Honda Ridgeline Owners Club Forums banner

G2 aem air intake

80K views 227 replies 50 participants last post by  brickfollett 
#1 ·
#7 ·
If it helps the engine breathe better it's a good idea. No downsides other than listening to the people here who whine about anyone using anything aftermarket whatsoever.

if the stock intake already flows more air than the engine can ingest, what value does such an aftermarket gizmo add? So upgrade where it adds value, but don't spend money just because you think it adds value... unless it really does. Now if you just want the look and are willing to spend cash for little or no benefit, so be it.
 
#5 ·
I've had them on other vehicles as well, and liked them. I know how I am, so I'll post some pics and opinions once it's installed. Hoping an exhaust becomes available soon.. The G2 doesn't sound bad when you get on the gas, but a deeper exhaust note would be nice.
 
#6 ·
If that's a metal tube we see in the picture, there's going to be some heat soak to deal with in real-world driving. Hoping some other firms devise a non-metallic, better-insulated system if the goal is truly to drop intake air temps. K&N seemed to have a decent non-metallic approach which we evaluated in building my cold-air system for our S2000 STR car. Vs. the stock Honda system raising IATs 25-30 degrees from outside ambient (meaning it sucked hot underhood air), the design I did only shows 7-10 degrees over ambient temp per the Hondata datalogs.
 
#8 ·
I had an AEM CAI on my Prelude and loved it. You could hear the whistle of air every time I got on it. Also it was located in the front lower fender, outside of the engine bay...hence CAI. This one for the Ridgeline is really a short ram intake. It is located inside the engine bay and realistically is not a true CAI. Also, from the instructions, it still "uses" the OEM intake box, there must not be any holes in the lower engine bay for a true CAI. They did report a gain on 13 HP on the Pilots dyno test though.
 
#12 ·
Thanks. I stand corrected.
 
#15 ·
I think AEM could have done better with the design. Like others have said it just sits in the engine bay and uses the factory air inlet tube to "direct" air to the filter on the AEM. I wish they would've made an intake that included a new air inlet, so that the intake is truly a cold air intake. I do think the intake looks nice and I've run AEM intakes on other cars I've owned and they're well constructed.
 
#20 · (Edited)
What's the value as "proof" from a manufacturer's own website vs an independent test??

I am most certainly dubious of a dyno graph that shows gains of around 10 hp at low RPM of 3500, not to mention that the trend in the graph appears to be a proportionally larger gap between stock and an AEM "CAI" as the RPM drops. Really? Is that some sort of magical resonance effect? Do you really think the stock intake is restricting 10hp worth of power at 3500rpm??? If that is legit y'all should buy this intake in a heartbeat . . .Not to mention the 2mpg gain that Devito says you will get. . . .
 
#30 ·
I had both v1 and v2 versions of the AEM CAI on my S2000... the change in engine note was quite noticeable, particularly when the cams switched over at the VTEC point. It had a much heavier growl to it. Once I added a different exhaust and straight pipe, it was insane. Changes on the intake side have a surprisingly large and noticeable effect on the exhaust side.

I do wish AEM would post more "average" gains rather than "peak" gains, though... it's not deceptive advertising, per se, but it does lead the uninitiated to a misleading conclusion. The 8% peak gain only happens at a very narrow window of RPMs, a place you'll likely only be at for a fraction of a second, and right at the top of the RPM band... a more realistic figure is the 3-4% gain over the majority of the power band. Not insignificant, but not earth-shattering, either.

AEM's results are verified time and again with reputable shops doing dyno pulls, so you can rest assured their graphs are accurate.
 
#31 · (Edited)
Did you look at their graph posted in this thread? They are showing a 10hp (10%) gain at 3500rpm and a minimum of 6hp gain from 4k to 6K. If this graph is accurate Honda completely F'd up their intake design and the AEM intake will be the cats pajama's of mods. To good to be true??? Then its usually not. . .
 
#32 · (Edited)
You have to take into account that Honda spends a lot of it's time developing these particular vehicles to be quiet, fuel efficient and emissions friendly vehicles. That is because the majority of people who purchase them, do not want a loud obnoxious rice burner that gets 5 miles to the gallon.

However, there is the minority, me being one of them, that likes to hear what Honda engineers really intended these engines to sound like. As soon as you remove the restrictive, emissions friendly, noise cancelling intake and exhaust systems from these engines you instantly hear and feel them come to life. This is where aftermarket companies like to spend their development time!
 
#33 · (Edited)
If this increases my MPG by even 1mpg, then it should pay for itself within 7500 miles.

I like mods that pay for themselves so i pulled the trigger and have one on its way. :D

Can't wait to replace exhaust when that becomes available.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pegger
#35 ·
First off, the stock intake design on GenI and GenII Ridgelines gets its air from outside the engine compartment. Its already a cold air intake. Its not likely that you will get any gains from the "cold" part of the equation.

AEM's intake for the GenI gets rid of the air box but does not wall off the area to prevent hot air from entering. They don't have a Dyno chart for it and probably for good reason as it probably has a negative effect. If you want to hear your stock engine more on the GenI then by all means install an intake. The air box is not the limiting factor on the stock GenI intake setup, the throttle body is.

GenII? AEM's dyno chart for the 16 Pilot is well worthy of suspicion. It is HIGHLY UNLIKELY that the the low RPM results (and the apparent trend that the graph is showing below 3500rpm) is remotely accurate. Suggesting that the stock intake is leaving close to 10hp on the table at 3500 rpm should have anyone's BS meter going off. After 4k the graph shows a consistent gain of at least 6hp through a wide RPM that eventually grows at its high RPM peak. With no cold air advantage over the stock setup again the BS meter is going off. The engine progressively needs more air as the RPM's build yet somehow the stock airbox /filter is choking it consistently up until close to redline where it finally is starts to have an increased effect?? BS!
 
#36 ·
Are you claiming false advertising? If so then what they are doing is illegal and i suggest you take them to court over it if you have facts to back up your claims. :wink:
 
#37 ·
Does anyone have any data showing that a Short/Ram Air intake actually causes the IAT's to be warmer than the stock intake w/snorkel?

@ 40-60MPH the Live data on my scan tool is showing that my IATs are pretty much the same as the temps on my gauge clusters heads up reading for the outside temps. Just wondering where all this warm air intake info is coming from.
 
#40 ·
I challenge anyone to notice less than a 10hp gain on the butt dyno on a 240hp engine... anyone. Our bodies are simply not tuned (no pun intended) to that degree. We may notice a louder noise and think we're going faster, but it's a placebo effect.

I was good friends with a fellow S2000 owner. We both had the AEM installed, but his car was miserable to drive, particularly at the VTEC switchover point. For weeks he was scratching his head. Long story short, it was remedied by taking the AEM off... and in doing so, someone finally realized that he had shoved the pipe so far into the filter, it was hitting the cap and cutting off most of the airflow. The intake design was great, but a failed install caused a major failure in its operation.

If you note in that video, he got the temp the same (bravo), but the humidity was WAY different. Dryer air means bigger hp numbers, and he tested the stock box at a humidity 16% lower than the CAI. I saw nothing in the first half of that video to lead me to believe he's applying any SAE correction to his numbers for the wide variation in humidity... so to claim that's a fair test strains credulity. Here's a decent explanation of the equation:
https://wahiduddin.net/calc/cf.htm

With all of that said, I'm bowing out of this discussion. No amount of discussion or factual information will appear to change your mind, so I will not waste any further breath on the matter.
 
#41 · (Edited)
The AC system on most vehicles uses around 5HP. I sure as hell can tell the difference in performance (highway cruising in particular) when the AC is switched on and off in my GenI. I would guess that most people could do the same . . .

I don't think that you could reasonably argue that the difference in humidity explains the absence of 3-5% improvement in power over a wide and useable RPM range in his real world test. That's stretching credulity.

Here's an S2000 video:

It makes a bit more power with the CAI (Don't know the brand) so for the performance minded its worth doing on that car. It aint a Ridgeline of course and neither is the old integra. . . .

I'm still waiting for the "factual information". Perhaps some of the early adopters of the GenII who decide to install the intake can provide some.
 
#42 ·
The discussion is great as long as we deal with intakes and not get into personalities. If in the end, we agree to disagree, that is ok too. But the discussion is certainly welcome as long as the discussion doesn't break down into a name calling contest.

After all, how else do we learn if we can't argue a point and either prove or disprove it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: plex
#44 ·
great cant wait to hear more about it

-Does the engine sound change much after install?
-How does the intake sound at 70mph+?
-Faster off the line?
-Do you notice more hp/tq in any ranges?

I was looking under the hood and it seems like it will section off air from around the engine and mostly draw from air coming under the vehicle, in which case a slight scoop on the underside could be attached to really draw more air up to the intake... cant wait to get mine tomorrow and start tinkering :)
 
#47 ·
I was looking under the hood and it seems like it will section off air from around the engine and mostly draw from air coming under the vehicle, in which case a slight scoop on the underside could be attached to really draw more air up to the intake... cant wait to get mine tomorrow and start tinkering :)
Be careful here. You don't want to inadvertently create an opportunity to hydrolock the engine. That will not be covered under warranty.

The G1 RL was designed to operate in 26.8 inches of water. I'm not sure if the G2 RL carries that design over or not.

http://www.ridgelineownersclub.com/forums/649642-post14.html
 
Top