Question about current CAI's.
 

I know there are tons of CAI's on the market. Most are very similar to each other model. So here is my question.

1) Has anyone used a digital infrared thermometer and test both aluminum vs. plastic intake systems? (Aftermarket)

Reason being asked: I installed a aluminum CAI on a turbo car I owned and it seemed to lose power over a plastic intake system. - Not sure why (Aluminum was a open filter system vs. plastic closed box K/N setup) but we were assuming it was caused by heat soak. (Engine heats up the aluminum and it was staying hot - making the intake charge warm air over the closed box plastic setup) It was a proven loss on the dyno but we never actually tested our heat theory and why this was happening.

I guess the second part of my question is did anyone actually do any back to back dyno testing of different CAI's? (independent of any vendors that are selling a product) There are some pretty big claims being made out there. I'd like to see some on paper results from a user vs. a seller of a product.

Thanks.

Nobody? :confused:

Talk to Mike Troyer, he has tested every intake system out there. The AF1 ran the coolest air temp, the stock intake ran the second coolest temp.

Aluminum is the worst material to use in an intake system, it absorbs heat.

I have been involved with several R&D sessions involving the AF1 which has a stainless steel tube, verses a plastic tube at Mikes.
The difference was minimal when shot with a digital thermometer (infrared)
and although many here will want to argue and claim foul, the stainless steel was the cooler. Have not seen any comparison between aluminum and plastic, but for sure the plastic would outperform aluminum...