I have a 2007 Dodge Ram with the Hemi. I would like to start adding some performance parts to the truck to gain some HP and possibly some MPG. I have found quite a few different manufacturers of Cold Air Intakes, and I am wondering which is the best bang for the buck. So if anyone has added a Cold Air Intake to a Ram Hemi, please let me know which one you added, and if you felt it was a good purchase.


Thanks Guys and Gals

Dan

 

I would recommend seeing this thread (pics and all) for a mod costing anywhere from $20-$35 total.
https://dodgeforum.com/m_712207/tm.htm

 

here, all their info about each product is dyno tested and driven by them, they know what's in the know....
http://www.rpmoutlet.com/frame.htmjustclick on your engine type and go from there...

 

After much cheating on dyno tests by even the auto manufacturers
the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE)
revised their testing proceedures for the 4th time in 80 years

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articl...1/ai_n13815480

and this time added an
'SAE Observer' requirement as a witness to prevent cheating.

This SAE observer is available to witness
shaft dyno,
rear wheel dyno,
and acceleration runs like the quarter mile.
If no cheating was detected, the words 'SAE Certified' can be added to any horsepower claim. The cost for the SAE trainned observer is less than about $300 per test.

It is worth noting that RPM Outlet is using words like
'dyno proven'
which means nothing
and not 'SAE Certified'
which everyone from Chrysler to Porsche,
and universities like MIT and NASCAR's own University of Charlotte Motorsports Program, agree is the correct way.

This means RPM and other sellers are running the test the way they want
and not the 'truthful' way.

This is no different than me fiddling with the insides of a stopwatch
and then claiming my Ram accelerates from 0-60 mph in 1.98 seconds
as shown on my specially 'calibrated' stopwatch.

 

I just installed a Volant for my '05 Hemi. I had one on my '02 5.9L as well. Can't comment on power increases, but I can confirm that mileage has improved about 1 MPG. Definitely sounds better too. Cost of the kit was about $375 off of Ebay.

 

Before spending considerable money on a cold air intake,
read what the volunteers found independently testing
KN Air Charger, KN drop in, Volant, Mopar and Airaid 360
aftermarket air intakes against the stock factory airbox
on 5.7 V8 Hemi's in Chrysler LX's

http://www.lxforums.com/board/showthread.php?t=14140

Keep in mind that the factory airbox
on a Ram pickup 5.7 Hemi engine is even
bigger and less restrictive than the factory box on a LX.

To save everyone some math
the average of three runs
of the stock factory airbox and paper filter dyno'ed:

280 HP with a standard deviation of 3.75
(corrected to standard pressure and temperature)

The only cold air intake testing better
was the KN Air Charger at
281 HP with a standard deviation of 4.15

Since the average of all 18 dyno runs
where an air intake design
was tested after a standard PCM reset was:

279 with a standard deviation of 3.24
(runs number 4 to 6 plus runs 10 to 24)

you really can't say with certainty that the
extra 1 HP for the KN Air Charger was 'real'
because even a well designed wheel dyno
that is well maintained
and has a great operator
can't be depended upon to repeat that close.

279 HP with a standard deviation of 3.24
means in simple terms
that if you ran exactly the same engine exactly the same way
100 times, then
98 of the runs would 'scatter' between
a high of 285.5 and
a low of 272.5
(which is 279 plus and minus two times 3.24)

1 HP gain for the KN Air Charger versus
280 for the factory air box
is below 1% difference
and this rear wheel dyno
seems to be varying over a range of 12.96 hp
which at a bit less than 5%
is actually admirable for repeats on a wheel dyno.

 

I have K&N cool air intakes on my HEMI & my SRT-10.
I like them alot, You get better gas milage. Not a lot but
some, but anything is good right.You do feel some more
H.P. also, that is the only intake I use.

 

True flow hands down. I owned a K&N on my 98 and a Volant on my hemi before the true flow and the true flow is a MUCH better intake than either of those.

 

To those that believe that their cold air intake
has improved their MPG,
can't you test this belief
by taking the CAI off for a month or two
and seeing if your MPG now drops
an equivalent amount to what you think you gained?

If people would test intakes for several tanks
by putting them on for a tank of gasoline
and then taking them off for the next tank,
a lot of knowledge would be gained for little work.

Below is a test of Overdrive off in city driving versus OD on.
Notice how this was done on alternate tanks.
Notice how the MPG 'natural jumps around'.
See how easy it is to make a false assumption if you only check a couple tanks?
======
9/12/2000
Here's the results of several tanks of gasoline I kept track of with the OD
either on or off in city driving. After each tank fill up, I alternated
keeping the OD on or off.

I have since made 3 more 300 mile long mpg tests in city driving since i
posted the original 6 tests. My test results now look like this:
-----------
OD turned off runs:

7-19-00 14.32 mpg Amoco87
7-29-00 15.17 mpg Amoco87
8-08-00 14.23 mpg Amoco87
9-08-00 13.53 mpg Amoco87
---------------------------------
average 14.31 mpg

OD turned on runs:
(these were run inbetween the runs above)

7-12-00 14.16 mpg Exxon87
8-17-00 14.25 mpg Amoco87
8-24-00 15.49 mpg Amoco87
9-01-00 15.03 mpg Amoco87
9-12-00 14.35 mpg Amoco87
-------------------------------
average 14.66 mpg

As you can see, so far the OD on/off difference seems to be small with a
slight 0.3 MPG edge to leaving OD on while in city driving. That is about a 2% difference, and may still by 'scatter'.

Note also how much the MPG jumps around.
All realworld tests have 'random
variation.'

If I had done just two tests, and had by chance gotten the low 14.16 for the
OD on, and the high 15.17 for OD off, I would have falsely concluded that OD on really hurts in city driving.

To get more reliable MPG numbers for Rams in city driving you need to do
multiple tests in a before/after/before/after sequence. Even better would be
to do SAE/TMC type IV testing with two or more vehicles following one another 'convoy' style.

Most fraudulent MPG improvement devices continue to sell because of this 'jump around' MPG during normal driving.

If a MPG device DOES NOTHING AT ALL,
out of 100 people who try it,
50 will find that their next tank of gasoline got them better MPG,
and they will then boast what a wonderful device they just bought.

Out of the 50 who get worse MPG on the next tank, quite a few will be a little ashamed they got gypted and stay quiet, and only a few will be brave enough to post that the device is a fraud. Some of these will say: "Maybe I did something wrong and I will check the MPG on the next tank and will drive more carefully." {carefully driving will almost always improve MPG}
A majority of this half will now find better MPG on the second tank
and get the percentage reporting better MPG with the worthless device up to 75% or more!