# S&b Cold Air Intake



## clarkely (Sep 15, 2008)

Finally decided on one and installed it tonight!!

S&B cold air intake









Sounds good..............

Now should i upgrade from the 3" exhaust to 3 1/2"SS cat back exhaust???

Decisions - Decisions - Decisions.......


----------



## Airboss (Jul 14, 2007)

S & B is good stuff and your install looks S-W-E-E-T!!!


----------



## Piecemaker (Nov 15, 2007)

Looks real nice.

I would suggest it. You are now taking more air in. You should now leave more out. 3 1/2" would be nice or even dual 3's.

When I did mine I lost that air sucking sound. Now all the sound is the exhaust. Performance is up front.


----------



## Collinsfam_WY (Nov 9, 2006)

Sweet looking intake Clarke! Nicely done









-CC


----------



## nynethead (Sep 23, 2005)

3.5" think big they make 4 and 5 " for big flow.


----------



## AZthunderations (Aug 21, 2008)

Good job, looks nice. Remember now that you have an oiled air filter that the fumes/vapors from the filter oil will coat the mass air flow sensor and it will pick up particles that happen to get by the filter. You should clean it with an electronics/MAFS cleaner only, like you would clean a tuner with, not carb or brake cleaner. I found this out the hard way and had to replace my MAFS. Just takes a few minutes to spray it down and let it dry. You may not notice a problem for a long time, but keep it in your memory bank. Those sensors are built to be in dry air and when introduced to oiled air will eventually not send the correct signal and may even shoot a code to the computer and set off a check/service engine light.
Remember too that a bigger exhaust is only as good as the smallest resriction and that an engine runs better and gets better milage with a certain amount of back pressure. There are some formulas out there for what exhaust to use with certain air flows and other engine upgrades, chips, etc.


----------



## BoaterDan (Jul 1, 2005)

What are you looking for? And do you care how loud it gets?

Headers are going to be more bang for the buck on the exhaust side.


----------



## clarkely (Sep 15, 2008)

AZthunderations said:


> Good job, looks nice. Remember now that you have an oiled air filter that the fumes/vapors from the filter oil will coat the mass air flow sensor and it will pick up particles that happen to get by the filter. You should clean it with an electronics/MAFS cleaner only, like you would clean a tuner with, not carb or brake cleaner. I found this out the hard way and had to replace my MAFS. Just takes a few minutes to spray it down and let it dry. You may not notice a problem for a long time, but keep it in your memory bank. Those sensors are built to be in dry air and when introduced to oiled air will eventually not send the correct signal and may even shoot a code to the computer and set off a check/service engine light.
> Remember too that a bigger exhaust is only as good as the smallest resriction and that an engine runs better and gets better milage with a certain amount of back pressure. There are some formulas out there for what exhaust to use with certain air flows and other engine upgrades, chips, etc.


Thanks for the heads up!! Where would i find these formula's???? I know the back pressure will also affect my torque more than my HP. I do no want to necessarily want to gain HP with out gaining or losing torque........

that is why i was going to stay single pipe................i just need to see if the gains of going bigger are there and are worth it? or is a 3" pipe big enough?

Questions .....questions......questions.............


----------



## azthroop (Jun 16, 2007)

More Power!!! Love it! I went with the K&N, but it gets the same thing done!

Good job!

azthroop


----------



## California Jim (Dec 11, 2003)

clarkely said:


> Now should i upgrade from the 3" exhaust to 3 1/2"SS cat back exhaust???
> Decisions - Decisions - Decisions.......


Just one man's experience with all of this "performance" stuff on a gas engine. See my post #8 HERE . I would save your money.


----------



## clarkely (Sep 15, 2008)

California Jim said:


> Now should i upgrade from the 3" exhaust to 3 1/2"SS cat back exhaust???
> Decisions - Decisions - Decisions.......


Just one man's experience with all of this "performance" stuff on a gas engine. See my post #8 HERE . I would save your money.
[/quote]

I have pretty much decided i would...............from the research i had done and asking people i know and trust........they said you already have 3" that is good enough................and single is what i want for torque/backpressure/towing anyhow..........

I do like the sound and it is snappier and appears to be an improvement (Intake), will be towing the trailer tomorrow, but i am sure I will see it the same way you did.

Did you have the 410's in from new or did you add it later? Did you have the dealer do factory or did you do it yourself?

I really think i should do the rear. Have you experienced any tranny issues?


----------



## rdvholtwood (Sep 18, 2008)

Nice Job Clarke - can't wait to see and hear it!!


----------



## California Jim (Dec 11, 2003)

clarkely said:


> Now should i upgrade from the 3" exhaust to 3 1/2"SS cat back exhaust???
> Decisions - Decisions - Decisions.......


Just one man's experience with all of this "performance" stuff on a gas engine. See my post #8 HERE . I would save your money.
[/quote]

I have pretty much decided i would...............from the research i had done and asking people i know and trust........they said you already have 3" that is good enough................and single is what i want for torque/backpressure/towing anyhow..........

I do like the sound and it is snappier and appears to be an improvement (Intake), will be towing the trailer tomorrow, but i am sure I will see it the same way you did.

Did you have the 410's in from new or did you add it later? Did you have the dealer do factory or did you do it yourself?

I really think i should do the rear. Have you experienced any tranny issues?
[/quote]

I had a local 4x4 shop install the Eaton 4:10 rear gears as they are experts at doing this type of thing. Also the Eaton stuff is very high quality.

I replaced the factory 3:73 gears that were known to get toasty under heavy towing conditions. This was done on a 1999 1/2 ton 2x4 Suburban. Although my tranny seemed to be OK when I sold it, it was starting to do some strange shifting and I suspect it was close to being "done".

I have just recently had the torque converter replaced on my newer 2007 3/4 ton Suburban that has about 30,000 miles on it. I got a service engine light saying the tranny was slipping and this is what it turned out to be. I have since towed over 2000 miles in the last 30 days and it is fine, so I guess they got it right. The Burb I have now was ordered with factory 4:10 gears.

Jim


----------



## BoaterDan (Jul 1, 2005)

From my experience fiddling with my LT1 Trans Am back in the day, I'd say you put headers on that baby and I'm 100% positive you'll notice a difference, but as Jim experienced, maybe the difference pulling the trailer up a hill isn't worth it.

I think the key is the difference between daily driving, taking off from a light with some groceries, and towing 7,000 pounds. You may see a header or chip ad claim "over 15 horsepower" on your gas engine. But the diesel towing guys would just say horsepower schmorsepower.


----------



## Airboss (Jul 14, 2007)

BoaterDan said:


> ...But the diesel towing guys would just say horsepower schmorsepower.


Indeed, horsepower means very little to us. Problem is, once you've felt the torque of a diesel you want more. So, basically, same story different (type of) engine.


----------



## BoaterDan (Jul 1, 2005)

Airboss said:


> Indeed, horsepower means very little to us. Problem is, once you've felt the torque of a diesel you want more. So, basically, same story different (type of) engine.


But the diesel tuners know they're going straight for those improvements. My point is even a modest HP gain might be detectable, and one that changes the sound for sure is noticeable psychologically at least, but they might have zero to do with improvements in towing. Think that was Jim's experience, if I understood him right.

When I raced the TA it was interesting how two cars could do same 1/4 mile times but with trap speeds a several mph apart, which is an illustration of how subtle these differences can be.


----------



## California Jim (Dec 11, 2003)

BoaterDan said:


> ...Think that was Jim's experience, if I understood him right.


Exactly.


----------

