Jeep Enthusiast Forums banner

Air intake for wk hemi

1 reading
7.9K views 41 replies 11 participants last post by  90grandoneer  
#1 ·
I've been looking for an air intake for my jeep wk hemi. I have my eyes on the k&n 77-1549. Does anyone have one or know of anyone that's selling one? Other intakes are acceptable as well. Just trying to change the stock intake on mine. Thanks!
 
#7 ·
I carry Volant as well but it's not often I sell them for the WK HEMI these days. The kit is designed for the SRT8 and as I recall it requires some alteration to fit the 5.7. Could someone enlighten me? I can't recall now what it entails.
 
#13 ·
I just put the k&n 57-1549 on my 5.7L wk. I am happy with it performance and sound-wise, but the AFE kit I had on my 4.7L WJ was made better (fit, finish, and quality of materials). AFE dry filter is excellent too. I wrap the black plastic tubes with insulated tape, so the air doesnt warm up while flowing into a hot engine. Looks crappy, but seems to work.

If you dont care about the price difference between the kits, see Kolak for the AFE or volant over the K&N.
 
#14 ·

Attachments

#21 ·
Since this thread is about CAI's and filtration, all obviously in an effort to gain a little more power and quite a bit more noise, I thought I throw this little tidbit out, FWIW. Certainly we're all aware that all filters are not created equally, and the same applies for filter material and filter area. This info. comes from the July 2013 edition of Mopar Muscle Magazine in which they cited the horsepower and torque losses caused by the various engine accessories......Power Steering Pump, Water Pump, Alternator, Paper Element Air Filter, High Flow Air Filter, and 5W20 oil vs. 20W50 oil. Since we're just talking filters here, that's all I'll show. They first ran the engine on a dyno with NO filter at all to get a baseline and then ran it with a 3 inch paper filter and finally with an AirAid 4 inch tapered, high flow filter. Here are the losses caused by the two types of filters when compared to the baseline (no filter) configuration. Horsepower and torque losses are based on "Peak" dyno numbers:

Paper Filter Loss: 14.4 horsepower and 10.4 lbs. ft. of torque

AirAid High Flow Filter Loss: 5.9 horsepower and 5.5 lb. ft. of torque

So, if you're running your engines at WOT all the time, you'll do better with the high flow filter than with the stock paper one.....but I think we all already knew that.
 
#22 ·
90 Grand, what was the test car?
I'm a big fan of the Legmaker CAI on the LX Hemis because they work very well and are Dyno and track tested by third parties like MoPar Muscle. There are a lot of CAI's out there that do nothing or make things worse.
But as pointed out, the net gain of all of these proven CAI's is up around 5500 rpm. The gain of 8+ hp and 5ft/lb is really nominal on a stock block unless you need every ounce of power to trip the lights.
The other side of the equation when discussing CAI's is the degree of filtration offered by the stock air intake versus the aftermarket filter systems being either simple drop in filters or complete CAI systems. I do not believe that porous oil saturated filters do a better job than closed mesh paper elements particularly when it's up to the owner to remove and clean the elements.

Having ventilated my technical opinion (FWIW), when all is said and done, the CAI does provide that beautiful song when you nail it at 4,000 rpm. My solution was to install a 2010 SRT8 intake and cut a big hole in the bottom of the air box. Looks stock, easy to replace filters and sounds mean.
 
#23 ·
They used an Auto Performance Engine's engine dyno for the tests. All they said is that the engines (a couple of them) were "big blocks". I guess that means our results could vary, especially since we're running small blocks. As far as filters go, I used to run K & N's on both my Hemi's and now run AFE's in both of them, using LX modified SRT airboxes in both. The K &N's work better when they're a little dirty, but they're good for filtering out the rocks and small boulders.

On my WK I did the same thing you did.....cut a bigger hole in the bottom of the airbox and also added another hole in the front, like the stock WK box has. On the LX I left the stock hole (4 in.) in the bottom and drilled another hole in the front of the box and routed a tube to the back of the grill. Both seem to work very well. Below are some pix of the LX setup. The WK setup is almost identical, except reversed since the airbox is on the opposite side.
 

Attachments

#29 ·
If you add the Airaid tube, a good high flow air filter and add another inlet to the airbox you'll have a CAI that is every bit as good as any $200-300 aftermarket one. If you're more after the noise, you'll have to spend the extra $$$, but IMO, it's nowhere near worth it. You can get more noise though if you cut most of the bottom out of the airbox. That will take away some of the sound deadening that the airbox gives.
 
#35 ·
Have any of you guys experienced any mpg gains? The only downside of having a huge engine is the fuel economy so I'm trying to do everything to increase my mpg

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ask 90grandoneer. Be prepared to spend some coin.
I have to say that this engine is particularly difficult and time consuming to work on just because there is very little room in the engine bay. So if you don't do the work yourself, it's going to be even more expensive at 100 bucks per hour shop rate.