Anyone install a CX-5 cold air intake?

Status
Not open for further replies.
There are tests out there that show more contamination of the oil when a "high flow" air filter is used. This makes sense as the filters tend to be less efficient at removing very fine particles from the air, which end up sneaking past the piston rings and get into the oil. However, most of these tests I've seen were done on large diesel engines, which pull a tremendous amount of air through the intake system, so the degree to which a passenger car is impacted by this is debatable. If you change your oil more frequently, this is likely moot.

The other issue with these filters and intakes is that it is unclear how much of the horsepower gain is due to reductions in flow restriction vs. alteration of the MAF signal. A small alteration of the MAF signal can cause the engine to run leaner, which will cause an increase in horsepower. Again, a 1 or 2% increase in engine output is not likely to cause any harm, but these filters and intakes are a favorite scapegoat of dealer service departments. If you install one and ever have check engine lights or other issues, you need to make sure you have a "mod friendly" dealer, or remove it prior to taking it in for service.
 
If you have a cheap BT scan tool (using Torque), and graph the MAP, you can easily see the net restriction of the entire intake system; air filter + carbon filter (2017 and newer have these) + twists and turns of the intake plumbing. Note your ambient air pressure at key ON, engine OFF, then do a WOT test. For my '17, the MAP reads from 93 to 97 kPa. My key ON, engine OFF was 99kPa (aka zero restriction). You can remove the air filter and do another run. Then remove the carbon filter and do another run. Witha little math, you'll know what the air filter and carbon filter contribute to restriction. You could do the same test with aftermarket intake plumbing/filters. No guessing or a**dyno calibration needed.
 
If you have a cheap BT scan tool (using Torque), and graph the MAP, you can easily see the net restriction of the entire intake system; air filter + carbon filter (2017 and newer have these) + twists and turns of the intake plumbing. Note your ambient air pressure at key ON, engine OFF, then do a WOT test. For my '17, the MAP reads from 93 to 97 kPa. My key ON, engine OFF was 99kPa (aka zero restriction). You can remove the air filter and do another run. Then remove the carbon filter and do another run. Witha little math, you'll know what the air filter and carbon filter contribute to restriction. You could do the same test with aftermarket intake plumbing/filters. No guessing or a**dyno calibration needed.

2017+ CX-5s have a separate carbon air filter? I've taken apart my 2018 CX-9's intake system a couple of times and there's no carbon filter anywhere. It also isn't listed as a part here:

 
2017+ CX-5s have a separate carbon air filter? I've taken apart my 2018 CX-9's intake system a couple of times and there's no carbon filter anywhere.

Yes, at least on '17, on the underside of the air cleaner box cover. I doubt you can order it as a separate part.
 
Yes, at least on '17, on the underside of the air cleaner box cover. I doubt you can order it as a separate part.

My mistake, you're right.

carbon.JPG


Googling the P/N for the air cleaner cover turned up that picture, which (like the Crosstrek) shows a non-replaceable carbon filter. You'd have to replace the $60 cover to get a new charcoal filter (if you wanted a new charcoal filter). I didn't notice it on my car but I probably just missed it. I guess that's one more layer of restriction that is removed during an aftermarket air intake installation.
 
Hm, the 2.5T's air cleaner cover doesn't appear to have the carbon filter. It would explain the price difference between the two parts (turbo cover is only $30).

2.5 NA: PY01-13-3AX
2.5 Turbo: PY8W-13-3AX
 
Just to clarify; besides the presence or absence of carbon filter, the NA and Turbo covers aren't otherwise identical, as the plumbing and air path differs between the two engines. Maybe some upstream tweaking to reduce turbulence with the extra 90 degree bend.
 
That carbon filter is also part of the acoustic (noise) mitigation design. If you remove it more induction noise will make it into the engine bay and into cabin. Some may like this.
 
If you have a cheap BT scan tool (using Torque), and graph the MAP, you can easily see the net restriction of the entire intake system; air filter + carbon filter (2017 and newer have these) + twists and turns of the intake plumbing. Note your ambient air pressure at key ON, engine OFF, then do a WOT test. For my '17, the MAP reads from 93 to 97 kPa. My key ON, engine OFF was 99kPa (aka zero restriction). You can remove the air filter and do another run. Then remove the carbon filter and do another run. Witha little math, you'll know what the air filter and carbon filter contribute to restriction. You could do the same test with aftermarket intake plumbing/filters. No guessing or a**dyno calibration needed.

So there's a 6 kPa pressure drop, max, due to the presence of the entire intake system and filter. This is ~6%, which places an upper bound on the most horsepower you could hope to gain with one of these systems. In reality, it will be less because the new intake doesn't remove all the restrictions, so the 2-3% increase is plausible.
 
I wonder if it's possible just to remove the OEM box surrounding the filter to help it breathe better without resorting to one of these kits? Or would that be detrimental?
 
Do NOT do that. Omg
Why not? I've done it on other cars with positive results.
Some of these air intake ducts are so convoluted with so many turns and bends, it definitely restricts air flow.
On the vehicles that I did this (Nissans mostly), the throttle response improved. There was less lag.
It also breathes better at higher revs.
 
Why not? I've done it on other cars with positive results.
Some of these air intake ducts are so convoluted with so many turns and bends, it definitely restricts air flow.
On the vehicles that I did this (Nissans mostly), the throttle response improved. There was less lag.
It also breathes better at higher revs.
It sounds like he is talking about removing the entire air box assembly leaving no filter in place. You can't remove a box without removing the filter. The vehicle was designed with the air box routing to a cold air snout under the front of the hood. The vehicle runs on computers and breathes just fine. To You remove this box and filter, you lose performance at best and damage your engine at worst. Not smart. If you are adamant about getting more performance and air into the engine, them it needs to be done right by installing a cold air intake and intake runners, etc and you need to get more air out with proper exhaust headers, exhaust piping and exhaust, and then a tune.
 
Last edited:
I wonder if it's possible just to remove the OEM box surrounding the filter to help it breathe better without resorting to one of these kits? Or would that be detrimental?

To answer your question without being confrontational.. No it isn't possible to do that because the panel filter is housed in the box. Removing the box means removing the filter, and you don't want an open intake allowing unfiltered air/bugs/leaves into the engine.

#3 in this illustration is the panel filter, the circled area is the box/filter configuration.
Capture.JPG
 
Looking at the illustration, it may be possible to remove the box/filter, and replace it with one of the "cone" style filters these aftermarket intake kits use. You'd need to source a properly sized piece of tubing to clamp the OEM tubing to, then you'd clamp the cone filter to that piece of tubing.

Here's an example of what I mean (vehicle pictured is a Veloster Turbo).

image-10-jpg.2834


I'd much rather just get the kit, personally. But it (theoretically) can be done. I don't think anyone here has done it though, so no idea if there may be any hurdles or issues with going this route. Proceed at your own risk (of voiding the warranty, if you have one).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back