sees the increased throttle and holds the gear longer (this is a bad thing for fuel economy)

The net result is less power and worse fuel economy.

My stock system flowed about 175 CFM (if I remember right) outside of the vehicle and flowed less inside the vehicle with the hood down (I forget the number). I modified the stock air box and picked up about 25ish CFM. I insulated the stock tube and dropped the max temperature excursion from 80F to about 45F.

I still wasn’t happy. So I did some research into CAIs for the JKs and bought the one that I felt had the most potential. I modified it to get cold air from the outside, modified the air box to flow better (the system is about 245 CFM now outside of the vehicle), insulated the tube, and insulated the inlet air temperature sensor from external heating. My temperature rise is about 5-10F during normal driving and I’ve seen a peak rise of about 20F. I used thermal insulation/noise dampening on the inside of two of the sides of the air box to help with conducted heat and to cut down the high frequency intake noise. My intake is pretty much silent until about 2500 RPM at >1/2 throttle then it starts with a very deep growl. One of my passengers remarked that it sounds like a V8.

I have the ability to dyno the JKU, but I didn’t after each design iteration. I’ll probably dyno, get a 0-60MPH time, and ľ mile performance after I finish tuning the ECM to just see the end result.
chp is offline   Quote
Old 10-02-2015, 11:07 PM   #67
Jeeper
 
turnbull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,091
turnbull is on a distinguished road
I just bought a Volant CAI for my 2015 JK. I will post my impressions once I install it. I can definitely record sound differences from stock to CAI, and in the future I will report any MPG findings. I also ordered an aFe muffler that I will be installing about the same time and will try to test acceleration between stock and modified (CAI/muffler), but I probably wont test it with just the CAI.

I had a Volant CAI on my TJ and really liked the design, and it appears the JK CAI has a similar design. For one, I feel that Volant has the best airbox in terms of protection from water. For two, the filter is great. It is a dry filter (so no cleaning required) that lasts about 100k miles, so it is very low maintenance, and is supposedly water resistant. The cylindrical design is more efficient than the stock filter in my opinion. It has the option for a pre-filter for even better dirt/water resistance.

The Volant JK CAI can actually be set up as a true "cold" air intake by one of 2 ways. One method is to use their snorkel system, but there is actually a second method that is probably not as well known. You can buy a lightweight hood (fiberglass/carbon fiber) from RK sport that is designed to be used with the Volant CAI to pull outside air through a duct in the hood directly to the intake. There is actually a Volant part you can buy that replaces the top cover of the air box with an open top cover that seals to the air duct when the hood is closed. This replacement hood method is what I am going to do in the future because there are no body modifications, it is lighter, and the hood itself has two heat extractor vents for reduced under hood temps.
turnbull is offline   Quote
Old 10-10-2015, 10:18 PM   #68
Jeeper
 
BigBadWilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: PDR of MoCo
Posts: 527
BigBadWilly is on a distinguished road
Send a message via Yahoo to BigBadWilly
After reading through the various posts in the forum, I decided to install the Banks stinger system, which is made up of

Banks intake


Banks Exhaust


This is the result after highway driving


21mpg is pretty good for our Jeeps. You can see that I am still above 1/2 tank at 180 miles, will probably get 200 miles at the half tank, and be somewhere in between 380 and 400 for the tank. Not bad.

Specs: 2015 JKU Sport S with street tires, rubi wheels, 3:21, filled up with 93 octane
__________________
_______
/l ,[____],
l---L -OlllllllO-
()_) ()_)--o-)_)
BigBadWilly is offline   Quote
Old 10-10-2015, 10:28 PM   #69
Supporting Member

5-Year WF Supporting Member
 
RoadiJeff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 5,619
RoadiJeff is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigBadWilly View Post
Specs: 2015 JKU Sport S with street tires, rubi wheels, 3:21, filled up with 93 octane
Unless you've messed with the timing or compression, running on anything about the 87 octane factory specs is a waste of money. 93 may actually decrease performance if the engine is not tuned for it.
RoadiJeff is online now   Quote
Old 10-11-2015, 06:24 AM   #70
Jeeper
 
BigBadWilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: PDR of MoCo
Posts: 527
BigBadWilly is on a distinguished road
Send a message via Yahoo to BigBadWilly
Allow me to grab some popcorn and wait while you explain how running higher octane will DECREASE performance.
BigBadWilly is offline   Quote
Old 10-11-2015, 07:17 AM   #71
Supporting Member

5-Year WF Supporting Member
 
RoadiJeff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 5,619
RoadiJeff is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigBadWilly View Post
Allow me to grab some popcorn and wait while you explain how running higher octane will DECREASE performance.
Do a Google search. There are MANY articles that talk about the reason for this if you run a higher octane than what is called for in your owners manual. I have personally done my own tests in my own DD car and the fuel economy decreased 2 mpg when I went from 87 to 93 during a 2-week test period.

Here's one of those Google results I mentioned above. Click on the link and read through it.

Fuel Octane, Choosing The Wrong Octane Will Cost You

Excerpt from the article:

A few things. For one, you will be wasting a huge amount of money paying for high octane gasoline. Second, your car will not run correctly, whether you notice it or not. Higher octane fuel requires more heat and more precision to burn correctly. If your car is designed to burn 87, it will not burn 93 correctly. Third, your gas mileage will suffer. The inability of your engine to burn the higher octane gas correctly will cause your engine to produce less power and thus will require more fuel to perform at the same level.

Allow me to grab some popcorn while I await your response.


RoadiJeff is online now   Quote
Old 10-11-2015, 08:25 AM   #72
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: New Lenox, IL
Posts: 33
mike2ss is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by turnbull View Post
The Volant JK CAI can actually be set up as a true "cold" air intake by one of 2 ways. One method is to use their snorkel system, but there is actually a second method that is probably not as well known. You can buy a lightweight hood (fiberglass/carbon fiber) from RK sport that is designed to be used with the Volant CAI to pull outside air through a duct in the hood directly to the intake. There is actually a Volant part you can buy that replaces the top cover of the air box with an open top cover that seals to the air duct when the hood is closed. This replacement hood method is what I am going to do in the future because there are no body modifications, it is lighter, and the hood itself has two heat extractor vents for reduced under hood temps.
If your Jeep is a daily driver, you want to make sure that the intake doesn't allow water to get into the air box. Looking at the pictures of the underside of the hood this looks like it could be an issue. Might be a great hood for off-road, but depending on the climate you live in you could be asking for trouble.
mike2ss is offline   Quote
Old 10-11-2015, 08:31 AM   #73
Jeeper
 
BUZZ31's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Mid-Atlantic
Posts: 840
BUZZ31 is on a distinguished road
My JKU does not like 87 Octane.
__________________
Buzz31

~Socrates, meet Ted - Ted, meet Socrates~
BUZZ31 is offline   Quote
Old 10-11-2015, 02:17 PM   #74
Newb
 
Join Date: Oct 2015
Posts: 2
FnLeevo is on a distinguished road
Is your JKU tuned for premium or mid grade gas? What was posted above is true with regards to octane. Was the 87 octane gas you bought E-15 or E-85 by any chance?(that's ethanol content, E-10 is your standard gasohol w/10% eth). If your JKU is tuned for 87 and you had problems with 87 it's possible you pumped gas at a station where the truck delivering it "cross dropped" the wrong product. That or incorrect ethanol content.

In terms of mileage from fuel your best bet is ethanol free gas of whatever octane your engine is rated at. Sadly this isn't readily available in all states. Due to regulations varying by region you might find it under different names, but I know we sell it to suppliers as conventional gas. (I.e 87 or 93 conventional).
FnLeevo is offline   Quote
Old 10-11-2015, 02:29 PM   #75
Jeeper
 
BUZZ31's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Mid-Atlantic
Posts: 840
BUZZ31 is on a distinguished road
I am not sure what the ethanol blend % was or is currently.

I noticed in my Chrysler engines that all of them have made a knocking sound under acceleration using 87 octane.

My Suburban also makes knocking noises at 87 octane.

When I run 92/93 the knocking goes away.
__________________
Buzz31

~Socrates, meet Ted - Ted, meet Socrates~
BUZZ31 is offline   Quote
Old 10-11-2015, 07:29 PM   #76
Jeeper
 
BigBadWilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: PDR of MoCo
Posts: 527
BigBadWilly is on a distinguished road
Send a message via Yahoo to BigBadWilly
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoadiJeff View Post
Do a Google search. There are MANY articles that talk about the reason for this if you run a higher octane than what is called for in your owners manual. I have personally done my own tests in my own DD car and the fuel economy decreased 2 mpg when I went from 87 to 93 during a 2-week test period.

Here's one of those Google results I mentioned above. Click on the link and read through it.

Fuel Octane, Choosing The Wrong Octane Will Cost You

Excerpt from the article:

A few things. For one, you will be wasting a huge amount of money paying for high octane gasoline. Second, your car will not run correctly, whether you notice it or not. Higher octane fuel requires more heat and more precision to burn correctly. If your car is designed to burn 87, it will not burn 93 correctly. Third, your gas mileage will suffer. The inability of your engine to burn the higher octane gas correctly will cause your engine to produce less power and thus will require more fuel to perform at the same level.

Allow me to grab some popcorn while I await your response.


Sorry but I've also done the tests and whenever 87 is used, the MPG DECREASES and whenever the higher octane is used, the MPG INCREASES... you can find that using Google as well. I read through the article you posted (and a few others) and the bottom line is that engine knock will not occur and MPG will increase with higher octane, but "performance" will not. So as alluded to, it could be denoted as a "waste of money"... maybe, but we all waste our money on something. Bottom line is that you cannot DECREASE mpg or performance by using higher octane.

Getting more popcorn.
__________________
_______
/l ,[____],
l---L -OlllllllO-
()_) ()_)--o-)_)
BigBadWilly is offline   Quote
Old 10-11-2015, 10:03 PM   #77
Supporting Member

5-Year WF Supporting Member
 
RoadiJeff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 5,619
RoadiJeff is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by BigBadWilly View Post
Sorry but I've also done the tests and whenever 87 is used, the MPG DECREASES and whenever the higher octane is used, the MPG INCREASES... you can find that using Google as well. I read through the article you posted (and a few others) and the bottom line is that engine knock will not occur and MPG will increase with higher octane, but "performance" will not. So as alluded to, it could be denoted as a "waste of money"... maybe, but we all waste our money on something. Bottom line is that you cannot DECREASE mpg or performance by using higher octane.

Getting more popcorn.
I posted one link to support the facts I stated about higher octane being a waste if your engine is not tuned for it. I could have posted many more.

I am still waiting for even one of yours...and getting more popcorn while I wait. Mmm...butter flavored this time.
RoadiJeff is online now   Quote
Old 10-12-2015, 12:14 AM
Thread Starter
  #78
Supporting Member

5-Year WF Supporting Member
 
TerryC6's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Everett, Wa
Posts: 2,707
TerryC6 is on a distinguished road
Guys take your octane debate elsewhere please. We are interested in the results of people who have actually installed a CAI, both good and bad. This is a result thread not a debate thread. Thanks.
TerryC6 is online now   Quote
Old 10-12-2015, 07:36 PM   #79
Jeeper
 
BigBadWilly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: PDR of MoCo
Posts: 527
BigBadWilly is on a distinguished road
Send a message via Yahoo to BigBadWilly
Quote:
Originally Posted by TerryC6 View Post
Guys take your octane debate elsewhere please. We are interested in the results of people who have actually installed a CAI, both good and bad. This is a result thread not a debate thread. Thanks.
Well said... especially when it seems to be a game of Google search?

I've posted my results... and they stand even with the input of other "opinions"
__________________
_______
/l ,[____],
l---L -OlllllllO-
()_) ()_)--o-)_)
BigBadWilly is offline   Quote
Old 10-12-2015, 09:36 PM   #80
Supporting Member

5-Year WF Supporting Member
 
RoadiJeff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 5,619
RoadiJeff is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by TerryC6 View Post
Guys take your octane debate elsewhere please. We are interested in the results of people who have actually installed a CAI, both good and bad. This is a result thread not a debate thread. Thanks.
Fair enough. I posted links to support my claims and the other person apparently could not find anything to refute it. I stand by what I said.
RoadiJeff is online now   Quote
Old 10-16-2015, 04:07 PM   #81
chp
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Posts: 77
chp is on a distinguished road
RoadiJeff and BigBadWilly,

You’re both right. Some background: Higher octane gas takes higher temperature and pressure to self ignite, burns more controllably, and “burns slower”. It is possible to gain more power and fuel economy from higher octane fuel.

Ideally, you set you ignition timing so that you can get the maximum power from the combustion. If your timing is too advanced, the combustion opposes the rising piston, causes a knock or ping, and reduces power. If your timing is too retarded, you will not efficiently use the combustion to push the piston away from the head, loose efficiency, put more hot gasses into your exhaust, and you can actually hear a little different exhaust note if you have a free flowing exhaust. For example, timing is retarded when you first start your engine to put more heat into the cats to help light them off.

I have seen manufacturers establish their ignition timing in a few different ways:

1) Design the timing for 86 octane gas but recommend 87 octane gas. This is a conservative approach to minimize the chance for knock. So, if you add higher octane gas here, you’ll lose fuel economy and power.

2) Design the timing for 88-89 octane gas but recommend 87 octane gas and rely on the knock sensors to actively pull back timing to optimize ignition timing. This approach can result in a more efficient fuel burn, but you are always relying on the knock system to protect you. So, if you add higher octane gas here, you’ll gain power and you can gain fuel economy in some cases because you can shift to a higher gear sooner and reduce your frictional losses.

3) Design the timing for 88-89 octane gas but recommend 87 octane gas and rely on the knock sensors and a learning process to adapt to the “best” timing for the current source of fuel. In this case there are two timing tables – a max and a min. Timing is started at the max and if knock is detected in a particular operating cell, timing is slowly pulled back and “learned” at a new level so you don’t get knock in the future. After you add, perhaps a Ĺ tank of fuel, the learning resets to the max timing table, and the learning process starts again. So, if you add higher octane gas here, you’ll gain power and you can gain fuel economy in some cases because you can shift to a higher gear sooner and reduce your frictional losses.

So, depending on who did the tuning for the manufacturer, either you can gain or lose power and fuel economy using higher octane fuel.
chp is offline   Quote
Old 10-19-2015, 07:37 PM   #82
Jeeper
 
turnbull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,091
turnbull is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by mike2ss View Post
If your Jeep is a daily driver, you want to make sure that the intake doesn't allow water to get into the air box. Looking at the pictures of the underside of the hood this looks like it could be an issue. Might be a great hood for off-road, but depending on the climate you live in you could be asking for trouble.
You are referring to the RK hood I mentioned in my previous post? If that is the case, I agree with you to a certain extent. The hood does like water could easily reach the intake. However, in my research I have read that RK designed the hood to drain the water before it reaches the intake. I have even read of one customer who supposedly sprayed the hood with a hose and still could not get water to the intake. And honestly, the theoretical amount of water we are talking about could be easily repelled by using a prefilter.

I do want to get this hood, but it probably won't be for at least a year. When I do decide to finally buy it, I will contact RK and ask about the water issue before I actually buy it. When I receive the hood, I will test it myself, and if it does not perform to my expectations, I will simply return it.
turnbull is offline   Quote
Old 10-19-2015, 08:11 PM   #83
Jeeper
 
turnbull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 1,091
turnbull is on a distinguished road
Sorry for the double posts, but I did not want to mix these two posts because they cover different topics. This one covers my impressions of the Volant CAI so far.

So I recently installed the Volant CAI. One complaint I have is that there are no holes to drain water that could potentially enter the airbox. Simple fix was to drill a hole into the airbox. I drilled 2 just to be safe.

I did not notice a difference in sound just from the intake, and I recorded the engine sound (outside the Jeep and inside) before and after the install so there would be no mistake. I will say that I did not test the Jeep under load, and maybe if I had, I would have noticed a difference in sound then. I only tested idle sound and revving up to 6k RPM not moving.

I cannot speak of any difference in performance from just the intake, but I did test the performance of the stock vehicle vs. the Volant CAI AND the aFe axle-back exhaust system. Note that the purpose of my test was for comparison between the stock setup and the modified setup only. For your information, I have a 2015 2-door Sport. I was not trying to beat any speed records, and you will see what I mean if you look at the results (further down). But first, my test procedure:

I start from an idle in 2nd gear (yes, 2nd gear). Peddle to the floor, I rev up to 6k RPM and then shift to 4th gear (yes, 4th gear) until I reached 70 MPH.

Why did I test it like this? For one, I was trying to minimize human error by limiting the number of shift points since I have a manual tranny. 2nd gear is low enough for me to get started, but also eliminates any error from shifting from 1st gear. Also I started from an idle so there was no human error in engaging the clutch to start off.

I could have hit 70 in 3rd gear, but since this is a Jeep after all, I figured the data would be more valuable if I stayed in the lower RPMs where it matters, so that is why I shifted to 4th gear for the last stretch. My RPM range in the 4th gear was about 3k-4k, so about mid range.

Obviously this is not the ideal procedure to minimize my times, but like I said, it reduces human error as much as possible which is important for comparison. Now, the results:

Stock runs:
1: 13.4s
2: 13.3s
3: 13.4s

Volant CAI and aFe exhaust runs:
1: 13.1s
2: 13.1s
3: 13.1s

As you can see, it is not a significant difference, but the error between each run is so minimal that I concluded that there was an increase in power. I checked the weather on both days I did these tests, and the weather was as similar as it could be both days, so weather was not a factor.

From the data given, you can see a decrease of about 2.2%. What does this means in terms of power? It is hard to say, but we know that for a given percentage of power increase, the percentage decrease in acceleration time will not be as significant. In other words, a 2.2% decrease in acceleration time equates to more than a 2.2% increase in power. I estimate this percentage to be around 5%.

This is still not a huge increase, but remember, this is mostly in the low-mid RPM range, so that is still useable power, and as we know, the 3.6l reaches about 250 lb-ft of torque around 2k RPMs and maintains at least that torque all the way to nearly redline. A roughly 5% increase in this range equates to between 10-15 lb-ft in the low-mid RPM range. And who knows, maybe the top end sees an even larger percentage increase in power.

In addition, I have personally noticed an increase in low-end torque, but take that with a grain of salt because it is, after all, just a butt dyno. However, I am basing this statement on the fact that the Jeep feels less likely to stall when I am starting off.

Am I saying it is worth buying a CAI and exhaust system for that increase in power? No, you have to make that decision on your own. A supercharger will definitely give you more bang for your buck (and a LOT more bang overall) if you can afford it. But honestly, if my mind isn't playing tricks on me with this low end torque business, I'd say it was worth it to me.

I have not been able to make a judgement on MPG yet, but I will have an opportunity to do that this weekend, so stay tuned!
turnbull is offline   Quote
Old 10-23-2015, 06:43 AM   #84
Jeeper
 
snokat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: East of the Everglades
Posts: 128
snokat is on a distinguished road
My build went this way, RR low-rise. Much better low end torque and I get two birds with one stone. Maybe a bit of a mpg gain but I don't really pay attention to that as much as staying in OD on my commute.
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	20150720_194438_005_resized.jpg
Views:	226
Size:	143.4 KB
ID:	2574481  
__________________
Mods: Rugged Ridge XHD Snorkel, 21" 12-10W LED Hood-Mounted Light Bar, Teraflex 2" Level Kit and 1.25" BL, BeStop Tinted Windows, Barricade HD Front and Rear Bumpers, Red Rock Wheel Spacers, Mickey Thompson Baja MTZ 295/70/17s,
JKS License Kit, Smittybilt Tailgate Table.
snokat is offline   Quote
Old 01-28-2016, 08:37 PM   #85
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Louisville, KY
Posts: 72
2K12JKSilver is on a distinguished road
Has anyone bought the combo from aFe? As in Hi Tuck exhaust, stage 2 intake and TB spacer?....Curious on how people feel about this setup
2K12JKSilver is offline   Quote
Old 03-14-2016, 02:52 PM   #86
Jeeper
 
BKJKU's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 31
BKJKU is on a distinguished road
Those of you who are running the K&N CAI, are you using the dry filter black hawk or the oiled filters? Any reasons to use one and not the other? Thanks.
__________________
2015 JKU Wrangler Rubicon 6 Spd
BKJKU is offline   Quote
Old 03-28-2016, 11:03 PM   #87
Newb
 
CarolinaJeeper0698's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 7
CarolinaJeeper0698 is on a distinguished road
I installed the Airraid cold air intake and I was very pleased with it, good sound under pull, great fit and finish with an easy installation. Seems to ride more easily now that it can breathe as well
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	ForumRunner_20160329_000244.jpg
Views:	167
Size:	130.2 KB
ID:	2923530   Click image for larger version

Name:	ForumRunner_20160329_000317.jpg
Views:	171
Size:	115.6 KB
ID:	2923562  

CarolinaJeeper0698 is offline   Quote
Old 04-02-2016, 11:15 PM   #88
OVRLNDR

5-Year WF Supporting Member
 
Skywgn1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Boise, Idaho
Posts: 1,717
Skywgn1 is on a distinguished road
I went an entirely different route. I like the idea of a "true" cold air intake but didn't want to reuse the stock airbox or intake tube with the chambers in it so I bought the new Injen "Amphibious Attack" setup. Stupid name I know. So, I could have bought the AEV snorkel with the 4" diameter top for 400.00 bucks and used the original intake box/tube which I didn't want to do. The Injen intake box/tube was 320.00 and very easy to install. It uses a dry cone filter and a larger intake tube that then goes down to what has to be the stock circumference since it couples to the stock throttle body. On the box has a little gauge that goes from green to red. If it's red then you clean the filter. Simple enough.
I also have a dynomax competition off road muffler that dumps before the rear axle (#39522 I believe). Needless to say the combination can move some air.
One of the first things I did not like about this Injen intake tube compared to other Injen products that I have used is that the tube is plastic and not metal so the MAF mount is nothing but a rubber grommet. That's fine and dandy if its just an intake tube but extremely underwhelming when you buy the snorkel part. I had to RTV the piss out of it to make it waterproof. Same with all of the airbox and snorkel joints. And since I used RTV I sure didn't want to tear it apart, clean the RTV off of everything to clean the filter so I bought a third piece. But more on that later.

I left out the snorkel. I bought this piece a week later and installed it three weeks after I bought it. Why, I really didn't want to cut my hood.......again. It was a little stressful when I cut my knew Jeeps hood to install the Poison Spyder louvers and I wasn't looking forward to it again. Anyway, I spent 320.00 for the snorkel and finally installed it. Nothing major happened other than the directions for the template placement on the hood had it 1" too far forward so I had to cut more out of my hood to make it right.

Now to go back a little, I just spent 650.00 for a very nice snorkel system that I water proofed using RTV and didn't want to tear apart to clean the filter. The stock Injen snorkel setup uses a ram top and works great on the highway to get that air into the engine and I did notice that my automatic transmission was holding gears better on the interstate (4.5" lift and 35x13.50x20 tires with 3.73 gears) but if that same air was on a dirty trail I would have problems. So as the old saying goes: JUST EMPTY EVERY POCKET, I decided I needed a precleaner. So, I got in touch with AEV and of course they were sold out of their precleaner (135.00) but were nice enough to tell me who made them (Sy Klone). Interesting company by the way. They wouldn't sell me one so I had to find another company with the one I needed. Unfortunately I did......CATERPILLAR. So instead of 135.00 I spent 230.00. Now my system has cost me 850.00. And this is what I have learned.
1. It looks cool!
2. I have to spend even more money to extend all of the breathers for my axles, transmission and who knows what else (onboard air) to the airbox so they are also water proof.
3. My gas mileage improved to 17.8 from 14.3 but as time went on the ECU found a way to get involved and took me down to 14.4 over the course of 1.5 months.
4. I needed a programmer.
So to waste more money I purchased the Superchips TrailDash1 for 300.00 and got to work. I have ran the Eco tune, 90 tune, and the 93 tune. I have also used the crawl tune even though it is pointless for this novel I have written. The programmer has changed the throttle sensor and it is peppy. It will break ground at a stop light and that takes a lot since each tire and wheel combo weigh around 147lbs. I can power brake it too until the nanny kicks in and eliminates it. If I am normal and us the 90 octane tune I was back up in the 17 MPG but as time has passed I am back down to 15.1 MPG.
I have come to the conclusion that no matter what you do with the ECU and the 3.6 Pentastar you will not get more power/MPG's. The only thing I can do short of forced induction is a throttle body spacer (pointless) and one of those Tornado thing-a-ma-jig in the intake tube (also pointless). But what's another 200 bucks.
To sum it up:
Injen intake: 330.00
Injen snorkel: 320.00
Caterpillar precleaner: 230.00
Dynomax muffler: 120.00
SuperChips programmer: 300.00
Total: 1300.00

Looks/sounds cool!
.8 MPG better!
I could have bought a good winch or roof rack for that price but instead I just need another set of tires.........Maybe I'll go to 37's.?
Click image for larger version

Name:	0117161606.jpg
Views:	967
Size:	223.7 KB
ID:	2933826
__________________
STUPIDITY IS NOT A FORM OF KNOWLEDGE.
Skywgn1 is online now   Quote
Old 05-25-2016, 04:02 PM   #89
Newb
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 1
autoradarinstallers is on a distinguished road
i did the CAi to my jeep and i have no regrets. DO IT!!
autoradarinstallers is offline   Quote
Old 07-12-2016, 12:24 PM   #90
Jeeper
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Posts: 118
milfblaster is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by chp View Post
Iíll offer another CAI opinion. First, the stock airbox has a few issues:

1) The airbox doesnít flow too well. You are only using about half of your air filter.
2) The tube from the airbox to the throttle body flows OK. However, the resonator tubes sit directly in the hot air path from the radiator/AC condenser/tranny cooler and gets hot.
3) The air inlet air temperature sensor gets heated externally by the same hot air as in #2.

On an 85F day I have seen IAT temperatures at 165F in stop and go traffic. The ECM has a couple tables that modify the ignition timing based on inlet air temperature. You can lose 1 degree of timing for every 10F increase in inlet air temperature. So, an 80F degree rise results in 8 degrees of timing loss. What does this mean:

1) Less dense air making less power
2) Lower timing resulting in making less power
3) To get the same acceleration feel you have to press the accelerator down more resulting in:
a) Less pumping losses for slightly better engine efficiency (this is a good thing)
b) Your transmission control module sees the increased throttle and holds the gear longer (this is a bad thing for fuel economy)

The net result is less power and worse fuel economy.

My stock system flowed about 175 CFM (if I remember right) outside of the vehicle and flowed less inside the vehicle with the hood down (I forget the number). I modified the stock air box and picked up about 25ish CFM. I insulated the stock tube and dropped the max temperature excursion from 80F to about 45F.

I still wasnít happy. So I did some research into CAIs for the JKs and bought the one that I felt had the most potential. I modified it to get cold air from the outside, modified the air box to flow better (the system is about 245 CFM now outside of the vehicle), insulated the tube, and insulated the inlet air temperature sensor from external heating. My temperature rise is about 5-10F during normal driving and Iíve seen a peak rise of about 20F. I used thermal insulation/noise dampening on the inside of two of the sides of the air box to help with conducted heat and to cut down the high frequency intake noise. My intake is pretty much silent until about 2500 RPM at >1/2 throttle then it starts with a very deep growl. One of my passengers remarked that it sounds like a V8.

I have the ability to dyno the JKU, but I didnít after each design iteration. Iíll probably dyno, get a 0-60MPH time, and ľ mile performance after I finish tuning the ECM to just see the end result.
What can I use to insulate this stuff? Would reflectix tape be good? I'm probably gonna stick to the stock intake for now but if I could pick up 2 or 3 degrees of timing advance it might be worth a try.

milfblaster is online now   Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off






All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:55 PM.


User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.1.0 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

Jeepģ, Wrangler, Liberty, Wagoneer, Cherokee, and Grand Cherokee are copyrighted and trademarked to Chrysler Motors LLC.
Wranglerforum.com is not in any way associated with the Chrysler Motors LLC
ę Back

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner