# Is CAI worth it?



## GTOAviator (Oct 18, 2011)

I am thinking about dropping the cash on a CAI, but all the kits are around $300. I want to make sure it's a worthy purchase because the money could definitely be used elsewhere...

My biggest concern is the health of my car and gas milage, with hp gain and sound being secondary.

Also which brands are good?

Thanks! (2006 GTO, Impulse Metalic Blue)


----------



## Falco21 (May 11, 2010)

OTRCAI is the only one worth it.

Svede OTRCAI. Only option I would go with. Or the Varram. Don't waste your money on the other junk.

SvedeSpeed OTRCAI - $399.00 : West Coast Speed, Custom Automotive Accessories


----------



## bubbz22 (Apr 14, 2011)

I really want the Svede, but damn if it aint expensive. I can't bring myself to pay $400 for a small intake piece and a K&N filter. I know it's the best method of getting the fresh air in, but why's it got to cost so much! 

Edit: To answer the question, I agree with Falco. Svede or Vararam are your best bets


----------



## Godspeed (Oct 12, 2011)

K&N Air filters, rechargeable/rewashable filters and the like let in a **** ton more dust and crap. It's not really rocket science- if the filter lets more air in, it's more porous.


----------



## Rukee (Feb 8, 2007)

Godspeed said:


> K&N Air filters, rechargeable/rewashable filters and the like let in a **** ton more dust and crap. It's not really rocket science- if the filter lets more air in, it's more porous.


If that were true then you'd never see them in off road racing, but truth is almost EVERY racer uses the K&N style filters. So unless you have some documentation to support your claim, I'm calling BS.


----------



## ViperT4 (Jul 18, 2010)

I have a K&N on my 04, and I can definitely hear it suck more when I have the hood open and I goose the throttle. If you're going to leave the rest of the car stock then I'd probably pass as you won't feel a difference, unless you can find a used piece for a good price. If you're going to do other mods in the future then I'd say they're worth it.

Edit:


Godspeed said:


> K&N Air filters, rechargeable/rewashable filters and the like let in a **** ton more dust and crap. It's not really rocket science- if the filter lets more air in, it's more porous.


And with the K&N system the improvement isn't in the filter material itself, it's in the design of the tube over the stock one. It smooths out the kinks the air has to travel through and makes it more efficient so air enters at a higher velocity. Is it better than the OTR kind no, but it's better than what the factory gives it.


----------



## jpalamar (Jul 22, 2008)

bubbz22 said:


> I can't bring myself to pay $400 for a small intake piece and a K&N filter


He did tons of R&D on it. It is by far the best and proven. It is truely worth waiting for if you don't have the cash.



Rukee said:


> If that were true then you'd never see them in off road racing, but truth is almost EVERY racer uses the K&N style filters. So unless you have some documentation to support your claim, I'm calling BS.


Exactly, I haven't see many people with blown motors from KNN filters unless they don't clean and oil them as directed.


----------



## 6speedlover (Aug 10, 2011)

I have the K&N Cai on my 06 M6, i paid $237.00 for it, and the only time i noticed a small change was on the cold 50 degree mornings  I paid just about the same for my Street Tune, and that made me a very happy camper ! Big difference.


----------



## bubbz22 (Apr 14, 2011)

jpalamar said:


> He did tons of R&D on it. It is by far the best and proven. It is truely worth waiting for if you don't have the cash.
> .


Oh I know that. I do plan to get one, it'll just have to be at christmas bonus time or tax time so I don't notice the $400 gone as much:rofl:


----------



## Godspeed (Oct 12, 2011)

Rukee said:


> If that were true then you'd never see them in off road racing, but truth is almost EVERY racer uses the K&N style filters. So unless you have some documentation to support your claim, I'm calling BS.


Race engines don't need to last 100k+ miles.


----------



## Rukee (Feb 8, 2007)

Godspeed said:


> Race engines don't need to last 100k+ miles.


Considering most of those motors go all year, or even multiple years run at extreme RPMs and temps, they prolly get more wear and tear then 100k motor. Regardless, without any documentation I'm still calling BS.


----------



## BlackJackByte (Aug 31, 2009)

Rukee said:


> If that were true then you'd never see them in off road racing, but truth is almost EVERY racer uses the K&N style filters. So unless you have some documentation to support your claim, I'm calling BS.


Both have valid points. The reason "EVERY" racer has them installed is because they *do* allow more air to come in, and have some power/performance gains. The manufacturer(GM) engineered the OEM intake the way they did for a reason, and used the filter for a reason too. I like them for what they contribute but there's no arguing the science behind it, the filters don't just magically allow for more air to pass. If you're going to let more air in you're going to let more "other things" as well. Whether or not the overall effect is negligible is a whole other argument.

Just because something adds more power to your vehicle or provides better performance does not mean it's better or even good for your motor (i.e. SLP underdrive pulley). End statement, I'll still pick one up sometime.


----------



## svede1212 (Nov 1, 2005)

The "issue" with the SSOTRCAI is that they are all hand laid glass using a multi-step process. There's probably more profit in the other brands as plastic is cheaper. It's just not practical at this late stage in the game to pay tens of thousands of dollars for molding on a very limited and shrinking market. As far as worth it it's the most durable, versatile and highest performance intake for our cars. Besides my own tests I had several serious drag racers directly compare it in the real world (not on a dyno with the hood up) to the VR, 4", AEM, Volant, K&N & LPE and they all to a man settled on the SSOTRCAI. Whether that small but measurable difference is worth it is up to the owner.


----------



## 1QWIK7 (May 23, 2011)

The vararam and other otr intake is dyno proven to give max hp gain..the other stock mounted intake still has the same flaw. They (intake tube) still becomes a heatsink when car is not in motion. Sure the filter has a heat shield but air still has to go through the tube thus carrying the heat with it back into the engine.


----------



## Godspeed (Oct 12, 2011)

Rukee said:


> Considering most of those motors go all year, or even multiple years run at extreme RPMs and temps, they prolly get more wear and tear then 100k motor. Regardless, without any documentation I'm still calling BS.


Many moons ago, I had a job interview with Wix Filtration. In my tour of the place, I saw their testing facility and they were testing K&N vs paper filters. Long short, I didn't see the actual numbers, but there was a pile of dirt behind the K&N and a much smaller one behind the paper air filter.

Race engines and street engines- there's no sense in comparing them. Of course they see extreme conditions, but they're not designed to last in the same way a street engine will. They're also getting oil changes ever 400-500 miles so it all gets cleaned out. It doesn't build over 6000miles. A few extra hose power is well worth the trade off in durability. 

Also, paper air filters aren't a good combination for off-road stuff like mud. They get wet and they're pretty much worthless after that.


----------



## Godspeed (Oct 12, 2011)

Here we go. I knew someone would have done this test by now:
http://www.nicoclub.com/archives/kn-vs-oem-filter.html
Cliff notes:

_
"In 60 minutes the AC Filter accumulated 574gms of dirt and passed only 0.4gms. After only 24 minutes the K&N had accumulated 221gms of dirt but passed 7.0gms.

Compared to the AC, the K&N“plugged up” nearly 3 times faster, passed 18 times more dirt and captured 37% less dirt. See the data tables for a complete summary of these comparisons. "_

If these filters really did filter just as well and let more air through, every OEM would be using them. It would mean more power and better gas mileage. When you see the huge efforts OEMs are going through to get a hair better gas mileage, this would be a no brainer.


----------



## BlackJackByte (Aug 31, 2009)

Godspeed said:


> Here we go. I knew someone would have done this test by now:
> K&N air filter or OEM, why OEM is better
> Cliff notes:
> 
> ...


:agree Exactly what I was saying.


----------



## svede1212 (Nov 1, 2005)

If you want better filtration with a K&N just don't clean it. They trap more dirt as they load up with it. It's also true your engine will last longer not revving over 2,000 RPM and get better gas mileage too. The engine will be fine for many many miles using a K&N unless you're driving in sand storms or something.


----------



## Godspeed (Oct 12, 2011)

svede1212 said:


> If you want better filtration with a K&N just don't clean it. *They trap more dirt as they load up with it. *It's also true your engine will last longer not revving over 2,000 RPM and get better gas mileage too. The engine will be fine for many many miles using a K&N unless you're driving in sand storms or something.



That's because it's all clogged up. You're way better off with a paper air filter than a dirt-loaded K&N :lol:

Dust and dirt getting through the air filter is a big deal. It's going to cause a lot of wear with everything as it gets in with the oil. If you've ever built an engine, you know the great lengths they go through to keep dust out. They're practically built in clean rooms.

If you're willing to sacrifice a good portion of your engine's life for an additional 3 or 4 hp, that's just fine. The OP asked if it's worth it, and I'm just giving him all the facts.


----------



## Gotagoat (Jan 6, 2006)

Convinced me. Since I plan on keeping mine indefinitely and I'm not looking for additional horses, I'll stick with OEM.


----------



## cesjr02 (Oct 26, 2010)

Great topic and conversation. I've been looking for a CAI for my 05 Goat. My number 1 reason is better fuel mileage. Added horsepower/torque and throttle response would just be an added bonus. However if true, letting in more dust and dirt into my motor is not acceptable.

Maybe it's time to replace the OEM filter with another paper filter.


----------



## Falco21 (May 11, 2010)

cesjr02 said:


> Great topic and conversation. I've been looking for a CAI for my 05 Goat. My number 1 reason is better fuel mileage. Added horsepower/torque and throttle response would just be an added bonus. However if true, letting in more dust and dirt into my motor is not acceptable.
> 
> Maybe it's time to replace the OEM filter with another paper filter.


Please do not take this stuff that seriously. You do realize that thousands and thousands of people are using aftermarket CAI and OTRCAI's without any of these issues stated. I have never heard of someone hurting their motor due to dust and dirt entering from the Air Filter.


----------



## Godspeed (Oct 12, 2011)

Falco21 said:


> Please do not take this stuff that seriously. You do realize that thousands and thousands of people are using aftermarket CAI and OTRCAI's without any of these issues stated. I have never heard of someone hurting their motor due to dust and dirt entering from the Air Filter.


If it did cause premature wear, how many people would actually be able to attribute it to the cold air intake?

If it was really better, don't you think the OEM would do it? Or were they just like "nah, more hp and better mpg sounds terrible."


----------



## Rukee (Feb 8, 2007)

More then likely they just don't want to enter into a licensing agreement with them.


----------



## Godspeed (Oct 12, 2011)

Rukee said:


> More then likely they just don't want to enter into a licensing agreement with them.


Because they can't manufacture it themselves? They wouldn't need to license anything.


----------



## 68greengoat (Sep 15, 2005)

Cost would have something to do with it. That's why we have all these aftermarket upgrades. Let the ones who want 'em, buy 'em. As far as MPG, they've had the technology for years but refuse to use it. We could get into reasons why, like oil companies, government etc..... But I for one don't want to go down that road. Today, the big 3 make a big deal when a mid sized car gets 28 - 30mpgs. Whoopi. Had a '99 Intrepid that got 33. JMO


----------



## Godspeed (Oct 12, 2011)

68greengoat said:


> Cost would have something to do with it.


Adding that kind of power that easily and increasing mpg? Very easy decision considering they're doing things like CF roof and Ti exhausts to shave miniscule weight.



> That's why we have all these aftermarket upgrades. Let the ones who want 'em, buy 'em. As far as MPG, they've had the technology for years but refuse to use it. We could get into reasons why, like oil companies, government etc..... But I for one don't want to go down that road. Today, the big 3 make a big deal when a mid sized car gets 28 - 30mpgs. Whoopi. Had a '99 Intrepid that got 33. JMO


We have aftermarket because there is some sort of trade off that isn't suitable for the masses, won't pass safety/smog or some combination thereof. Cost, ride quality, durability, sound, etc.

I'd really like to hear what technology we've had for better mpg :lol: As someone who was a powertrain development engineer and is fairly well learned on the subject of powertrains, I'd really like to hear this.

MPG has gone down because they're tested differently (stuff like AC on), riding wider tires, bigger cars, more weight, and more power.

Let's compare your 99 Intrepid and the 2012 Impala
With regard to the Intrepid:
It weighed a lot less
It was smaller/ had far less frontal area (front profile/surface area- for drag)
It had thinner tires
It had smaller wheels
It had smaller brakes
It was less safe & had less safety crap (weight)
It was less reliable/not as well assembled
It made *100 less hp*
It got _*worse*_ gas mileage

Yup:
The Impala comes standard with a 300hp, 30mpg (hwy) engine. 

Your 99 Intrepid got 28 highway, and it had 200hp
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/noframes/15186.shtml


----------



## Rukee (Feb 8, 2007)

Godspeed said:


> Because they can't manufacture it themselves? They wouldn't need to license anything.


It's patented technology. They can't make it without a licensing agreement.


----------



## Godspeed (Oct 12, 2011)

Rukee said:


> It's patented technology. They can't make it without a licensing agreement.


Neither cold air intakes are patented nor are media filters. They've both been around way longer than 17yrs, even if they were.

I'm sure there are patents, but there is no reason why they can't just make their own version. The patent is more for accounting and marketing than any practical legal enforcement.


----------



## Rukee (Feb 8, 2007)

Depends on the patent type, if it's a design patent, then yes they could make their own changing the design to call it improved. If it's a Utility patent, then it covers every design of the product.


----------



## Godspeed (Oct 12, 2011)

Rukee said:


> Depends on the patent type, if it's a design patent, then yes they could make their own changing the design to call it improved. If it's a Utility patent, then it covers every design of the product.


Without getting into the legalities of this- considering there is more than one cold air intake company out there and more than one media air filter company, it's safe to say a patent isn't required- it's expired or not patentable/enforceable.

Further, how could someone beat an OEM to designing a cold air intake for it if it came from the factory with one?


----------



## 68greengoat (Sep 15, 2005)

Godspeed said:


> Your 99 Intrepid got 28 highway, and it had 200hp
> Fuel Economy of the 1999 Dodge Intrepid





> Let's compare your 99 Intrepid and the 2012 Impala
> With regard to the Intrepid:
> It was less reliable/not as well assembled


Don't care what the website says, pencil and paper said I got 33mpg. Less reliable than a 2012 Impala? How do we know? The Impala is new, time will tell. Put 220k on the Intrepid and it's stiill on the road being driven by some kid for school....

We're getting off track here. Let's get back to the original question, is CAI worth it?


----------



## svede1212 (Nov 1, 2005)

Godspeed said:


> That's because it's all clogged up. You're way better off with a paper air filter than a dirt-loaded K&N :lol:
> 
> Dust and dirt getting through the air filter is a big deal. It's going to cause a lot of wear with everything as it gets in with the oil. If you've ever built an engine, you know the great lengths they go through to keep dust out. They're practically built in clean rooms.
> 
> If you're willing to sacrifice a good portion of your engine's life for an additional 3 or 4 hp, that's just fine. The OP asked if it's worth it, and I'm just giving him all the facts.


Well then give him all the facts. It's 15-20+ HP and you'll find many engines running fine with 150,000-200,000 miles on them using oiled cotton filters.


----------



## svede1212 (Nov 1, 2005)

Godspeed said:


> Further, how could someone beat an OEM to designing a cold air intake for it if it came from the factory with one?


Exactly! Everyone knows factories put in the absolute best of everything regardless of cost. :rofl:


----------



## Godspeed (Oct 12, 2011)

svede1212 said:


> Well then give him all the facts. It's 15-20+ HP and you'll find many engines running fine with 150,000-200,000 miles on them using oiled cotton filters.


It's _not_ 15-20hp. Let's start there. That's just a joke and a lie by the manufacturers. 
Most of those engines at 150-200k burn oil, so yeah. Likely, a paper air filter engine will too. The difference is where it starts, and any speculation on the effects on your part will be just that- wild speculation.

It seems kind of silly to do things like get synthetic oil and then allow more dirt and dust into your engine. For those of you/us that have built engines before, we know a dust is a killer- they're practically built in clean rooms.




svede1212 said:


> Exactly! Everyone knows factories put in the absolute best of everything regardless of cost. :rofl:


Because it would cost more to duct plastic like a CAI than OEM style. And when it comes to MPG, they're doing stuff like shutting off cylinders, adding gears, direct injection, dropping weight with aluminum/ti/etc, electric fans, endless engineering, hybrid engines, etc- not exactly cheap stuff. 

Currently, it costs GM $5.50/vehicle for every 0.1MPG their fleet is below CAFE standards for EVERY SINGLE CAR they manufacture. So if a cotton air filter was less restrictive, allowing even 0.1mpg improvement, it would be worth it in CAFE fines alone. Plus they get more power. Plus better MPG is better for selling cars.

You think the cost difference for an OEM from paper to cotton is going to stop them from getting better MPG and making "15-20hp?" And btw- less restrictive intake = better engine durability too.

The reasons they don't have things high end shocks and coil overs are obvious. If a cotton air filter was actually better, they'd use it. It's hard to believe an OEM wouldn't just use a larger paper air filter if it would make more power to begin with.

Of course, a CAI is more than just the cotton filter. The intake location and tubing- any benefit? Maybe. There, the OEM has to consider a bunch of other stuff like water, sound, etc. 

If anyone lives in Dallas and has a K&N filter, I'll be happy to test the theory. I have HP tuners. We can just log the mass air readings and see what happens with a simple filter change at WOT. We'll head up to Eagle's Canyon and do some laps. See what happens in the main straight. Or we can just do WOT runs in 5th or 6th from 40-80mph on the highway.


----------

