Acura TSX Forum banner

1 - 11 of 11 Posts
G

·
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
what is the best overall CAI/SRI out for the TSX? i was thinking about buying a k&n drop in filter but wanted to make a better informed decision. thanks in advance!
 

·
, Administrator Emeritus
Joined
·
4,123 Posts
Much agreed ... While the Gruppe M carbon cold air intake is also a well design/manufactured product that I'd recommend.
 

·
, Administrator Emeritus
Joined
·
10,660 Posts
Hello, and welcome to the Club PR_TSX :wavey:

Joker - who also likes the Injen CAI :thumbsup:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
634 Posts
I have to ask - does the Injen unit have a bypass valve in case of water intake? I know AEM does (whether or not they make a unit for the TSX, I don't know).

The reason I ask is the reason my wife has a new TSX - hydrostatic locking.

We had a rainy summer on the East Coast, which meant lots of flash flooding because the ground was sodden. Her car was a '95 Neon into which I'd put a '96 Stratus 2.4 DOHC engine, and part of that setup was a Mopar Performance CAI, based on the Iceman unit. The MP piece has a big K&N cone on it. As designed, it sits extremely low. However, her car was an automatic and the filter wouldn't fit in the normal position. So I shortened the tube and modified the battery box so that the filter sat right under the battery (same battery location as the TSX) above the transmission. This put the filter 18" above ground or so, maybe more to the bottom of the inlet tube.

It wasn't enough.

She drove into some semi-deep water during a storm - maybe 12" deep - and that was it. The intake inhaled about a half pint of water, the 2.4 hydrostatically locked, and lunched at least 2 connecting rods. Game over for the sleeper Neon.

Not to tell horror stories, but unless your intake has a bypass valve, don't drive into any puddles you couldn't jump across. I didn't think it would happen to me, either.
 

·
, Moderator Emeritus
Joined
·
5,352 Posts
Duke said:
I have to ask - does the Injen unit have a bypass valve in case of water intake? I know AEM does (whether or not they make a unit for the TSX, I don't know).

The reason I ask is the reason my wife has a new TSX - hydrostatic locking.

We had a rainy summer on the East Coast, which meant lots of flash flooding because the ground was sodden. Her car was a '95 Neon into which I'd put a '96 Stratus 2.4 DOHC engine, and part of that setup was a Mopar Performance CAI, based on the Iceman unit. The MP piece has a big K&N cone on it. As designed, it sits extremely low. However, her car was an automatic and the filter wouldn't fit in the normal position. So I shortened the tube and modified the battery box so that the filter sat right under the battery (same battery location as the TSX) above the transmission. This put the filter 18" above ground or so, maybe more to the bottom of the inlet tube.

It wasn't enough.

She drove into some semi-deep water during a storm - maybe 12" deep - and that was it. The intake inhaled about a half pint of water, the 2.4 hydrostatically locked, and lunched at least 2 connecting rods. Game over for the sleeper Neon.

Not to tell horror stories, but unless your intake has a bypass valve, don't drive into any puddles you couldn't jump across. I didn't think it would happen to me, either.
It does not have a bypass valve, so you need to be careful to avoid hydro-lock. However, I'm not worried about it and when it rains it pours here in Georgia.

More on this can be found here:
http://www.tsxclub.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3755
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
634 Posts
That's a choice to make, and as long as you are totally aware of making it, that's fine. I just want to offer the story of something that directly happened to me, not to a friend of a friend in some urban legend scenario.

A lot of the advertising doesn't mention it except in the fine print, and it should be a real concern for those who are not aware of the possibilities. If you lunch the engine and your insurance company finds out it had a CAI on it, they will take great satisfaction in totally denying your claim.
 

·
, Moderator Emeritus
Joined
·
5,352 Posts
Duke said:
That's a choice to make, and as long as you are totally aware of making it, that's fine. I just want to offer the story of something that directly happened to me, not to a friend of a friend in some urban legend scenario.

A lot of the advertising doesn't mention it except in the fine print, and it should be a real concern for those who are not aware of the possibilities. If you lunch the engine and your insurance company finds out it had a CAI on it, they will take great satisfaction in totally denying your claim.
That's cool...I understand...it's certainly a buyer beware situation. I was just trying to answer the question (more or less). :)

According to the Moss-Magnusson Warranty Act, a dealer can not deny a warranty claim unless they can definitively prove the aftermarket part caused the car malfunction. Below is the wording of the act.
Moss-Magnusson Warranty Act
(15 U.S.C. 2302(C))

(c) Prohibition on conditions for written or implied warranty; waiver by Commission

No warrantor of a consumer product may condition his written or implied warranty of such product on the consumer's using, in connection with such product, any article or service (other than article or service provided without charge under the terms of the warranty) which is identified by brand, trade, or corporate name; except that the prohibition of this subsection may be waived by the Commission if: (1) the warrantor satisfies the Commission that the warranted product will function properly only if the article or service so identified is used in connection with the warranted product, and (2) the Commission finds that such a waiver is in the public interest. The Commission shall identify in the Federal Register, and permit public comment on, all applications for waiver of the prohibition of this subsection, and shall publish in the Federal Register its disposition of any such application, including the reasons therefor.


More reading on the subject can be found here:
http://www.tsxclub.com/forums/showthread.php?t=2834
 

·
, Administrator Emeritus
Joined
·
4,123 Posts
All cold air intakes risk the chance of hydrolocking when driven over it's permissible suction level. That itself is a consideration that should not be ignored when purchasing.

I personally would never drive through a flooded road with or without a CAI. While I agree with Jonathan, you wouldn't have a problem in rain (heavy or light) if you take appropriate care. The Injen is also convertible from a long RAM to a short RAM with a few screws off. That is the recommended way of driving through wet weather and I would quite agree so.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
634 Posts
Let me also say that I'm still using a CAI on my Neon (though in fact I sold the full-length one on eBay and installed the shortened, higher version on my car). Neither of them ever caused trouble in normal rain, that much is true. And they were/are effective. But many people read no further than the exaggerated manufacturer's claims, and slap down the cash without understanding the potential consequences.

Moss-Magnussen will cover you in some situations, but not all. For instance, if you install a header and the car spins a bearing, they can't use the header as proof of abuse and deny the warranty claim. But if you install an intake kit and the car spins a bearing, and they can show the oil is dirty with particulates, then they can say the intake failed to filter effectively and deny your claim. So Moss-Magnussen is not carte blanche protection, but it is better than nothing.
 

·
, Moderator Emeritus
Joined
·
5,352 Posts
I think you mean a short ram intake...right? That is a good alternative to the CAI as well, but it usually provides less gain due to engine bay heat.

The bottom-line is you have to be careful with a CAI to avoid hydro-lock and there are safer alternatives out there via various short ram intakes, Comptech IceBox, Gruppe M...etc. I guess it's all about an individual weighting performance versus risk.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top