Which Air Intake should I get

texas4rnr

New member
I know everyone has their own opinion on what the best is, but I'm wanting to know the difference between a volant air intake and K&N. i am getting bored waiting for my wet okole covers and I need something else to put on my car. Since I nearly fell over after filling up on gas, I want to know what I should get for my car? I have a k&n filter on there now, but it's not really hacking it. So I leave it to you, world, to tell me what to buy!

2004 4 Runner
4x2...stock almost everything
 
Register to hide this ad
Why?

Is there a reason the different years are better for different intakes? I don't know anything about the things. I just know I get better gas mileage and I'm all over that like white on rice.

I have a 2004 V6 2WD
 
'03-'04 V8 was 235hp.
'05-'06 V8 has vvt-i and it is 260hp.
Fuel economy is questionable. Theoretically yes, but practically 50/50.
 
Why Part 2

Ok, so I've been reading everywhere that getting an air intake increases mpg 1-2? Is that incorrect, what is the purpose of getting the intake system other than better air flow? Any other reasons? I don't have a 4x4 so I don't really go offroading because I don't want to be stuck in the mud (although that would totally be cool to do that)

I have the K&N air filter already - so do you recommend an air intake instead?
 
With Drop-in filter you mainly getting better airflow to your engine. Gain in hp is minimum and not noticible. Adding Cold Air Intake, you also improve airflow by shorting and straiting up your air arm which giving you less air drag in intake system, and increasing filter area by adding cone hi-flow filter which also has minimum air resistance. This setup will give you some extra hp. My K&N gaved me 12hp for my 4.0 V6. It may give you 1mpg fuel economy due to less air resistance, but you'll have to mainatin your driving habits to smooth acceleration and stopping. With the sound which you'll have with Cold Air Intake it's difficult. For example my intake gives the sound of V8 or V12 under acceleration which is awesome, so I'm pushing pedal a little bit more then I did before installing it and all economy gone out.
I hope this helps...
 
You shouldn't see any mpg increase with any "less restrictive" air intake system on a 4Runner. Even with a dirty stock paper air filter, the pumping losses of getting air through the filter are infinitesimal, and not even an order of magnitude close to what it would take to get a 1mpg (5%) increase in gas mileage.

Even if you had an air intake system that that permitted 5% greater peak horsepower than stock (about 12 HP), that wouldn't produce a measurable increase in mpg in a properly functioning fuel injection system - certainly not 5%.

Though I don't need it for the above argument, I would ask you if you think multi-billion dollar car manufacturers would overlook such a cheap way to get even 1% greater gas mileage, given the CAFE pressures put on them by our lawmakers.
 
Light_Mania said:
You shouldn't see any mpg increase with any "less restrictive" air intake system on a 4Runner. Even with a dirty stock paper air filter, the pumping losses of getting air through the filter are infinitesimal, and not even an order of magnitude close to what it would take to get a 1mpg (5%) increase in gas mileage.

Even if you had an air intake system that that permitted 5% greater peak horsepower than stock (about 12 HP), that wouldn't produce a measurable increase in mpg in a properly functioning fuel injection system - certainly not 5%.

Though I don't need it for the above argument, I would ask you if you think multi-billion dollar car manufacturers would overlook such a cheap way to get even 1% greater gas mileage, given the CAFE pressures put on them by our lawmakers.
I disagree...

Using a less restrictive filter with optimized intake tracts will improve your engine's efficiency. Since an engine is just a glorified air pump, making the process more efficient will have positive effects on fuel economy. A naturally aspirated engine which relies on its own vaccum to pull air into the cylinders will be more efficient because of less friction the air sees on its way from the outside to the combustion chambers. This reduction in flow restriction also results in more power. You may be wondering how it is possible to have more power but use less fuel? Its all because the engine wastes energy pulling air through a restrictive air filter/intake system. The same is true with aftermarket exhaust systems; when the air flow is optimized which is what an aftermarket intake/exhaust system does, the engine is free to apply more energy to turning the crank vs. sucking air in or pushing air out. If you still claim that pulling air through a "dirty stock paper air filter" has "infantesimal" effects on fuel economy, then I advise you to put a dirty OEM air filter in your truck and record your gas mileage for a couple of tanks.



As for the comment about the auto manufacturers doing this as an OEM process: It all comes down to a cost/benefit analysis. Even today, a manufacturer's primary concern is reliability and cost savings.

There are two reasons why they don't put an optimized low restriction intake system on from the factory;

1) The stock air filter is meant to be very restrictive to catch anything that is thrown at it. It is also meant to be run for many miles without being replaced to ensure the car is as reliable as possible. A couple comments here: Yes, I am saying that an aftermarket filter does a worse job than a stock paper filter; That's the idea! The filter is the #1 flow restiction in an intake system, replacing with a high flow filter will most likely let more particles in than an ordinary filter. This is why it is important to know what kind of conditions you drive in. If you frequently drive in dusty conditions an intake with a low restiction filter may not be the best choice. Also, having an aftermarket intake system requires more checking/cleaning of the filter element to ensure its functioning properly. It should also be noted that an aftermarket cone type filter flows more air because it has a larger surface area than stock paper filters too.

2) An optimized intake system costs too much for the added benefits of fuel economy and power. For a manufacturer, paying for a cheap intake with readliy available and easy to fabricate parts is better than realizing 10-20 HP and 1-2 mpg by paying for special expensive to fabricate parts like high flow cone filters and mandrel bent tubing. This is because it translates into millions of dollars of savings over the build of the fleet and allows them to charge less for the vehicle which, in the 4Runners (and many other vehicles for that matter) case, already have good stock horsepower and fuel economy numbers. This being said, with the current gas crunch many auto makers are looking to bolster fuel economy much as possible, and the first place they are doing this is with less restrictive intake and exhaust systems.

Bottom line is: No matter how restrictive (or unrestrictive) a stock intake system is, a properly designed aftermarket system will almost always increase power and fuel economy. If it didn't, I'm not so sure that K&N, Airaid, AEM, Volant, etc. would still be in business...

:biggrin2:
 
Last edited:
We're probably just going to have to disagree;): , but I'll respond.

First, I won't argue that there are not HP gains to be had by changing the T4R air intake system. Even a low restriction intake can be replaced by a resonance tuned intake to provide torque bumps at one or two points on the rpm curve but it will generally be at the expense of other areas on the curve. Tune it so that the peak occurs at the rpm of maximum HP, and you have your gain in maximum HP, but often at the expense of total area under the torque curve. Again, I don't know what can be done with the T4R.

In any event, these HP gains at wide open throttle with less restrictive intakes in modern electronic fuel injected engines come because a greater mass of air is being delivered to the cylinders and the fuel injection system is able to meter that air and add extra fuel to keep the air/fuel ratio at its mapped point. The fuel isn't being used more efficiently, its just that more can be provided because a greater mass of air is making it to the cylinder. This in itself won't improve fuel mileage. Don't confuse increases in volumetric efficiency (HP per liter of engine displacement) that a better intake might provide, with an increase in fuel efficiency. They are not at all the same thing and are often at odds with one another.

Now all of the above is really only relevant at wide open throttle, and has almost nothing to do with part throttle situations, which is where our vehicles run 99.9% of the time. At part throttle, where is the big restriction in the intake system? At the throttle plate, of course, where your foot is regulating the flow of air into the engine by restricting it. The fuel injection system measures the mass of air that does squeeze by the partly open throttle plate and delivers the appropriate amount of fuel to maintain a proper A/F ratio. The throttle plate restriction at part throttle makes any other restriction in the intake puny in comparison, and irrelevant to your miles per gallon.

Now lets look at "free flow air filters". How much do they help? In a poorly designed intake with an inadequately sized filter area, a free flow filter will probably help a lot, but modern vehicles with this problem are rare. Have you looked at the size of the T4R paper air filter? Its pretty big, I don't think there is much restriction there. If you have the time, go to this link and peruse the data:
http://home.usadatanet.net/~jbplock/ISO5011/SPICER
The pressure drop across the paper filter in that engine at 350 sCFM air flow (what the 4.0 V6 sucks at 5000 rpm) is 6.25 inches of H2O, but only 4.5 inches across the least restrictive filter, the K&N. Sound impressive? It really isn't. The difference between the K&N and the paper filter is 1.75 inches of water, but atmospheric pressure is roughly 385 inches of water so the K&N is delivering 1.75/385 or 0.5% more air to the engine. That should give you an equivalent HP bump of 0.5% at WOT. If that could be translated to the T4R engine, you would be looking at no more than 2 extra HP. Not much for the money or the hassle.

Some argue that because companies like K&N stay in business they must be doing something good. Thats a pretty weak argument. Someone still sells and makes money on those little magnets you put on your fuel filter to align the fuel molecules for more power and economy too, don't they? Again, there probably are intake systems that benefit from a K&N, but I do not believe the T4R is such a beast. It will make the engine sound a bit gnarlier due to reduced muffling of intake noise.

What about that dirty paper air filter? If its really dirty, it will reduce peak HP at WOT to some degree, but will it have a noticeable impact on fuel economy? Not if the fuel injection system is working properly. That restrictive air filter is doing the same thing your throttle is doing, restricting air flow into the engine, but it is a far lesser restriction than your partly open throttle. The fuel injection system doesn't care what part of the system is restricting flow of air into the engine, it just determines how much air is getting in and meters the right amount of fuel for best combustion. Fuel is still burned with the same efficiency, and the same amount of power is delivered per gram of fuel regardless of how much restriction is provided by the air filter compared to the throttle plate.

I'm not saying there might not be good reasons to revamp your air intake. I will say that doing it to improve gas mileage is likely to fail.
 
That's a very fair argument. But how does it explain the masses of people who on this and other forums realize at least a 10% gain in fuel economy? The answer is because with a less restrictive intake system the engine doesn't have to waste its kinetic energy pulling air through a less than efficient intake system. Now, I understand your argument about how the engine adjusts for less air by adding less fuel which results in less power but equal fuel consumption. But you have to agree that at any throttle position an optimized intake system (filter & tubing) will provide less "backpressure" than the factory system, maybe not alot, but a significant enough amount to reduce this extra "load" on the engine and over a tank of gas, have a positive effect on engine fuel efficiency (energy in gasoline vs. energy to crank).

As an example lets say the throttle is depressed 50%, in this case, you are right, the biggest restriction in airflow is the throttle plate. After the initial inrush of air from the volume of intake tubing directly adjacement to the throttle plate, this void still has to be filled with air from the outside of the vehicle. Now, lets compare two indentical engines performing the exact same thing, but one has a factory intake system and filter, and the other has a high flow filter and intake system. The overall pressure drop from atmospheric to cylinder will be fractionally greater in the factory system. What this results in is a higher differential pressure behind the piston than with the high flow, not alot, but a signifcant amount. If every piston in the engine encounters this higher pressure differential (keeping in mind that a 3 inch diameter piston moving up and down very fast even at modest rpm still moves alot of air), over the life of a tank of gas this can add up to alot of energy wasted just pulling air through an intake system that may only flow a couple percent less air or have a couple percent more pressure drop through it.

My point is that the engine is an air pump, and the easier it is to pull air in and push air out, the more efficient it will be. This efficiency translates directly to increased energy output vs. energy input or better fuel economy.
 
What ever the increases spending a couple hundred on an intake will still take a lot of driving before you even get a return if any and it's still an iffy proposition on MPGs since I installed a drop in K&N along with the deckplate mod (which is dyno proven at a minimum of 6whp) but I didn't see an increas in MPGs and I am constantly monitoring mine.

Light_Mania- I guess you don't believe in throttle body spacers either?:p
 
RonMAIDEN said:
What ever the increases spending a couple hundred on an intake will still take a lot of driving before you even get a return if any and it's still an iffy proposition on MPGs since I installed a drop in K&N along with the deckplate mod (which is dyno proven at a minimum of 6whp) but I didn't see an increas in MPGs and I am constantly monitoring mine.

Light_Mania- I guess you don't believe in throttle body spacers either?:p
Gosh, you know what? You guys changed my mind. I'm cancelling my order on the intake today. Thanks for helping me realize I'm such a moron for thinking that I would get more power and fuel efficiency from such a bogus device...
:bowdown:
 
You might get more power. If you are satisfied with that, go ahead and get it. But if you need to justify the expense by believing it will improve fuel efficiency - well thats just going to be a religion, not science.
 
Wow,why the sarcastic remark over a discussion and an educational and rational one at that?

Buy what you want since you believe in the product and that's what usually makes your decision as for me the evidence is too great from my view to spend that much money on a filter kit plus with my budget the deckplate mod works for me and I'm glad I have the cheaper option that does the same thing as the $200 part.


I'm still your compadre even if we disagree on a few things. Peace.
 
RonMAIDEN said:
Wow,why the sarcastic remark over a discussion and an educational and rational one at that?

Buy what you want since you believe in the product and that's what usually makes your decision as for me the evidence is too great from my view to spend that much money on a filter kit plus with my budget the deckplate mod works for me and I'm glad I have the cheaper option that does the same thing as the $200 part.


I'm still your compadre even if we disagree on a few things. Peace.
I don't know...Its just useless trying to explain stuff to people on this forum, everyone who posts act like they know everything about anything (myself included). However, I believe my arguement is valid, and that along with the overwhelming amount of people not only on this forum but elsewhere who see the benefits I'm talking about, can't be ignored.

Just so you guys know, I plan on proving everyone wrong once I get, install and run a few tanks with my intake on. If I'm wrong, I'll post a naked picture of my girlfriend :bigok: Maybe not, but I'll do something. Thanks for hangin' in there Ron :biggrin2:
 
Interesting how this thread has turned out! I didn't mean for it to be a back and forth debate. Of course there are two different sides of the coin, and that comes down to two different kinds of people.

I'm still getting intake though -- decided to wait for a bit though. Decided on the VOLANT.

Reason: It's enclosed and keeps dust out better than open aired.

Got my front Okole's in... waiting on the back- will be here on the 11th.Tossin over that money was the best heart attack I've ever had.
 
Ron and Light, I completely agree with your statements. Sure the intakes may increase horsepower, but gas needs to be at a 14:1 ratio with air, and if there's more entering the engine, then more gas needs to be burned too.

You want more horsepower, buy a Corvette. You wanna climb rocks, drive through small ponds, and blast through fields blinding everything with your super high beams, in your squirrel-squashing-deer-smacking driving machine, buy a 4Runner! Come on people, they're SUVs, they're already decently fast, and we knew when we bought them that we'd get screwed at the pumps. Load them up with all your hunting gear and 3 other friends to take to the lake and shoot ducks, and you'll never look back. My SUV likes to get dirty too.


This website is great for this topic.

http://www.fuelsaving.info/power_economy.htm
 
I believe the cold air intakes will make hp and if I were to get one it would be the AEM Brute Force because of the use of the non-oiled synthetic filter element that filters 99% to 1 micron. AEM also makes the TRD drop-in.

Koz
 
There is no AEM available for 4th Gen. 4Runner. I was checking couple month ago and only K&N was available for V6, K&N non VVT-i V8 and Volant for VVT-i V8.
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
278,309
Messages
3,554,071
Members
248,016
Latest member
Advally Service

Trending content

Back
Top