ClubWRX Forum banner

1 - 20 of 21 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I have a 2010 wrx with a tb exhaust and stage 2 tune with a cobb ap. the aem cai and cobb sf intake both have a stage 2 map for the ap, and i was wondering which one would make the most power or be better because i could basically choose either one. thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,393 Posts
According to their map notes they seem to be the same to me... Stage 2 93 octane 17.5 % HP, 23.9% Torque for both...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
51 Posts
I've been contemplating on which one of those intakes I want to purchase for my car as well. I think it comes down to preference of the look of the intake under the hood and whether or not you feel comfortable having a CAI that sits low. I haven't been able to find any threads that claim one to be superior to the other.
 

·
Master Baiter
Joined
·
22,114 Posts
If you go the Cobb route, you have to also purchase the airbox. Other than that, you're not going to notice much of a difference other than sound, maybe...

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
279 Posts
If you go the Cobb route, you have to also purchase the airbox. Other than that, you're not going to notice much of a difference other than sound, maybe...

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk
+1

Get the airbox w/cobb sf intake, and when seriously comparing both applications, the cobb is the better route to go. Shorter piping = faster air flow, composite materials = better heat dissipation as opposed to the AEM (aluminum I believe?). And with the airbox, it has an opening which allows airflow from the fender to travel to the filter anyways, so it effectively becomes a 'CAI.' Also, if you ever plan on getting a FMIC, you require a SRI, CAI gets in the way apparently of the piping.

Although, until you putting down 350+ whp, you prob won't notice much of a difference from either intake anyways :D
 

·
Gold Member
Joined
·
2,175 Posts
+1

Get the airbox w/cobb sf intake, and when seriously comparing both applications, the cobb is the better route to go. Shorter piping = faster air flow, composite materials = better heat dissipation as opposed to the AEM (aluminum I believe?). And with the airbox, it has an opening which allows airflow from the fender to travel to the filter anyways, so it effectively becomes a 'CAI.' Also, if you ever plan on getting a FMIC, you require a SRI, CAI gets in the way apparently of the piping.


Although, until you putting down 350+ whp, you prob won't notice much of a difference from either intake anyways :D
+2. This very topic has recently been covered ad nauseam BY YOU here - http://www.clubwrx.net/forums/engine-modifications/134350858-cobb-sf-intake.html, and elsewhere on this forum. No offense, but PLEASE search topics before posting, and never post a duplicate thread.
 

·
Master Baiter
Joined
·
22,114 Posts
J_Maher_WRX said:
Although, until you putting down 350+ whp, you prob won't notice much of a difference from either intake anyways :D
You likely won't notice a difference regardless of power output. At some point (because dyno numbers vary, we can't put a cap on it), the stock-sized intake will be a restriction and you'll need to go to something in the 70+mm range.

Sent from my Droid using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
279 Posts
True enough, that was just a very rough approximation. But you're right, running each intake back to back you are not likely to notice any difference. What it boils down to really, is the companies ability to advertise their product, which I feel as though AEM does a better job. Biggest deciding factor for me = ease of installation & maintenance + with the facts I posted above, I couldn't see any reason to go with the AEM.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,751 Posts
To each their own. Personally I think the AEM is a better product. Some people disagree, but that doesn't mean they're right.

Watch out for MAF issues...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,393 Posts
To each their own. Personally I think the AEM is a better product. Some people disagree, but that doesn't mean they're right.

Watch out for MAF issues...
Eh?... It's a COBB designed product with their own map for it so why would there be any issues? But I agree with you on the AEM in the fender it would get colder air with more benefits...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,751 Posts
Because it has an oiled filter which are well-known to cause issues on any car with a MAF.
 

·
Captain James of the SS Impreza has gone down with
Joined
·
8,921 Posts
Because it has an oiled filter which are well-known to cause issues on any car with a MAF.
Just gotta keep it clean. I have no problems with my Perrin Big MAF which came with an oiled filter.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,393 Posts
Because it has an oiled filter which are well-known to cause issues on any car with a MAF.
Yea, OK. But that's caused by user error of over oiling, after they clean it... Not really a problem if done properly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
I actually have both systems sitting in my garage right now. They are both constructed very well. I think it's a little unfair that Cobb Charges for the airbox as much as they do for the intake system. I haven't installed either of them. I believe AEM went the smart route with using an oil free filter vs Cobb's oiled filter. Aem also offers a splash protection sleeve which I hear works very well from keeping dirt and crap from building up onto the filter. Cobb's piping is definitely shorter than AEM's piping. Something that really scares me about AEM's intake is where it's positioned in the engine bay. We recently had an intense storm over here in Los Angeles flooding a few streets here and there. The water was up to half the length of my wheels. I know it would take accelerating WOT in a puddle to suck up enough water to hydra-lock the engine, but it's still something I worry about.

I decided to stick with Cobb's system because since I installed Cobb's downpipe and OTS maps, why not keep it all in the same family?

Oh and here's something to consider as well. Even though AEM's filter is an oil free filter, you still have to sell out $15-$20 for the special cleaning solution. You just can't use soap or dish detergent. No matter what route you take, you'll still have to spend the same amount of money on the cleaning/reoiling kits.

Here are some side by side shots of both Intakes.
Note that I forgot to include the silicone piping for Cobb's intake. :(




 

·
Gold Member
Joined
·
2,175 Posts
Stick an AEM dryflow filter on the Cobb SFI. Done and done.
 

·
Gold Member
Joined
·
2,175 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
21 Posts
I gotta admit, that's a genius idea lokey...
The only thing is, would a different filter, with different filter material cause differences in overall measurements of airflow. I'm sure there's a reason Cobb selected the oil filter types. I could be wrong... but I'm curious now and would like to swap my oiled filter out.
 

·
Gold Member
Joined
·
2,175 Posts
Oiled filters provide better filtering, but less air flow. Conversely, the dryflow provides better airflow, but less filtering. Each has their upside and downside. As far as switching it up, considering the Cobb OTS map for both is the same, I can't see how it's not safe. If you have any doubts or just need some peace of mind, call Cobb to verify.
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top