Turbo Air Intake from ExtremePSI (Filter options)

[IIv SHaDoW vII]

So I have decided to get one of the $150 intakes from ExtremePSI.. They offer the choice of two filters: The K&N or Vibrant Performance Racing filters.

My question is, is the K&N really that much better than other cone filters? The difference in price between the K&N and the other one is $20 bucks.. Is it worth it to shell out the extra $20 for the K&N?

With the K&N filter.. the total is something like $177.xx.. For $10 more than that ($187.xx), I could just get an injen intake with the hardware and filter.
So another question becomes, is the injen intake + (injen?) filter better than the extremePSI intake + K&N filter?

 

[lil corb]

Honestly, if it was me, I would save that $20 on something else. As long as the filters are clean they are good. If one does flow better than the other, I'm sure they are other things that can be changed before upgrading the filter.

 

[PieEyedPiper]

So I have decided to get one of the $150 intakes from ExtremePSI.. They offer the choice of two filters: The K&N or Vibrant Performance Racing filters.

My question is, is the K&N really that much better than other cone filters? The difference in price between the K&N and the other one is $20 bucks.. Is it worth it to shell out the extra $20 for the K&N?

With the K&N filter.. the total is something like $177.xx.. For $10 more than that ($187.xx), I could just get an injen intake with the hardware and filter.
So another question becomes, is the injen intake + (injen?) filter better than the extremePSI intake + K&N filter?

Yes, K&N really is that much better than "other" filters. Fortunately, the Vibrant Performance part doesn't fall into the category of "other" and will likely provide you similar results. They're no chinabay manufacturer.

If you're not getting an FIPK then I wouldn't bother with the expense for an entry-level intake setup - No trash talking, just facts of the matter. When you need a 4" inlet then you can be more worried about if that K&N the size of a football is worth the extra coin.

 

[jpmxrider489]

Have you checked out the fp intake? And kn is better.

 

[IIv SHaDoW vII]

I did consider the FP intake.. but isn't it missing some of the vacuum line taps I'd need to hook up all the stock lines?

Also, what coupler would I need for a 16g if I went with the FP?

 

[EclipseOwner95]

I did consider the FP intake.. but isn't it missing some of the vacuum line taps I'd need to hook up all the stock lines?

Also, what coupler would I need for a 16g if I went with the FP?

You would need a 4" to 2.25" reducer coupler which Extreme PSI and FP both offer.

 

[FIBA M - EC17PSE]

Im pretty sure they tell you on there site. If i remember it says 4" to either 2" or 2.5" i cant remember if they use the stock rubber ring around the inlet of the turbo or not. And if you can get the injen for only 10$ more then i would go with that! Injen and k&n are pretty much the same when it comes to filters,

 

[agentorange313]

I did consider the FP intake.. but isn't it missing some of the vacuum line taps I'd need to hook up all the stock lines?

Also, what coupler would I need for a 16g if I went with the FP?

If you have your stock emission I believe the intake need two nipples of different sized for the vacuum lines.

FP had the coupler, its a 4 inch to 2.25 coupler. I would read up on the FP intake on this link, there is very good information on how it can actually hinder you performance due to the turbulent design of the coupler reducer.

I thought people might get some useful info out of this. I tried a few things to squeeze more power out of my 16g. With the FP 4" intake pipe, I was flatlining at about 390 w.h.p. (ECMLink) on multiple pulls in the 65-70*F range. This is about 384 w.h.p. on a dynojet for comparison. I slapped on my old Dejon 2.75" intake pipe and bought a very short 3"-2.25" reducer, not completely optimal (because of the coupler NOT the intake pipe) but it was a major improvement. Damned if that intake pipe doesn't look good, chopped about 1.5" off the BOV return pipe and it fit 95% good. Anyhow, car started pulling 400-402 w.h.p. at the same mid 60*F temps. So definitely, the 4"-2.25" reducer hurts topend flow.

http://www.dsmtuners.com/forums/dyno-talk/365759-evo3-16g-dyno-results-2.html#post152163483


Personally I went with a dejon 3 inch intake, couldn't be happer, I also run the a EVO MAS, which has a 3.125 mouth rather than 4 inches like the 2g mas. Dejon can also add proper barb fittings as an option for you emission and vacuum lines.

 

[91stocker]

Are you speed density? If not id just go with the ebay kit for $40 or whatever it is now.

And like said above 4" is much to large for any mhi turbo.

 

[PieEyedPiper]

I did consider the FP intake.. but isn't it missing some of the vacuum line taps I'd need to hook up all the stock lines?

Also, what coupler would I need for a 16g if I went with the FP?

A 4" intake will prove inefficient with a 2.25" inlet.

If you have your stock emission I believe the intake need two nipples of different sized for the vacuum lines.

FP had the coupler, its a 4 inch to 2.25 coupler. I would read up on the FP intake on this link, there is very good information on how it can actually hinder you performance due to the turbulent design of the coupler reducer.



http://www.dsmtuners.com/forums/dyno-talk/365759-evo3-16g-dyno-results-2.html#post152163483


Personally I went with a dejon 3 inch intake, couldn't be happer, I also run the a EVO MAS, which has a 3.125 mouth rather than 4 inches like the 2g mas. Dejon can also add proper barb fittings as an option for you emission and vacuum lines.

Awww, he even quoted the post I was thinking of..