i just ordered an aem cai for my car, where can i get a bypass valve... better to be safe than sorry imo.

 

i did notice a better throttle response with the sri. i also noticed that i lost some low end gained some high end cai. engine temp is the same both ways i was checking them all the time i have changed them back and forth a couple times

 

EDIT: WRONG THREAD!

 

Contact AEM

 

That's due to the distance for air to travel and possibly velocity differences depending on the size of piping and the bend in the piping.

 

I have the injen, and I tried it at full cai and at shorty, and found the shorty to have better throttle response.

 

Yeah of course. If you read my above post, that's what I was saying. "SRI" style intakes have a shorter distance from the filter to the throttle body than the "CAI" style. The shorter the distance, the faster air will reach your throttle body, the better throttle response.

 

I think Ppazz was right about the CAI keeping the air cold. But I think I was also right about the loose in throttle response w/ CAI.

I had some time, so I swapped the Injen SRI to the CAI. I reset the ECM and have been running it with CAI this afternoon. I will probably run it for awhile as CAI, but it does seem like I lost some throttle response, and maybe a little low end.

Another thing that bothers me on the setup on our cars, if the cone would wiggle loose from the bottom pipe - I don't think you would know unless you took off some of the wheel well plastic and looked. With the SRI the cone is right there to be seen when you open the hood - very easy to check.

But to each his own. What ever works.

- w

 

eh... if ur gonna race just buy a bag of ice and dump it in ur airbox. Cold air right?














I'm joking by the way. don't really do that...

 

have we came to a conclusion.

 

well until i get flamed. i just wanna say ive always felt cai is better then sri because of the location and postition of the intake. now it may be a gimmic, maybe its just as good as a sri and the gains are slim to none for each.
BUT
regardless its performance. you wont notice a ton like "omg my cars reaching 88mph!!" -back to the future hehe. but id like to say that you do get better gas milage with the cai if you run on freeways and whatna. thats what ive heard. maybe its wrong. if it is o well. u got more intake pipeing lol.

 

Holy old thread...

Hopefully this won't continue much farther cause it's beating a dead horse. Period, its an intake, the differences between the two are so small it doesn't matter. Each vehicle could respond to one intake than the other better, there are just variables that could make one better than the other.

Overall, it's just an intake.

 

It been proven that CAI is more efficient that SRI. Like both of them said, CAI. SRI is good if your affraid of water and floods and stuff. But CAI bring colder(outside engine bay) air. Cold oxygen is smaller than warm oxygen. So more oxygen = more power. Look at dyno results on the injen websites. They sell both for some cars and on 100% of them, the CAI had bigger gains

 

I know this is a bit of a repeat from the argument, but honestly, short ram seems to be the way to go with ecotecs. I have the 2.4L and when i had my stock system it was ok, but i wanted better throttle response. I built my own short ram and it works wonderfully. I then bought a cold air from ebay and tried it out as well.... it was horrible, because our engines work so well when they can breath, and by restricting the flow of air with longer tubing, you restrict throttle response AND power. I tested all three intakes for a few days... short ram came out on top with a very noticeable difference.

 

honestly...CAI or SRI you will get a hell of a difference than stock. our huge intake resonator thing is so restrivtice. any type of intake will have a gain. just gettin better flow will create what we all need. can u tell the difference between 3hp and 4hp. i cant. im sure many of us cant. on my car i had a CAI setup and yes i felt the difference. but im sure if i took it out and did SRI setup. it would be pretty much the same deal...plus SRI is a hell of a lot easier to install.

 

Well, i put in a cold air and our stock was better because the air had less tubing to travel through. Ecotecs are very high flowing engines. Free up the air, free up the power. Put a turbo in and set it for 7 psi with stock internals and we (2.4L's) make 100+ more horsepower through airflow alone.

 

I'm not trying to belittle your statement or trying to nitpick but I just wanted to point out that 7 PSI doesn't necessarily equal 100+ horsepower. There are many variables in between. Mainly how well the fuel management/system is and the size turbocharger but these are the MAIN things cause there is alot of things in between that to contribute to how much power you will or won't make.

One last thing, It's not the airflow that is making the engine make more power, it's the fuel + spark combination allowing for a more powerful "explosion" in the combustion chamber. The more force made with the igniting fuel, the more power is made. The air is simply there to allow you to supply more fuel (hence why air to fuel ratio is so important).

But also, I do realize what you were saying was just a generalization...I just didn't want people to get misunderstood that it's that "easy".

 

That's fine man, I've seen enough of your posts to know I was going to be corrected. Yes, it was a generalization, and thank you for filling in the missing info Im not as touchy as some people tend to be. Also, those numbers were gained with a high flow exhaust as well. Yes, fuel and other minor things help, but you have to admit, the more we flow, usually, the more we go (ecotec motors that is) I plan on getting the Hahn turbo so I've been salivating over those stock internal numbers