i just installed an injen CAI on my 05 type-s, sounds nice, runs fine.

bads-

makes a sucking noise, i guess its normal for a CAI - so problem solved

but...
my front bumper wont line up anymore, is anyone else having the same problem? it looks like its pushed in on the front and on the left side where the filter is, the wheel well kind of gets in the way....

also..
i live in seattle, pours rain, i searched and searched this topic online, but there was mixed answers, anyone really know the chances of me screwing up my motor? i'm not gonna smash over puddles an gun it in the rain, but for daily driving in the rain..should i just go back to stock? i read on previous forums that SRI is decreases performance. I don't want to go with the icebox...anyone have any ideas?

thanks..

- and yes i have researched but i got mixed answers, and those were from previous threads, its been awhile and people are probaly more updated with the hydrolock type situation.

 

bumper should line up correctly as if it was stock
did you cut a small section of the wheel well for the pipe of the cai
its also stated in the instructions

i know someone that live in seattle and he has a aem cai

so far he said its been fine and that its not like its always pouring here, just misty
i'm assuming its ok but there are risks
i know a few people that has gotten hydrolocked (all from the aem dryflow filter)

 

i cut the hole like it stated in the instructions but for some odd reason it just wont line up.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by albertleee &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

also..
i live in seattle, pours rain, i searched and searched this topic online, but there was mixed answers, anyone really know the chances of me screwing up my motor? i'm not gonna smash over puddles an gun it in the rain, but for daily driving in the rain..should i just go back to stock? i read on previous forums that SRI is decreases performance. I don't want to go with the icebox...anyone have any ideas?

thanks..

- and yes i have researched but i got mixed answers, and those were from previous threads, its been awhile and people are probaly more updated with the hydrolock type situation. </TD></TR></TABLE>

Look in the FAQ at the top of this forum. Several documented cases of hydrolock. No way I'd run one on a daily driver.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Todd00 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
No way I'd run one on a daily driver.</TD></TR></TABLE>

i agree.. i bought a car that came with a CAI and got rid of it and went with an SRI and actually an SRI outperforms a CAI. When i was living in Texas, i knew a guy with an EP3 that hydrolocked his motor because he had a CAI. Told him he should of got an SRI and in all honesty you don't need to buy a namebrand SRI. You just need an SRI that fits your car. They are just mandrel bent tubes fitted to your car.

 

SRI outperforms CAI? I never heard that before, i aint trying to talk shiat, but could you tell me where you got that information&gt;? i will go SRI if convinced.

 

ClubRSX did 3 performance tests on different types of intakes, different times and the Injen SRI outperformed everytime. They had it up on their site for the longest of time but unfortunately they took it down so i can't show you that. On top of those tests my roommate, at the time i was living with him, worked at a performance shop, they were bored one day and bet that the SRI would outperform the CAI. So the owner took that bet and they used a generic SRI and a CAI, and the SRI outperformed the CAI. I was laughing when he told me that.
Everyone thinks because you are pulling cold air from down below, you are getting cold air. Well for every bend in the "pipe" you lose a degrees of cold air on top of that the air has to travel a very long distance before it actually makes it into the TB as where the SRI has a short distance and has maybe 2 bends, if you want to consider that little hump a bend. People will argue about "heat soak" which both intakes would get theoreticly because they are both still in the engine bay, aluminum and right next to the transmission. In all tho, the SRI is the best choice between a CAI and a SRI.


Modified by risktypeS at 11:30 AM 10/14/2007

 

Hydrolocked my Accord june of '06 when i had the AEM v2 on. Got a new engine out of it. Paying a little extra for aftermarket parts insurance can be worth it sometimes.

 

here you go i found it, they just moved it around:

http://www.clubrsx.com/cr/SSPTIT.html

you see the INJEN SRI outperformed them all

 

I dont know what to think about that. The Injen SRI started out the highest on the first pull, then ended up the lowest, which makes me think engine heat is a factor. The V2 stayed the most consistent out of the 3. The SRI had the highest average, but that doesnt sell it for me, cuz if youve been driving for a half hour, your going to be getting the lower HP rating. 1 Hp doesnt really mean anything, but the CAI being farther away from the engine stayed the coolest and kept the Hp rating nearest its original pass. Ide like to see a test of the car being driven for 30-45 minutes with all three then take a few dyno pulls. Good post tho.

 

Injen Short Ram : Injen Average = 185.128hp & 131.343lbs

Injen Cold Air : Injen 2 Run Average = 194.5hp & 135.6lbs

not sure what you were reading?

 

Im not talking about the average. Im saying that the Injen SRI has the biggest difference in Hp from run 1 to run 7.
Injen Short Ram
Run #1 - 186.6hp & 133.5lbs - Dyno Chart
Run #2 - 186.7hp & 133.4lbs - Dyno Chart
Run #3 - 185.1hp & 130.9lbs - Dyno Chart
Run #4 - 185.3hp & 130.7lbs - Dyno Chart
Run #5 - 186.1hp & 131.6lbs - Dyno Chart
Run #6 - 182.4hp & 129.2lbs - Dyno Chart
Run #7 - 183.7hp & 130.1lbs - Dyno Chart


AEM Cold Air
Run #1 - 185.5hp & 133.1lbs - Dyno Chart
Run #2 - 183.8hp & 130.1lbs - Dyno Chart
Run #3 - 185.3hp & 131.0lbs - Dyno Chart
Run #4 - 184.3hp & 130.8lbs - Dyno Chart
Run #5 - 184.7hp & 130.3lbs - Dyno Chart
Run #6 - 184.2hp & 130.9lbs - Dyno Chart
Run #7 - 184.5hp & 130.6lbs - Dyno Chart

AEM Short Ram
Run #1 - 184.4hp & 133.2lbs - Dyno Chart
Run #2 - 183.9hp & 131.8lbs - Dyno Chart
Run #3 - 183.7hp & 131.1lbs - Dyno Chart
Run #4 - 184.0hp & 130.8lbs - Dyno Chart
Run #5 - 183.3hp & 131.0lbs - Dyno Chart
Run #6 - 183.1hp & 131.1lbs - Dyno Chart
Run #7 - 184.1hp & 130.7lbs - Dyno Chart

Thats why I said heat is a factor.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by idc5yes &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Injen Short Ram : Injen Average = 185.128hp & 131.343lbs

Injen Cold Air : Injen 2 Run Average = 194.5hp & 135.6lbs

not sure what you were reading?</TD></TR></TABLE>

you do realise the engine had more mods done to it right?

Intake Test #2.5
This test was more about testing two new intakes then it was comparing intakes all together like the first two. <U>This time around, the car was much different </U>and had a lot more modifications done to it. This time the car had a Hondata reflash, Jackson race header, and an Injen SES exhaust. This test was to see how sell the AEM V2 did compared to the Injen cold air intake. The tests were once again done on the same DynoJet as the first two tests.

Intake Test #2
The second intake test was done on January 31st, 2002. We tested all three of the intakes again, the Injen short ram and the AEM cold air & short ram. We used the same AEM cold air and Injen short ram as the first test but we did use a second AEM short ram because of poor results from the first test. Because of certain member opinions from the first test, all of the installs were done by Tobi Connell of TC Performance and no one from Club RSX installed any of the intakes. This was done to ensure the accuracy of each test. There was no change to the car from the first test other then doing an oil change an hour before the test was done. After poor results from the first intake test, we did follow AEM's dyno setup and procedures that they use when they test intakes. This included a fan at the front of the car and at the rear of the car and had a time period of three to five minutes between each dyno pull. These tests were done on the same DynoJet as the first intake test.

This was a better overall test procedure wise but we feel the results were mixed. The Injen short ram produced almost the same numbers as the first test but the AEM cold air and short ram did quite a bit better. We are not sure why this was but we feel that you can't look at each test by themselves but look at the results from the first test to the second test together to make up your mind.

heat was a factor but the injen still outperformed them all

reading &gt; idc5yes

 

I got the Injen SRI on my Type s and the AEM V2 on my 6th gen Accord Cpe. I like the Injen a little better, plus its a super easy install and cheaper. But the AEM has a plus in that its maintenance free. v2 cost me 3 bills for the Accord.