16 captured repliesDiscussion pagination complete · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHWhich CAI (996 C2)?
Leading reported evidence
Install 4 years
Performed · outcome unconfirmed
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that performed work without a confirmed outcome
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Leading evidence: 'Install 4 years' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Install 4 years' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
..but the Evo uses a K&N filter element as well, so why does it not have the same problem as the K&N CAI?
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
16 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
Rennlist: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
1 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Outcome without a verified action link
That happened to me once and I removed and spayed down the MAF with throttle body cleaner which fixed the CEL.
I just got back from a DE, which went very well. New PSS9s and MPSCs worked exceedingly well. Unfortunately, I uncovered a problem - when I'm behind a loud car I can't hear my own motor, which means I'm studying the tach when I should be looking up the road.
I'm thinking the cheapest, most efficient way to get more volume is through a CAI. I don't need it to make more power (though wouldn't mind), and I don't want or need it to be VERY loud - just a good bit more quality sound at high revs would be great, without a lot of headaches.
So which CAI should I use? Evo? How much should I pay? And can I do this work myself?
I have the EVO on my 986. It has been installed for 4 years with no issues. It does really wake up the sound of the motor (on my Boxster) and throttle blips can be heard much more easily with this set-up.
I don't have the EVO on my 996 but I have not heard of many problems with it.
However, many people have experienced nothing but problems with the K&N set-up.
Good luck
Some of us have no problems with the K&N and gained 22 hp at the wheels with a K&N 63-series intake and Fabspeed mufflers. Don;t know if you will get the same gains out of the EVO.
The way to stay away from the problems with the K&N is to wipe any of the excess oil that came with the filter from the manufacturer. This can be done by wrapping it with newspaper and letting it sit over-night. The issue with the K&N is the oil getting drawn up out of the filter and coating the MAF sensor, causing a CEL. That happened to me once and I removed and spayed down the MAF with throttle body cleaner which fixed the CEL.
Silly Porsche, they went and designed the X51 Power Kit with higher flow heads, higher lift and duration cams, more aggressive fuel and ignition mapping, and revised intake for a lousy 25 hp.
Instead, they could have bolted in the K&N 63 and gone home early.....
Good Dyno's require good equipment, operators, and little atmospheric variability. Additionally, dyno numbers can be easily manipulated. I'm sorry but I just don't believe K&N or Vivid's numbers.
I would "guess" that these intakes (K&N or Evo) are probably worth less than 10hp (probably around 5hp).
Additionally, to really realize power gains they should probably be done in conjunction with an ECU re-flash.
But the sound is a lot of fun!!
That's why I didn't go by their dyno sheets and had my car dynoed twice on a Dynojet 248C in similar conditions (correction factores were 1.04 and 1.03). I put no credit in dyno sheets posted by manufacturers for the reasons mentioned. The same goes for butt dynoes. My numbers were 270.1 hp @ 6200 rpms as the baseline and 292.1 hp @ 6600 with just the intake and exhaust, no reflash. I didn't believe I would gain 22 RWHP until I saw it on a dyno with my own car. K&N claimed they got 23 RWHP from their intake, very doubtful based on my experience. For the $850 I paid for the K&N kit and the used Fabspeed exhaust, I didn't see a lot of risk. As you can see, it was still a good bang for the buck. Will you get the same gains with the EVOMS intake and a PSE? Dyno it an post the results.
I have been considering either the Upsolute or the GIAC reprogram, but I am really questionable about the gains. I have never seen an independant dyno of a 3.6l with either program. I am only going to do it if is guarenteed. I know that the local Upsolute dealer gives you 30 days to decide or swithc back, but I don't know about GIAC? I actually doubt they are able to make the gains they claim.
I must admit if your numbers are true I'm shocked with your gains. However, based on the numerous complaints about this product on 6speed and rennlist I wouldn't risk it on my car.
I'm glad that your experience has been trouble free!!
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.
