Jayco RV Owners Forum

Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 11-07-2013, 10:08 AM   #11
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Renton
Posts: 516
OEM intakes and exhausts are engineering compromises they need to stay within certain cost constraints etc. OEMs build performance intakes like for my 2007 Tahoe, GM Performance has a factory approved cold air kit that improves performance and at the same time improves fuel economy. The reason people can have lower fuel economy with these types of improvements has to do with driver issues such as the tendency to use that additional power by more full throttle starts etc. If you use the freed up power wisely you will get increased fuel economy. I saw significant improvement with the GM cold air kit on my 2007 Tahoe both in fuel economy (when I keep my foot out of it) and power (when I need it such as when passing or towing). OEM cast exhausts are similar in that they are restrictive and intended to barely meet the performance targets set by the OEM. Long tube performance exhaust headers use tuning to reduce heat and backpressure to improve performance.

Old setup:
2004 Chevrolet Silverado 3500 LT with a 2004 Jayco JayFlight 29BHS
2014 Greyhawk 31FS with a 2007 Tahoe toad
New setup:
2014 Thor Palazzo 33.3 with a 2007 Tahoe toad
msturtz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-09-2013, 10:56 AM   #12
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Lake Mary
Posts: 287
Thanks for the replies. I'm not a "motorhead" at all, more of a "turn the key and go" guy. My Ram has the diesel engine and in its stock configuration does all I need or want it to do with reasonable fuel economy for a 7000 lb. truck. Not apples to apples, but it's fuel mileage is on par (city) and better (highway) than the '03 Tundra it replaced, even though it weighs about 3000 lbs more than the Tundra. That to me, is impressive enough..................

thomasmnile is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2013, 07:04 AM   #13
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Swift Current
Posts: 124
Re: Cold air intake

I'll chime in and parrot everyone else. Waste of money. And claims to gains anywhere are definitely open to scrutiny. If you look at the dyno curve they provide- gains are made towards peak RPM (if any) so what's the point? I don't believe the mileage gains either. Too many variables to make a claim like that. OEM intakes are pretty efficient- more than the engine needs.
Could potentially damage MAF sensor as another drawback.
2015 Ram 2500 Limited 6.4L Hemi, 3.73 LS
2007 Jay Feather 254 EXP "HMCS Anchovy" :Canada:
smurfs_of_war is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2013, 01:54 PM   #14
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: North Idaho/Arizona
Posts: 5,263
All the auto makers are concerned with CAFE (corporate average fuel economy). Bean counters are worried more about keeping the corporate mileage within government expected parameters than saving a few cents per unit. The easiest way to improve fuel economy and power is to have less weight. When your wallet is lighter by several hundred dollars your mileage and power will improve.

2011 Eagle 330RLTS with just about every option.
Dodge SRW 1 ton Cummins powered.

I was born with nothing and I still have most of it left.
clutch is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

» Virginia State Campgrounds

Reviews provided by

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:18 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.