19 Limited with Ram airflow

[Mr.Gigglez]

An 18% increase in mpg is impressive. If it carries over to hwy, you should be in the 24-25 mpg range. That is nearing the eco diesel.

I kno this might sound crazy but I'm at 24.5 on the highway... With 36k miles now on the truck I'm seeing awesome mpg's ...city is at around 15.5 to 15.9 sometimes see 16

 

[Mr.Gigglez]

Add: i travel for a living, i spend alot of time in Colorado ( no mods ) , i live in NC ...driving around Colorado my mpg sucks *** it goes to about 12.5 to 13 in city and around 19 to 20 on highway ... Heading back east my #'get back to normal ...these averages are in NC on east coast and stay that way until i get back up to those " high " mountain tops ! ... I wonder what kind of #'s I would see with the ram air installed

 

[bigwhttrk19dt]

Add: i travel for a living, i spend alot of time in Colorado ( no mods ) , i live in NC ...driving around Colorado my mpg sucks *** it goes to about 12.5 to 13 in city and around 19 to 20 on highway ... Heading back east my #'get back to normal ...these averages are in NC on east coast and stay that way until i get back up to those " high " mountain tops ! ... I wonder what kind of #'s I would see with the ram air installed

My "guesstimate" is that ...modern fuel injection is ... supposed to ... compensate for changes in the air ( atmosphere )... thin mountain air, sea level, etc. If you ever watch drag races on TV... when they race a national event in the mountainous regions you always hear them state " changes in the fuel system to compensation for the thin air". Personally... and only personally, ...adding more air, if the fuel system, accompanied by the ECU making ignition timing changes... are not made... I would suspect an overly lean system. I think this is a great question for a service mgr at your NC dealership. Matter of fact I'm going to ask my NE dealer the same. For over $900 MSRP, I can think of better ways to spend the $$$ even though aesthetically it's cool looking. My aesthetic preference is for the SRT-type hood...however the only one I have found to date is made of fiberglass, so would be heavier than the stock aluminum one. Can't win... i.e ...coming up with something special , likely voiding the warranty.

 

[bigwhttrk19dt]

I kno this might sound crazy but I'm at 24.5 on the highway... With 36k miles now on the truck I'm seeing awesome mpg's ...city is at around 15.5 to 15.9 sometimes see 16

Not unreasonable ... if you "keep your foot out of it " ... and maintain a steady speed. By 2005 Silverado with the 5.3L V8 still gets 17+mpg in the city and can get 23-24 on the highway...if I keep it steady. Plus 3:21 highway gears will help. If you have 3:92 gears, then 24.5 mpg is amazing !

 

[Mr.Gigglez]

Not unreasonable ... if you "keep your foot out of it " ... and maintain a steady speed. By 2005 Silverado with the 5.3L V8 still gets 17+mpg in the city and can get 23-24 on the highway...if I keep it steady. Plus 3:21 highway gears will help. If you have 3:92 gears, then 24.5 mpg is amazing !

Thats the thing. 3:21 gears yes , heavy on pedal absolutely ! I quit focusing on the mpg and keeping a light foot on the pedal . The 1st 18k miles were ****ty and almost made me want to get rid of the truck, but now ; I can comfortably live with its performance and enjoy it !!

 

[bigwhttrk19dt]

I contacted VARAMAIR since it is somewhat of a variation of the FCA RamAir assembly except for the top cover and a bit of extension to the front skirt. I was asking whether or not they include, bedsides installation instructions, the need for a mod or reflash to the ECU/ECM for optimum air, fuel and ignition giving the increase in air. Response - To date ( 5 days )... nada, zilch. While I still believe the RAM, Ram Air is great aesthetically, not sure if I'll be opening the hood much at local cruise night... but would like an increase in torque which could translate into mpg.
In reviewing the RAMAIR installation instructions I find a "tell" which could be ( note "could be" ) FCA's window if later there is an engine ( lean burn ) issue. I've included that in the attachment.
As a long time ( I mean a really long time ) Mopar gearhead I like the forums to get info . Thank you.

 

[Surfingjeff]

Just case in point the standard OEM intake has a chock section measured at 2” x 5” at 350 CFM Intake volume at highway speed the velocity is 6000 feet per minute which is significant back pressure equates. The 2”x5” is just under 3.5” round at that velocity it’s about 12” w.g water gauge per 100 feet of duct . If you look at the stock intake you have several 90 degree turns equals 25’ each straight pipe also those flex section adds static . My estimate would be about 50’ of straight smooth pipe is 6” w.g. of static on the stock intake . So if you take The Ram air unit it removes all the chock sections and hose so you negate the static but the air velocity at 70 miles a hour is 6000 feet per minute you therefore reduce the static by 6” but gain about the same 6” w.g. This is significant .See picture below of the chock section Hard to see but the top of the intake on stock Ram 1500 Hemi on bottom of this picture . I typically do calculations on dust and vacuum systems in air ,pollution control. The way you test it is with Dyno but I can see the gains . Thing about the horse power it takes at vacuum pressure at 350 cfm . Just case in point just finished 1000 cfm vacuum system for small amusement park in Anaheim Ca they required 100 horse power . So 350 cfm at slightly lower velocity may equal the horse power gains for that efficiency as quoted . I think that is the reasons that CAIs work and also this rams especially with the higher density cold air help these engines . I have no idea why Ram would design such a chock on the intake makes sense on back pressure on exhaust for lower rpm around town driving. Just my two cents. If I mis calculated anything let me know .

 

[bigwhttrk19dt]

I really like your analysis. If you are not an engineer...then you must be one heck of a tech. Kudos ! I see you note " at 70mph " and I agree, therefore at lower speed ( and also therefore with a lower airflow into the intake ) it would appear the value is insignificant, except for the aesthetic value...and that's what I believe the FCA engineers were going for... hand in hand with the bean counters. Ram Air is nothing new. Goes back to the 60s & 70s on the big block drag cars. But can be noted, cars with flat hoods and open element air cleaners ( e.g. 396/375 Chevy, LS6 ) did very well. ) I admit to having a Hemi scoop on 65 Belvedere 440BB but it's just for cruise nights. While I contemplated the FCA system, I also made note of their "escape clause" with the instructions. "Off Road Use" etc. so even if you used the vehicle / system as a grocery getter, there was a "gotcha" if something went wrong ( like the roller lifter issues with the 5.7L Hemi).

 

[Skater]

WoW! You lost me after 2”x 5” because I was pretty good at arithmetic in school, but my trying to understand the rest of your information is like me opening up a book of braille and trying to understand the pattern of bumps on the blank pages without pictures or ink. I will have to take your word for it because I am still scratching my head to try to understand if 6000 feet per minute is significant back pressure for an air intake system. So, your summation statement about mis calculation… yeah, I think I will just say… you are far smarter than me at calculations of cubic feet per minute of air density pressures, volumes, and everything related thereto. Thanks for the great study and information, and causing me late night lucubration.

 

[Surfingjeff]

I also forgot to mention the carbon filter on the stock intake is considerable we use the granular type of carbon filter with the same depth that equates to .25”-.33” of static dependent on RPM. So this also equates to less static pressure on more horse power when you utilize the ram type of cool air intakes .

 

[WXman]

An 18% increase in mpg is impressive. If it carries over to hwy, you should be in the 24-25 mpg range. That is nearing the eco diesel.

Sorry but I’d need to see much more proof of anything along those lines, if it were that easy they’d all come that way.

I've been doing some testing lately using a Scangauge II to monitor intake air temperature at the MAF sensor. What I've found is that when using the snorkle ductwork to pull air from the grille, the intake air temperatures are EXACTLY the same at highway speed compared to ingesting "hot" air from the engine bay that is not directed from the grille. In other words, while crusing there is zero difference in intake air temperature with ductwork that pulls out of the grille area. Now, while stopped at a red light I do see more heat soak of the MAF sensor due engine heat directly entering the airbox. But, as soon as I begin to drive again the temps decrease rapidly and return to exactly where the temps are WITH ductwork.

This tells me that "cold air intake" kits do absolutely nothing to truly affect the temperature of air while driving.

Also, gaining fuel economy? No. You don't use less fuel by stuffing in more air. That would throw off the stoichiometric ratio and **** off the ECU. Any gain in fuel economy is going to be placebo effect or from not calculating things apples to apples. It doesn't work like that. More air requires more fuel.