Dyno Tested: New RK Autowerks CF Cold Air Intakes

[MSIXCARBON]

Hey guys,

I had these installed on my car and tested on the dyno. The car had an ECU Tune done by Powerhaus Performance, NJ with Catless downpipes. I was very pleased with the quality of the intakes. The weave and finish are very high end and there is zero fiberglass used in the construction. Installation is definiately DIY with a few basic hand tools. It takes about 1.5 hours. These are also made in the USA. I'll support a USA made product any day :thump: Bang for the buck I think these are the best intakes on the market.

Against the stock air box with the charcoal filters in the RK Intakes picked up 38 whp. The car was also ran without the charcoal filters and the RK Intakes showed a 16 whp gain over that setup. I feel that these intakes at speed on the highway will have a clear advantage over the stock setup. Real world airflow just can't be replicated on the dyno so the potential for gains are even greater.

Here are some pictures!

[apexlocator]

Thank you thank you for this post! I was just about to sign up and post a question on m5board about this intake. For whatever behind-the-scene reasons, RK is off this forum. I just picked up this intake and you've answered all of my questions

[lunden]

Nice!

What is the price of those bad boys?

[Mkai0]

As of now they are going for $1850. The quality looks to be very good. I'm gonna re-visit the idea of picking up a set once my warranty expires.

[cjrdriven]

Interesting. Like the carbon fiber but looks %100 like a MSR copy but with filters with no velocity stacks. How does that filter react to water by the way?

[apexlocator]

Originally Posted by cjrdriven

Interesting. Like the carbon fiber but looks %100 like a MSR copy but with filters with no velocity stacks. How does that filter react to water by the way?

Maybe thats why they were booted off this forum and their intake development thread deleted.

True there are no velocity stacks, and the filters are just K&N #RF-1031. I remember the developer saying velocity stacks werent needed, but again, that thread is gone.

In terms of water in that area, I wonder how MSR deals with that?

[MSIXCARBON]

These are not a copy. The threads were probably removed because they aren't a supporting vendor.

As far as flow these are CFD Tested and designed by an engineer that has worked for the OEM in a mutimillion dollar dyno cell where stringent testing would make conventional dyno testing laughable.

[MSIXCARBON]

Originally Posted by apexlocator

Maybe thats why they were booted off this forum and their intake development thread deleted.

True there are no velocity stacks, and the filters are just K&N #RF-1031. I remember the developer saying velocity stacks werent needed, but again, that thread is gone.

In terms of water in that area, I wonder how MSR deals with that?

Another nice thing is that these intakes retain the flex section before the turbos. I've seen the plastic inlet piece ( 2 piece design) come apart on a few cars because the msr doesn't allow for any flex.

[cjrdriven]

Originally Posted by MSIXCARBON

Another nice thing is that these intakes retain the flex section before the turbos. I've seen the plastic inlet piece ( 2 piece design) come apart on a few cars because the msr doesn't allow for any flex.

Those inlets have snapped at seam on stock OEM cars. Also the MSR intakes are not bolted directly to car beyond hose clamp so some flex still happens.

As for filter, water never damages filters on the MSR intake, stainless steel mesh. There is never water issues.

[apexlocator]

Originally Posted by MSIXCARBON

These are not a copy. The threads were probably removed because they aren't a supporting vendor.

As far as flow these are CFD Tested and designed by an engineer that has worked for the OEM in a mutimillion dollar dyno cell where stringent testing would make conventional dyno testing laughable.

Yes, I read that entire development thread. It was impressive and I researched the company and owner himself. Just wondering why mods felt the need to delete the entire thread because it was informative; should have just deleted the posts discussing intro pricing, etc.

[TheHouseWon]

Is the diameter larger than MSR?

[MSIXCARBON]

Originally Posted by TheHouseWon

Is the diameter larger than MSR?

MSR intakes have a 3.0"'inlet, these have a 3.5" inlet. That alone is a huge difference, 27% less surface area for air to be sucked in. The filters are washable so water is not gong to ruin them. I believe the MSR are metal and much smaller surface area on the filter itself. I personally value the intakes being carbon fiber from a performance standpoint, less heat soak, form fit yielding 100% optimization. When I installed them you could see the subtle design needs implemented to fit the intakes easily.

[m6beast]

Originally Posted by MSIXCARBON

MSR intakes have a 3.0"'inlet, these have a 3.5" inlet. That alone is a huge difference, 27% less surface area for air to be sucked in. The filters are washable so water is not gong to ruin them. I believe the MSR are metal and much smaller surface area on the filter itself. I personally value the intakes being carbon fiber from a performance standpoint, less heat soak, form fit yielding 100% optimization. When I installed them you could see the subtle design needs implemented to fit the intakes easily.

The MSR intakes are not 3.0" they are 3.25" used specifically to match oem pipe/MAF diameter not to have cel's ect. Also the MSR intake is a totally different design and doesn't just rely on pipe diameter size to run more efficiently but are setup of a compressed air design where it makes its huge power gains proven by track, vbox and car racing. Everything has been done for a reason not just because it looked great or thought it was cool, for example the filters and velocity stacks in their specific location, they are not relying on cold air or larger pipe diameter to make their gains.

Just because a product looks good on paper, calculated numbers ect, doesn't always mean the end results will be as promising.

The MSR intake on a stock M5 on a Dyno before and after only showed 20-30whp midrange and 10-12 peak but vbox showed .5 seconds faster 60-130 mph. On a fully Moded M6 the MSR intake showed 30-40 whp midrange on the the Dyno proving the more mods the more gains because of its overall efficiency On a fully Moded M5 at the track that was running 12.1-12.2 @ 120 mph with 2.0 60ft and a best 12.0@120mph, after installing MSR intake and two weeks of adaptation it dropped its time by 11.5-11.6@124-125 mph same 60ft of 2.0. All this data is documented and anyone that wants to see it they are welcome. Just adding big filters in the front of the kidneys dosent mean you'll get the same gains on the street as the MSR intake that has been setup for a reason and proven over and over again around the globe.

But I can say the carbon fiber does look good!

[TheHouseWon]

M6beast, do you have a patent on the intake?

[apexlocator]

The MSR is indeed proven to perform; I just cant get over the price of admission for an intake system, but hey, I have the same gripe with the current market for catless downpipes.

The M tax is real, alive, and well.

[MSIXCARBON]

Hold on I’m confused now, if everything was done for a reason, then why would you reduce the pipe from 3.5 to 3.25? The OEM inlet is 3.5. That doesn’t add up to me, I also recall reading when you were “developing” these intakes that you had Maf codes. You can see the RK section is an exact replica of the OEM maf section, down to the curvature.

Do you have flow bench numbers for your intakes? RK Autowerks has provided flow bench numbers for their product, OEM, charcoal, and your product. That is not calculated data, that is real life testing. We can debate your track numbers all day. But going to the track one day, then 2 weeks later, doesn’t mean anything. Your intake temps changing are more significant than the intakes at that point. Don’t get me wrong, nobody is doubting your intakes make power, but how much is the question here. I feel the guys at RK being aerospace engineers might know a thing or too. I spoke to the owner and he has heavy experience in the automotive industry working for the OEMs.

You yourself must know that the car does not need 2 weeks to adapt, that is unreasonable. Even then, intakes do not effect anything in terms of “adaptations.” Intakes are simply a restriction on the system which the car has to endure as the RK owner explained in his engineering paper.

You should be able to put the intakes on the car and instantly see power. This is proven and the engineering backs it up. I saw this on the dyno myself, I did not need 2 weeks of driving around.

Sounds like the guys at RK made a product that looks good on paper, calculated numbers, validated numbers via CFD, validated numbers via flow benching, validated via dyno testing; resulting in a great product. I understand you have track times, but you can’t argue that a flow bench does not hold more value when developing intakes. You eliminate all the variables, temperature, humidity, the entire vehicle engine, and so on. If the argument was for a naturally aspirated car, I can understand that. But this is a turbo vehicle where reducing restriction is the name of the game.

[cjrdriven]

MSR intake only on a standard M5 racing a Comp Package M5. Just posting to back up some of M6beast statements above.

[13M5F10]

Originally Posted by MSIXCARBON

Hold on I’m confused now, if everything was done for a reason, then why would you reduce the pipe from 3.5 to 3.25? The OEM inlet is 3.5. That doesn’t add up to me, I also recall reading when you were “developing” these intakes that you had Maf codes. You can see the RK section is an exact replica of the OEM maf section, down to the curvature.

Do you have flow bench numbers for your intakes? RK Autowerks has provided flow bench numbers for their product, OEM, charcoal, and your product. That is not calculated data, that is real life testing. We can debate your track numbers all day. But going to the track one day, then 2 weeks later, doesn’t mean anything. Your intake temps changing are more significant than the intakes at that point. Don’t get me wrong, nobody is doubting your intakes make power, but how much is the question here. I feel the guys at RK being aerospace engineers might know a thing or too. I spoke to the owner and he has heavy experience in the automotive industry working for the OEMs.

You yourself must know that the car does not need 2 weeks to adapt, that is unreasonable. Even then, intakes do not effect anything in terms of “adaptations.” Intakes are simply a restriction on the system which the car has to endure as the RK owner explained in his engineering paper.

You should be able to put the intakes on the car and instantly see power. This is proven and the engineering backs it up. I saw this on the dyno myself, I did not need 2 weeks of driving around.

Sounds like the guys at RK made a product that looks good on paper, calculated numbers, validated numbers via CFD, validated numbers via flow benching, validated via dyno testing; resulting in a great product. I understand you have track times, but you can’t argue that a flow bench does not hold more value when developing intakes. You eliminate all the variables, temperature, humidity, the entire vehicle engine, and so on. If the argument was for a naturally aspirated car, I can understand that. But this is a turbo vehicle where reducing restriction is the name of the game.

Both intakes look beautiful.

As far as adaptation, we all know these cars take some time to adapt. Whether it's 1 day or two weeks, every Bmw has reacted differently and if you reset adaptations as I did then it can take up to two weeks. I can tell you from experience as others will also comment on, each day after install the car felt different. If that's not called adaptation, then please help explain what that means.

This isn't MSR Vs RK, again, both beautiful designs and so far proven gains. We all know MSR came out with the concept and everyone has followed with their changes to improve it. Bravo to them.

Those filters btw, will be soaken wet when it rains. I already have a buddy with these intakes and he experienced that already. Same issue with M PsI filters.

[m6beast]

Originally Posted by MSIXCARBON

Hold on I’m confused now, if everything was done for a reason, then why would you reduce the pipe from 3.5 to 3.25? The OEM inlet is 3.5. That doesn’t add up to me, I also recall reading when you were “developing” these intakes that you had Maf codes. You can see the RK section is an exact replica of the OEM maf section, down to the curvature.

Do you have flow bench numbers for your intakes? RK Autowerks has provided flow bench numbers for their product, OEM, charcoal, and your product. That is not calculated data, that is real life testing. We can debate your track numbers all day. But going to the track one day, then 2 weeks later, doesn’t mean anything. Your intake temps changing are more significant than the intakes at that point. Don’t get me wrong, nobody is doubting your intakes make power, but how much is the question here. I feel the guys at RK being aerospace engineers might know a thing or too. I spoke to the owner and he has heavy experience in the automotive industry working for the OEMs.

You yourself must know that the car does not need 2 weeks to adapt, that is unreasonable. Even then, intakes do not effect anything in terms of “adaptations.” Intakes are simply a restriction on the system which the car has to endure as the RK owner explained in his engineering paper.

You should be able to put the intakes on the car and instantly see power. This is proven and the engineering backs it up. I saw this on the dyno myself, I did not need 2 weeks of driving around.

Sounds like the guys at RK made a product that looks good on paper, calculated numbers, validated numbers via CFD, validated numbers via flow benching, validated via dyno testing; resulting in a great product. I understand you have track times, but you can’t argue that a flow bench does not hold more value when developing intakes. You eliminate all the variables, temperature, humidity, the entire vehicle engine, and so on. If the argument was for a naturally aspirated car, I can understand that. But this is a turbo vehicle where reducing restriction is the name of the game.

The MAF location of the oem intake pipe is 3.25" not 3.5" if you want I'll take a pic for you to make you happy.

And as for two weeks adaptation you are correct for the rk design doesn't need it because of efficiency where as the MSR intake is of compressed air design which is totally different. The reason it takes two weeks is because the car has to learn the new flow characteristics because of its higher volume and velocity of air by mph and what happens is the dmes close the throttle to protect it from runing too lean. As time passes they add more fuel and open the throttle more and more each day which the end result making more power. You wouldn't know this because your flow bench isn't gonna tell you. Reall live data on the street and logging while recording every test in performance is key to a well designed product.

I've done my testing in every way and I'm not the one that's here trying to compare intakes you guys brought me into this. Anyone can copy someone else's design and try and make it better, as for my design it's been proven not by just me but by several customers and they can all tell you the two weeks adaptation is as real as it gets.

The fully modded M5 that I told you about that dropped his times by .5 seconds and gained 4-5 mph actually couldn't wait for two weeks and the track numbers also proved adaptation is real

I installed his intake on a Friday and I told him it needed two weeks, he had no patience and went to the track that following wed. From his best 12.0 @120 mph he ran 11.7@121 mph. I told him to go the following week and he would see a big difference. So he went the following wed and ran 11.5-11.6 @124/125 mph consistently. I design my own products of my own cars and they go through every kind of testing and logging. I'm not a company taking a customers car and making a product but someone that wants the best performance possible for years always been my goal from the time I could drive.

So you can talk about flow testing data ect that doesn't mean your gonna perform as well as you think. I suggest take the rk intake and run it against an MSR intake stock cars and run them, you will see the difference.

[apexlocator]

How do you deal with the water then? during the rainy months?

[MSIXCARBON]

M6beast,

Can you please explain this "compressed air design" as I have never heard of that terminology.

Also, can you post our testing data. I would love to see it. Thanks.

[13M5F10]

Originally Posted by apexlocator

How do you deal with the water then? during the rainy months?

Dunno, hence why MSR uses the filters they do.

I'm sure RK sells socks to put over like MaxPsI does