Try to do a research on past Stillen Intake testimonials but came up with nothing. Correct me if I'm wrong, the obvious difference between Stillen Intake and CAI (where you have to cut a hole to do the piping, CAI being COLD whereas Stillen is 'hot' air intake). Are there any documented proof that CAI out-performs the 'easier-to-take-off-before-inspection' Stillen Intake??

AnGe

 

Well... here's a quote from the Max.org MaxFAQS:

Which intake system is better?

The CAI makes the most horsepower. The Stillen and JWT are about equal. The JWT is the cheapest with the CAI being the most expensive. With the CAI, you will have to drill a 3" diameter hole in the fender well because the filter for the system sits in the fender well to suck in cool air.

 

Well you shouldn't have to take the Stillen intake off before inspection. It's CARB certified. If you want the cone, go with the better bang for the buck JWT intake.

 

like randy said if you want a bang for your buck cone go with the JWT... there has been debate as to which intake system is better (im sure someone will post the link) my thoughts are this for the extra 30 bucks between the PR CAI and the Stillen Intake i'd pay the extra money for the "more" power it makes (although in question) and for the look...Stillen is just a name...i personally like the look of nice tubing in an engine bay

 

oooooh! tubing in the engine bay looks nice =)
Vic

 

So many people blindly believe that the CAI makes more horsepower than the SI... Well, it doesn't... And for proof and lengthy discussions on the topic, go to http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/nissanmaxima and search back from discussions all the way back from last summer.
It's all been argued and discussed at length and not one person was able to come up with proof of the CAI's alleged superiority over the SI.

Also, click on the URL below and check out this dyno graph and see for yourself how the SI (blue line) makes more top end power over the CAI (red line).
http://63.204.172.66/maxima/uprd%201.jpg

--Nabil

 

hmm lets think, hot air for performance or cold air for performance?? i think its obvious that the CAI is the "best intake" for the Maxima perfromance wise, hands down!
with NO WATER PROBLEMS EITHER...

If anybody else feels different id love to hear it!

 

Dude, I wouldn't make blind comments like that. You should read the debate that went on during last summer.

 

OSCAI OSCAI OSCAI!!!

 

i think one of the main problems is the tubing the PR CAI uses....i plan on dynoing this summer with the PR CAI and then switching from the 3" to custom 2.5"...better results should be yielded

 

Look at the location of the filter; directly behind the battery. When the vehicle is in motion, where is all the engine heat moving? Towards the filter? No, it's moving towards the firewall/cowl section because it's a low pressure area. The only time the conical filter is at a disadvantage is when the car is idling, heat soaking the filter. Horsepower & torque doesn't really matter when you're not moving

 

And then you can move the battery to the trunk and make yourself a little "Cone of isolation booth" for even better air temp....

 

THANK YOU NABIL, I've been trying to tell people this FOREVER, and almost everyone is still convinced that the CAI is better when it's actually not. SO many people on here are convinced that everything is about "cold air" I wanna know how many people have had either the JWT or SI and had any problems at all.

 

in these dyno differences... did you guys use a LARGE FAN while dynoing the CAI vs the SI?

because if no cold air is going in the CAI.. obviously the dyno results are not going to be accurate

whats funny is.. CAI maxima's run faster than SI maxima's .. i wonder how that is?

 

this is true of the max's ive seen both at englishtown and atco...good thought..

 

Here's a quick summary of what has been presented
and debated...


http://vbxmaxima.8m.com/caivssi.html

 

So, it's a toss up. Get which ever you like. I still say OSCAI since it has also been dyno proven to give the same power as an under-hood intake and is much much cheaper.

 

While the CAI might not work for the VQ, it definitly works for the VG (mine at least). I've dynoed the K&N panel, generic cone filter and my custom CAI. The CAI by far made the most power. Now all we need are some 3rd gen guys to test this theory on.

 

this is what i hear from people saying that cai is not better then in bay intake, blah blah blah i am jealous blah blah blah i wish i had one blah blah blah. lets think about here for a sec, frist off, when people go from in bay intake to cai, they rarly ever go back. why? because you can feel the performance gain. something that is away from engine bay (where there is heat, believe me or not!) and sucks cooler air is going make enigne perform better. and whoever said don't make blind comments? yeah, real blind, i have tested both on my car so i know what works. this debate is old and played out. i don't want to start a flame war but i mean come on. you put a cai in your car and trust me, you wont go back...alright?!

 

or you feel guilty spending $200+ LOL that's why they don't go back.

on the dyno, a cone intake is heat soaking the heat from the engine bay so it's at a disadvantage like the CAI.

Etown.. I don't many cone intake guys even running. All of the dudes that race are running CAI setups with more mods than the cone intake guys. Invalid comparison..

 

Does anyone have any charts comparing a K&N panel to CAI and Pop?

 

this is also true

hey phuong...if it rains sat. i may not be at etwon so i can't get you the Z pads...if that happens i'll mail them to ya..

 

is anyone besides me running a hks intake i think that it is better than the stillen or cai

 

How does the HKS intake differ from the others?

 

The colder the air that goes into the engine the more fuel is given to the engine therefore more performance, the hotter the air the less fuel given to the engine less performance. I just ordered the CAI but the only problem I have is that I haven't gotten it yet.

 

That isn't entirely correct. Just because there is more fuel does not mean that you will get more power. Running rich will hurt performance. Sometimes leaning out the mixture will yield more power.

ZuM

 

Thank you for your knowledgeable and credible response.
With all that "blah blah blah..." proof you presented, I'm totally convinced now that the CAI is superior! What was I thinking before? How could I be so adamant on wanting to see real and credible evidence? And who am I to doubt the irrefutable anecdotal statements by someone who either doesn't want to contend with having buyer's remorse or just wants to feel like they've bought the ultimate mod for the ultimate car from the ultimate car manufacturer, bar none...

Yeah right...

--Nabil

 

the stock air intake is pointing towards the front of the hood. i would think a modified intake should be pointing towards a flow of air also. i like the intake set-up on the 2k s/c. in that area, i think would be cool. as far as inside the fender, is there air flowing to it? or is it just out of the hot area.

 

200 bucks? try 20 bucks, that how much it cost for my cai

 

How's this setup sound?

Poorman's setup with the secondary intake pipe in the foglight hole? I can do this because of my non-factory lights Dyno proven to make as much power as my POP HKS setup. What's even more impressive is that the fan was not aimed at either intake on the Poorman's setup!!! I'm pretty sure I'm making a little more power from a roll. Track tested, the Poorman's CAI is consistently .2 and 1.5mph quicker in the 1/4 mile which is mostly due to much less heat soak.

Why did I get rid of the HKS setup? Mostly because of the noise.

Spend your money any way you like. Just remember that the stock setup is already damn good, it just needs a little help. Hell, even the new 3 series has the same kind of setup. The CAI and POP setup will perform nearly the same. There might be 1-2 hp difference between the two at a given rpm. The CAI is not gonna make a huge difference like everyone implying. In the world of vehicle modification, more noise is often believed to be a sign of more power (not always true).


Dave

 

You've proven the poorman's CAI to work the same or better than the hks/pop intake. However you never had a CAI so you really don't have any proof that it works better. The CAI by nature will have a lower resonance that improves volumetric effieceny at a lower rpm. While the CAI will have less topend power, it will no doubt have more midrange power. You also said that the power falls off quickly after 5900rpm, so without a significant change in topend won't make a real difference. I have tested the K&N panel, generic cone filter and CAI on my car. But since I have a different engine with a different powerband my results aren't as comparable. FYI my CAI netted over a 10hp gain and dropped my ET 3 tenths plus adding 1.5mph. But then again my powerband is from 3800-5100rpm, so the lower resonance gained me lots of torque between 4000 5500rpm. Also based on my testing the K&N panel in the stock airbox doesn't do much at all. I guess I'm just upset because of the design of my airbox wouldn't allow for a "poorman's CAI".

 

Honestly my jury is still out on this debate, but I must say that I've seen a CAI cut 9 tenths off of my friends 1/4 mi. but he has a 240 so I guess that really doesen't count. but I have a Pop and i noticed an immediate rise in power and for the ease I had installing I'm still leaning toward that end of the debate but as far as the CAI guys go all they really have to say is that "It brings colder air and that makes the engine run better and you get more power" but when you are at high speeds air that's traveling 70+ mph doesen't turn very well and given the tubing for the pr cai that is a big problem but in the low/mid range colder air is being brought in and colder air contains more oxygen(main ingredient for combustion) and that's why it burns better than hot air, but let's be for real not many people are going to race to 50 mph just so you can use your CAI at it's best before your performance starts dipping. IMHO I think that a POP charger would work much better if you simply replace the intake tube that leads from the MAF to the TB.

 

Let's not forget we are talking about 4th and 5th gen Maximas so this only applies to their setup. There are plenty of cars out there that have really restrictive stock intake systems (93-97 F-Body, Celica GT-S, Diamond Stars).

I think people are really making way too much out of intakes these days. All these principles with laminar flow, resonance, etc all sound nice and work under a controlled environment, but in the real world these "little" extras that the CAIs intakes supposedly pocess don't make that much of a difference. Things like velocity stacks are suppose to improve power, but I haven't seen proof with my car. No one has shown me proof that the CAI will make more midrange than the POP setup. Show me some proof and I'll believe (ie before and after runs on the same car).

BTW wasn't the quickest 4th gen Maxima, Jeff Ks 95 Max, run with a POP setup for all his runs except his 14.3 (had the CAI AND DRAG RADIALS) and he was only .2 quicker with a reduction in mph. That tells me the difference in intakes was neglible.

On the same day, I'm pretty sure the Maxima will run 0.05 seconds within each other.



Dave