joeybisson
Member
there are so many options for intakes on the mazdaspeed3, i was leaning towards the cpe nano, and then i came across the k&n with its "25hp" gain, how come no one has ever tried the k&n?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
K&N intake..
- Thread starter joeybisson
- Start date
- :
- Mazdaspeed3
It's a new product only recently announced. However it has been out long enough that someone may have already installed one. Maybe someone will respond.
mazdaspeedster3
Member
- :
- Mazdaspeed3. 2008
I have to agree that their products are always high quality and have great Warrantys/Guarantees...
Something about this dyno doesn't seem right whatsoever..... Maybe could it be that they dyno'ed the car in 3rd as opposed to 4th.... K&N is a pretty legit company, this just makes me kinda skeptical..
http://www.kandn.com/dynocharts/69-6011_dyno.pdf
Edit: I just went back and looked at the graph again, the line is showing the 25 horse increase not the peak power output, this confused me... It seems to be in the appropriate range for a stock, then intake car... BTW is this like a cold-air/short-ram...? Thats what the pic makes it seem like.
http://www.kandn.com/dynocharts/69-6011_dyno.pdf
Edit: I just went back and looked at the graph again, the line is showing the 25 horse increase not the peak power output, this confused me... It seems to be in the appropriate range for a stock, then intake car... BTW is this like a cold-air/short-ram...? Thats what the pic makes it seem like.
Last edited:
I am looking a getting one of the k&N's in the next month or so. I figured my dealer might look on it more kindly with a name they know. Just had my car in for it's first oil change, and they didnt say anything about my bpv, or motor mount inserts, not that they'd be able to tell with the inserts being black, you'd have to look pretty hard to notice.
In know I've seen a picture but I can't find it now. I've been searching for about an hour. It doesn't appear to be on the K&N web site at all. All they show for the Speed3 is a flat air filter and an oil filter. I wanted to get a look at the heat shield to see how hard it would be to make one and use the Protege Garage housing and make my own intake. I'm not happy with the broken battery boxes from the Cobb SRI and don't think the Amsoil filter will fit with the Nano. I'm stuck on using an Amsoil filter after reading the recent information on them here.
I believe this is the link to their product:
http://www.knfilters.com/search/product.aspx?Prod=69-6011TS
http://www.knfilters.com/search/product.aspx?Prod=69-6011TS
I don't see how this intake is any different than the Cobb. The box isn't really anything more than a shield. Heat will get around it. The price is way out there too ($321). I guess there will be some K&N fans that will pay it. Get the Cobb or the Corksport which comes with a turbo inlet. I would get the CS if I didn't already have the Cobb.
So, the Corksport performances better than the Cobb and CP-E?
The Corksport intake comes with the turbo inlet as well, I have not seen the CS in person but from pictures it looks slightly lower quality when compared with the Cobb and CP-E intakes. The turbo inlet hasin't really had any HP gain claims, it mainly just makes your turbo spool 500 RPM's sooner.
FrequentFlyer
Member
- :
- 2008 CWP Mazdaspeed3
The dyno looks legit to me. It's nothing out of the ordinary to show 25whp mid range gains for an intake on this car.
what's interesting on that graph is that where they put the measurements showing the 25hp increase is neither the power peak NOR the peak gain.
If you look at roughly 6000rpm, that appears to be nearly a 40hp gain, about 30hp at 5700. THAT is what makes me skeptical about this dyno run. As most here know by now, installing a different intake, no matter how well designed, is prone to throw off the fuel trims in the ECU, which after a few days of driving around will all get nailed down tight again as the ECU's closed-loop feedback allows it to determine how much more/less fuel is needed for a given MAF voltage.
What I see on the graph though is an hour and 20 minutes to install the thing and run it again for the second run. This tells me that perhaps they didn't allow the car to learn at all and thus it is likely running fairly lean to make that much more power.
I would want to see an air/fuel graph for the same two runs to be able to make an informed decision, but I am almost certain that with time, the gains from this intake will dwindle quite a bit from this first chart and you'll end up with performance gains nearly identical to other short-ram style intakes on the market.
If you look at roughly 6000rpm, that appears to be nearly a 40hp gain, about 30hp at 5700. THAT is what makes me skeptical about this dyno run. As most here know by now, installing a different intake, no matter how well designed, is prone to throw off the fuel trims in the ECU, which after a few days of driving around will all get nailed down tight again as the ECU's closed-loop feedback allows it to determine how much more/less fuel is needed for a given MAF voltage.
What I see on the graph though is an hour and 20 minutes to install the thing and run it again for the second run. This tells me that perhaps they didn't allow the car to learn at all and thus it is likely running fairly lean to make that much more power.
I would want to see an air/fuel graph for the same two runs to be able to make an informed decision, but I am almost certain that with time, the gains from this intake will dwindle quite a bit from this first chart and you'll end up with performance gains nearly identical to other short-ram style intakes on the market.
what's interesting on that graph is that where they put the measurements showing the 25hp increase is neither the power peak NOR the peak gain.
If you look at roughly 6000rpm, that appears to be nearly a 40hp gain, about 30hp at 5700. THAT is what makes me skeptical about this dyno run. As most here know by now, installing a different intake, no matter how well designed, is prone to throw off the fuel trims in the ECU, which after a few days of driving around will all get nailed down tight again as the ECU's closed-loop feedback allows it to determine how much more/less fuel is needed for a given MAF voltage.
What I see on the graph though is an hour and 20 minutes to install the thing and run it again for the second run. This tells me that perhaps they didn't allow the car to learn at all and thus it is likely running fairly lean to make that much more power.
I would want to see an air/fuel graph for the same two runs to be able to make an informed decision, but I am almost certain that with time, the gains from this intake will dwindle quite a bit from this first chart and you'll end up with performance gains nearly identical to other short-ram style intakes on the market.
Good Call.... I'd like to see dyno numbers again after a few days aswell..
joeybisson
Member
alright.. well if i had to choose from cobb (street unit has it in stock, i think) or the corksport what should i go with..
New Posts and Comments
- Replies
- 2K
- Views
- 522K
- Replies
- 8
- Views
- 249
New Threads and Articles
-
-
-
Just bought a 2017 CX5 - should I be resetting the transmission shift pattern?
- By mwinfredpp
- Replies: 1