Contour Enthusiasts Group Archives Forums Modifications Duratec Performance intake decisions

I searched for this topic, but no dice.
Some advice would be greatly appreciated, the cold air intake from sca...how much better is it than the kkm intake? Or is it?
Figured that the sca intake would be better, no need to worry about a heat shield.

thanks

I personally do not like the design.

I also have not seen any dyno proof it improves anything.

Sucking air wash from the radiator and off the transmission does not sound like Cold Air to me.

As you can Imagine I would recommend the KKM with a heatshield of some kind

Have you heard of the dragon intake?
POS?

Do not know personally about Dragon Intake, but would have to agree with DemonSVT... I have the SCA w/ Monster Flow and the more I read about it on this forum, the more I started to pay attention to the temps of my filter after driving. It is probably effective in cooler temps but when it is hot out (especially like the weather we have been having), the radiator fan is blowing from 5 minutes after you are running the car until you stop. I installed mine originally when it was cooler out and could feel the differce but it may be due to the Monster Filter. When the radiator fan kicks on, you fan feel the difference in the way the car behaves. I have been thinking about removing the CAI (supposedly) and just using the filter like the KKM setup.

Go with a less restritive air filter, you could add a straight intake pipe to smooth out the air flow and you could add the heat shield (who makes it again?) to finish it off......

The KKM is nice (and I have one) but several people have been using the K&N as an open air element. Someone (Eric L?) finally did a dyno on the K&N that fits in the stock SVT airbox -without the airbox. It gained 5HP (only gained 1HP with airbox on). 5HP is equal to the BEST dyno Ive seen for the KKM and the K&N is only about $40. Can just bolt the thing to the baseplate (so you do not need to mutalate your stock airbox). Interestingly enough, the flow data for the smaller K&N is 890 cfu/min (published) and the KKM is 550 cfu/min (per KKM). I checked after Rara commented about the problems with "cone in end" filters, the "flow dead space". I also talked with a PRO-M tech rep who said the same thing and he has done a bunch of flow bench testing. He said that ideally you want 2.5X the flow capacity of the throttle body (stock SVT T body is 330 cfu/min) so about 825 cfu/min. I may have to give you that one to you, Rara. So, I am switching to a larger K&N that will go on my KKM adapter. I will try to add that to my list of comparisons to make when I dyno soon.

Correction : the SVT "drop in" K&N #E-0998 actually flow 701 cfu/min.
To clarify, I think that this K&N without the airbox has now been proven to be "about equal" to KKM from a power gain standpoint (and cheaper) despite "dead space" and flow numbers.

Based on the numbers, it might be POSSIBLE that a bigger K&N might work a bit better (or it might not) but I would NOT recommend ditching your KKM unless someone shows this on a dyno. KKM did ALOT of careful testing, particularly of the adapter and it is a good part.

Just curious, does anyone know what the pressure drop was used across the filters to arrive at these #'s. I have bench tested both the stock and K&N filters with and without the airbox and would like to know what the drop was so I can compare #s.

Anyone know how I could post an Excel graph?

Brentos,

AFAIK, the numbers were obtained with 1.5 inches of H2O.