Mazda6 This powerful new sedan offers a sporty feel and stout engine, all without compromising the ability to seat 5.

Short Ram Air Intake vs Cold Air Intake

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
  #11  
Old 09-24-2006, 01:52 PM
the_gray_mazda6's Avatar
Senior Member
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 1,802
Default RE: Short Ram Air Intake vs Cold Air Intake


ORIGINAL: zoomnbyu

Actually the difference is pretty huge - especially when it is hot and humid outside. Look at it this way. You know how on a nice cold, crisp morning your car feels like it wants to runs it's ***** off? That's what a CAI does for it most all of the time. Trust me. Don't waste your money on a short ram. [:'(]
agreed, you will discover a great performance increase consistently with a cold air intake as the air being sucked in will be cooler as it is further away from the engine heat whereas the short ram will be closer.
 
  #12  
Old 10-10-2006, 12:41 AM
JBix's Avatar
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location:
Posts: 124
Default RE: Short Ram Air Intake vs Cold Air Intake

Theoretically, Cold Air Intakes are better than Short Ram Air Intakes. A SRI take air from the engine compartment (a couple hundred degrees with the hood closed and engine warm). A CAI takes air usually from under the car or from a scoop out of the fender or in the front bumper, the air coming in there is fresh and COLD compared to the air in the engine. Colder air means denser air (more oxygen), means more fuel can be mixed for more combustion (power). But, the CAI has much longer plumbing, so the air is traveling through the hot engine compartment for a significantly longer distance, making it warm up a bit. This is in THEORY. In reality, I've seen and heard of cars with CAI and SRI dyno with LESS hp and tq than with a stock intake. In my little experience, I put a K/N FIPK2 kit (short ram style) on my '04 Mustang GT (poor thing is wrecked now), and though I didn't dyno it to see the difference, I heard and felt the difference. There was noticeably more grunt between about 3K to 5500 (with no other modifications). Obviously, different engines at different power ratings and different designs are going to vary on gains. But if you're going to fork out the money for an intake, I'd go for the cold air intake. Drive the car right before and after you install it to see if you can feel and hear the difference (I drive hard, but it's best if you just drive the way you usually drive).
 
  #13  
Old 10-10-2006, 04:03 PM
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: WEST SIDE, CALI
Posts: 48
Default RE: Short Ram Air Intake vs Cold Air Intake

I bought an AEM SRI and I have no problems with it.
 
  #14  
Old 03-10-2007, 02:04 PM
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location:
Posts: 98
Default RE: Short Ram Air Intake vs Cold Air Intake

I have an AEM cai and didn't get much for HP but saw a dramatic difference in throttle response.
 
  #15  
Old 03-11-2007, 05:00 AM
JBix's Avatar
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location:
Posts: 124
Default RE: Short Ram Air Intake vs Cold Air Intake

Well, you're not going to notice THAT much of a difference in power. On a N/A 4 cyl, you're looking at maybe 5-6hp for a regular unit from K/n, AEM, etc. The biggest difference is in the torque and power curves. A good CAI will flatten the torque curve, and move the peak back a little bit, and usually lets the peak hp number keep going to the higher rpms. Throttle response is usually the best improvement.
 
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
linuxguy0481
Mazda Tribute
2
04-14-2012 05:25 PM
warhog8
Mazda Protege
1
07-14-2008 11:46 AM
rjiangster37
Mazda Protege
1
07-28-2007 11:40 AM
CX7Turbo
Mazda6
0
11-16-2006 04:01 AM
AEM_Bako
Mazda Miata (MX-5)
0
10-04-2005 04:28 PM



Quick Reply: Short Ram Air Intake vs Cold Air Intake



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:40 AM.