Exhaust & Intake Systems
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by: Real Truck

CAI differences Performance wise

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Oct 8, 2009 | 12:03 AM
  #1  
04HeritageXL's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
From: NJ
Exclamation CAI differences Performance wise

I have a 2004 f150 heritageXL with the 4.6, i have been looking for a CAI for my truck and i am wondering what the difference is between the K&N 57 series and 77 series. Also i was wondering if anyone has installed the AFE Stage 2 CAI on their 97-03 f150. If you have installed any of these, have any opinions or any knowledge on these CAI's it is appreciated.

-Fred
 
Reply
Old Oct 8, 2009 | 08:59 AM
  #2  
4.6 Punisher's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 4,778
Likes: 10
From: Douglasville GA
One is plastic (better) and the other is metal (worse). Both choices are overpriced and perform poorly.

Look into S&B, Volant, or create your own via Gotts Intake Mod.
 
Reply
Old Oct 8, 2009 | 09:57 AM
  #3  
Big Slick's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,879
Likes: 0
From: Virginia Beach
Originally Posted by 4.6 Punisher
One is plastic (better) and the other is metal (worse). Both choices are overpriced and perform poorly.

Look into S&B, Volant, or create your own via Gotts Intake Mod.
i really wish people would put a little more thought into things before holding them as a maxim and subsequently doling out incorrect information.

from a performance standpoint, the material a CAI is made out of makes zero difference to how well it performs. a substance (air) must dwell for a certain amount of time at a given temperature before ambient heat transfer can take place. the air molecules, as they travel from filter to throttle body, dwell within the intake tube for an extremely small amount of time. they just don't stay in the intake long enough for any meaningful amount of heat transfer to take place.

if a company is in the business of selling intakes and the material an intake is made out of made any kind of real difference, don't you think they would know this, and choose the material that produced the most power? after all, that is the point of an aftermarket intake and increasing power is what all these manufacturers claim. it boils down to manufacturing costs. the AF1 3.5" intake is widely purported to be the best performing intake that you could buy, yet it is (shockingly) made of metal. who'd a thunk it?
 
Reply
Old Oct 8, 2009 | 10:14 AM
  #4  
ZEEKA's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 313
Likes: 0
Isn't a CAI is useless without a proper tuner/scanner to maximize its true benefits?
 
Reply
Old Oct 8, 2009 | 10:49 AM
  #5  
MudTerrain's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,413
Likes: 0
From: Iowa
Originally Posted by ZEEKA
Isn't a CAI is useless without a proper tuner/scanner to maximize its true benefits?
Useless, no.

To maximize it to its true potential, yes.
 
Reply
Old Oct 8, 2009 | 03:15 PM
  #6  
ZEEKA's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 313
Likes: 0
I have dual exhust and a K&N air filter, what could I expect from a CAI without a tuner?
 
Reply
Old Oct 8, 2009 | 07:08 PM
  #7  
DarrenWS6's Avatar
Technical Article Contributor
Truck of the Month
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 16,436
Likes: 5
From: Mansfield, P.A.
Originally Posted by ZEEKA
I have dual exhust and a K&N air filter, what could I expect from a CAI without a tuner?
Deeper exhaust note, barely noticeable power increase.
 
Reply

Trending Topics

Old Oct 8, 2009 | 08:35 PM
  #8  
4.6 Punisher's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 4,778
Likes: 10
From: Douglasville GA
Originally Posted by Big Slick
i really wish people would put a little more thought into things before holding them as a maxim and subsequently doling out incorrect information.

from a performance standpoint, the material a CAI is made out of makes zero difference to how well it performs. a substance (air) must dwell for a certain amount of time at a given temperature before ambient heat transfer can take place. the air molecules, as they travel from filter to throttle body, dwell within the intake tube for an extremely small amount of time. they just don't stay in the intake long enough for any meaningful amount of heat transfer to take place.

if a company is in the business of selling intakes and the material an intake is made out of made any kind of real difference, don't you think they would know this, and choose the material that produced the most power? after all, that is the point of an aftermarket intake and increasing power is what all these manufacturers claim. it boils down to manufacturing costs. the AF1 3.5" intake is widely purported to be the best performing intake that you could buy, yet it is (shockingly) made of metal. who'd a thunk it?
I get my information from K&N's own site. They say that the plastic tube gets 1 more horsepower than the metal one. If you've got a problem with me referring to their own site, I suggest you bitch at them instead of me.
 
Reply
Old Oct 8, 2009 | 11:03 PM
  #9  
04HeritageXL's Avatar
Thread Starter
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2009
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
From: NJ
today i got a K&N drop in and i think im going to do the gotts. i think im going to get a PHP Gryphon, i am assuming i will get custom tunes etc. does anyone know how much the custom tunes, programmer itself and the dash mount wouyld cost
 

Last edited by 04HeritageXL; Oct 9, 2009 at 12:08 AM.
Reply
Old Oct 9, 2009 | 08:25 AM
  #10  
Big Slick's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,879
Likes: 0
From: Virginia Beach
Originally Posted by 4.6 Punisher
I get my information from K&N's own site. They say that the plastic tube gets 1 more horsepower than the metal one. If you've got a problem with me referring to their own site, I suggest you bitch at them instead of me.
hahaha. you're repeating information from a company that's trying to sell something? of course they'll say that. fwiw, that's a pretty ridiculous claim. 1hp can be gained or lost by tons of different variables on back to back dyno runs.
 
Reply
Old Oct 9, 2009 | 11:58 AM
  #11  
4.6 Punisher's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 4,778
Likes: 10
From: Douglasville GA
Well then why don't you go buy both intake tubes and dyno test both of them under the exact same conditions if you've got a problem with their own results.

Sounds to me like you bought the metal intake then found out it doesn't perform as well as the plastic intake.

And about the 3.5 inch AF1 intake being the best, I'll give you one guess why it's the best, and it's not because it's made of metal.
 
Reply
Old Oct 9, 2009 | 12:07 PM
  #12  
Big Slick's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,879
Likes: 0
From: Virginia Beach
Originally Posted by 4.6 Punisher
Well then why don't you go buy both intake tubes and dyno test both of them under the exact same conditions if you've got a problem with their own results.

Sounds to me like you bought the metal intake then found out it doesn't perform as well as the plastic intake.

And about the 3.5 inch AF1 intake being the best, I'll give you one guess why it's the best, and it's not because it's made of metal.
and where exactly did i say it was the best because it's made of metal? i said it's been purported to be the best AND it's made of metal.

that said, the 3.5 is quite a bit larger than the majority of other intakes which allows more air volume to be delivered to the engine at any given time. that coupled with the huge filter with the inverted dome inlet allows for a greater amount of air to be delivered. pretty much exactly what a large displacement engine needs.
 
Reply
Old Oct 10, 2009 | 12:46 PM
  #13  
stoffer's Avatar
Senior Member
Truck of the Month
20 Year Member
Veteran: Army
Community Favorite
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 13,678
Likes: 82
From: missing Texas...
you two better chill out...
 
Reply
Old Oct 10, 2009 | 12:48 PM
  #14  
stoffer's Avatar
Senior Member
Truck of the Month
20 Year Member
Veteran: Army
Community Favorite
Joined: Apr 2004
Posts: 13,678
Likes: 82
From: missing Texas...
Originally Posted by 04HeritageXL
I have a 2004 f150 heritageXL with the 4.6, i have been looking for a CAI for my truck and i am wondering what the difference is between the K&N 57 series and 77 series. Also i was wondering if anyone has installed the AFE Stage 2 CAI on their 97-03 f150. If you have installed any of these, have any opinions or any knowledge on these CAI's it is appreciated.

-Fred


take a look in the how to's for the gotts mod, it'll perform just as well as the two you mentioned and cost you about $10...
 
Reply
Old Oct 10, 2009 | 01:17 PM
  #15  
Maxout05's Avatar
Senior Member
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,403
Likes: 0
From: Ny
There difference between metal intake tubes performance and plastic tubes is simple and a well known factor and as stated above the plastic proves better.
Heres why:
The plastic resists heat in the engine bay which in return keeps the air going into the intake cooler.
The metal gets hotter which in return makes air going into the intake hotter and then the cold air intake is more of a warm to hot air intake. The race performance shop near me that builds track cars have significant proven dynos behind this thought as well. Plus its pretty much easy for anyone to figure out.
 
Reply



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:58 AM.