Mazda 6 Forums banner

1 - 20 of 40 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I was at the dealer today checking to see if they carry a CAI for my MS6. They don't. When I asked why the service manager came out to explain that I didn't need one because my car is intercooled. That makes sense but I was also looking for better air flow. He agreed that an intake that removed the restrictive stock air box would help but that trying to get "cold" outside air into the engine is not going to do much because the intercooler is cooling air. If this is true then the stock air box mod would be just as good as a CAI IMO because they both allow more air into the system.

What do you think?

Johnny
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
wow. thats just wrong on so many levels. do your best to make sure that guy loses his job.
[/b]

I could see his point... I live in Texas. Most days its about 95 here. If I had a non intercooled car I could see how getting colder air from an intake would help. A CAI doesn't only provide cooler air but also better air flow. That is where the stock air box mod or an intake would help right. I just don't see how 95 degree air from the bottom of my car is going to help any since the intercooler is going to cool the air anyway...

Johnny
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
580 Posts
Because w/o the CAI ur gonna be pulling in wayy hotter than 95 degree heat... look at it that way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Because w/o the CAI ur gonna be pulling in wayy hotter than 95 degree heat... look at it that way.
[/b]

I guess what you are trying to say is that since the air would be a little cooler from the bottom of the car, the intercooler is not going to have to work as hard to cool the air and that could help with performance? I could see that point as well.

Johnny
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,574 Posts
that wasnt as bad as a guy telling me at discount tire that if i rotate my tires i will hydroplane.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,308 Posts
Intercooler isn't magic... and Top mount is anti-magic x100...

If its 95 outside... then the air inside your engine bay is going to be THAT much hotter... Air passing through the intercooler, exchanges heat with the metal mesh that makes up the intercooler, which in turn exchanges heat with outside airflow... bla bla bla... i'm sure you already know all of this...

Point is... Cold Air Intake is supposed to get air from outside the engine bay... so technically it should be called External Air Intake or some shit... You can't do anything about the outside temp... however in every case, it will be colder than whats sittin in the engine bay....

This is why i'm so hyped to get Front Mount.... when they finally finish them... "intercooled" air thats sittin on top of my engine = bad... They place radiators in the front of a vehile for a reason... the best and more or less only location where you can cool anything.. from inside the engine bay!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Thank you all for the feedback. I appreciate it! I'm glad I asked the question because I did get a better understanding of the benefits of a CAI for our car. :)

Thanks!

Johnny
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
580 Posts
Thank you all for the feedback. I appreciate it! I'm glad I asked the question because I did get a better understanding of the benefits of a CAI for our car. :)

Thanks!

Johnny
[/b]
No prob man! That's what we're here for! :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
396 Posts
A CAI is mainly for improved flow. Your stock airbox isn't sucking air in from the engine compartment it sucks it from the fenderwell, as well. The stock airbox is restrictive and the CAI is less restrictive and has increased flow. The gains from a CAI are mainly from flow, not the few degrees in air temp charges, though every bit helps.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
900 Posts
that wasnt as bad as a guy telling me at discount tire that if i rotate my tires i will hydroplane.
[/b]
:eek:fftopic: Sorry, off topic, but arch started it!

That's because of testing that was done back in the 90's by some tire companies on front wheel drive cars. Of course, on a FWD car the fronts wear alot faster than the rears(i know, duh.). They tested cars through a slalom and what was happening is that the rear end would wipe out quicker after the rotation because the tires with lesser tread were now there(again, duh.). We were actually being told by the manufacturer that I was working for(I'll leave it nameless, but just say that everything they had at the time was FWD) that they did not want us rotating tires that were more worn to the rear. Well, that pretty much meant ALL OF THEM?

Anyway, long story short. You do need to rotate your tires every 5-10K miles if you want even wear, front and rear, for the life of the tire (yet again, duh.). The benefits far outweigh the negatives, but you do not want to rotate any worn, or nearly worn tires to the rear. I had a friend that did that (because he was a cheapskate) and he ended up backwards at 55 mph sliding into some trees in a median during a thunderstorm!

Again, sorry for hijacking the thread! Back to you, Optic. ;)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
31 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
A CAI is mainly for improved flow. Your stock airbox isn't sucking air in from the engine compartment it sucks it from the fenderwell, as well. The stock airbox is restrictive and the CAI is less restrictive and has increased flow. The gains from a CAI are mainly from flow, not the few degrees in air temp charges, though every bit helps.
[/b]

That is exactly what I was thinking... :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,661 Posts
that wasnt as bad as a guy telling me at discount tire that if i rotate my tires i will hydroplane.
[/b]
:bsflag:



considering the idiots I've run across at Discount Tire I'm not surprised. I took my Impala there for a flat fix (free with the set of tires I had bought previously) and the idiot working on the car broke two studs and cross threaded the other three, one so badly the nut wouldnt even go all the way down.
They acted like it was no big deal, told me to take it 4 miles down the road to a shop that does their front end alignments and mechanical work. 4 miles on two studs.!!
The guy at the shop said such crap was a common occurance and they were making a good buck off of Discount's regular screw-ups.
I'll never set foot in one of their stores again :thefing:

I can get matching prices at any one of several other places and Tire Rack is within an hour's drive of me. :drive:




:eek:fftopic: Sorry, off topic, but arch started it!

That's because of testing that was done back in the 90's by some tire companies on front wheel drive cars. Of course, on a FWD car the fronts wear alot faster than the rears(i know, duh.). They tested cars through a slalom and what was happening is that the rear end would wipe out quicker after the rotation because the tires with lesser tread were now there(again, duh.). We were actually being told by the manufacturer that I was working for(I'll leave it nameless, but just say that everything they had at the time was FWD) that they did not want us rotating tires that were more worn to the rear. Well, that pretty much meant ALL OF THEM?

Anyway, long story short. You do need to rotate your tires every 5-10K miles if you want even wear, front and rear, for the life of the tire (yet again, duh.). The benefits far outweigh the negatives, but you do not want to rotate any worn, or nearly worn tires to the rear. I had a friend that did that (because he was a cheapskate) and he ended up backwards at 55 mph sliding into some trees in a median during a thunderstorm!

Again, sorry for hijacking the thread! Back to you, Optic. ;)
[/b]

Ya, I was thinking briefly along those lines when I read that but you're right. Of course that can apply to ANY car, front or rear wheel drive. Putting worn tires on either end of the car is going to drastically reduce grip or hydroplaning resistance. Front Wheel cars being such different animals in regards to how they react to tires IMO sometimes are very misunderstood, IE the belief that putting those worn out old tires from the front on the rear will have no negative effect on the car's handling. Your friend found out the real truth to that myth, unfortunately the hard way.

My opinions of Discount Tire still stand, they're just a small cut above my house plants in intelligence.....a VERY small cut above at best

My aplolgies also for the sickening left turn off topic :eek:fftopic:

:bsflag:
considering the idiots I've run across at Discount Tire I'm not surprised. I took my Impala there for a flat fix (free with the set of tires I had bought previously) and the idiot working on the car broke two studs and cross threaded the other three, one so badly the nut wouldnt even go all the way down.
They acted like it was no big deal, told me to take it 4 miles down the road to a shop that does their front end alignments and mechanical work. 4 miles on two studs.!!
The guy at the shop said such crap was a common occurance and they were making a good buck off of Discount's regular screw-ups.
I'll never set foot in one of their stores again :thefing:

I can get matching prices at any one of several other places and Tire Rack is within an hour's drive of me. :drive:
Ya, I was thinking briefly along those lines when I read that but you're right. Of course that can apply to ANY car, front or rear wheel drive. Putting worn tires on either end of the car is going to drastically reduce grip or hydroplaning resistance. Front Wheel cars being such different animals in regards to how they react to tires IMO sometimes are very misunderstood, IE the belief that putting those worn out old tires from the front on the rear will have no negative effect on the car's handling. Your friend found out the real truth to that myth, unfortunately the hard way.

My opinions of Discount Tire still stand, they're just a small cut above my house plants in intelligence.....a VERY small cut above at best

My apololgies also for the sickening left turn off topic :eek:fftopic:
[/b]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,546 Posts
I'm with Baggio on this one.

The fact it is a CAI doesn't mean much. Even an SRI should get the same performance gains on this car as a CAI would.

What we're doing with intakes on this car is simply improving air flow, cold or not.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,067 Posts
^ It seems most cars intakes are labeled CAI's as a trend or marketing tool rather than LRI which is what they really are


LRI = Low Restriction Intake!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
595 Posts
I'm with Baggio on this one.

The fact it is a CAI doesn't mean much. Even an SRI should get the same performance gains on this car as a CAI would.

What we're doing with intakes on this car is simply improving air flow, cold or not.
[/b]

an intercooler is only going to cool the air by a certain percentage....which will change based on if the intercooler is heat soaked or not. Say it will cool the air by 50%. So if you are drawing 100 degree air in though your CAI from outside, and after the turbo it is say 250 degrees, it will cool the air back down to 125 degrees or so in this example. If you are drawing in 150 degree air in from your engine bay short ram, and after the turbo it is 300 degrees (I know this is a very simplified thermodynamic example - and will not reflect real world actual numbers) , the intercooler will only cool it down to 150 degrees.

Basically if you start with warmer air from the engine bay, vs the outside air, you will end up with warmer air after the intercooler.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,138 Posts
I'm with Baggio on this one.

The fact it is a CAI doesn't mean much. Even an SRI should get the same performance gains on this car as a CAI would.

What we're doing with intakes on this car is simply improving air flow, cold or not.
[/b]
This is so far from accurate its remotely sickening...

I take it you have never driven a car with a SRI in the central florida heat and humidity?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,067 Posts
This is so far from accurate its remotely sickening...

I take it you have never driven a car with a SRI in the central florida heat and humidity?
[/b]
He is speaking specifically about the MS6 not just any car in Flroida, and how would a CAI help with humidity anyways?!?!?

While I will not agree with him on this particular car, I will say I have seen plenty of data logging on various cars showing little to no difference between a short ram and CAI on N/A motors... In the end on a bone stock car it is more commonly less restriction not lower temps that gain the most HP under real world conditions.
 
1 - 20 of 40 Posts
Top