6.7L Air Box

[Trizae]

I can't believe as much as I have read about (and purchased to install tomorrow w/new South Bend Street Dual Disc) the 6. 7 damper that I havent posted this idea.



A couple of months ago, one of our service techs attend a school at the chrysler tech center in pittsburg.



one of the side bar conversations that came up was the use of aftermarket filters and intakes on our trucks.



the trainer told our tech that chrysler, along with general motors and maybe ford as well just did a major study on air filters.



one note was that most of the "high peformance" filters do not offer the filtration of the mopar factory filter and most of the aftermarket filter do not offer the flow. We have seen several check engine lights caused by napa air filters



the trainer also gave josh, our tech, a little tip that some of the deisel service trainers (who are all really gear heads just like us, but get to experiment on the factorys dime) was to install a factory 6. 7 air filter in our 5. 9 trucks.



the 6. 7 filter has better filtration than the 5. 9 filter and offers 400 more cfm of flow.



it is my understanding that the only change is that you must install the lower section of the 6. 7 air box (i'm sure there plenty of stock boxes that could be paid forward)



I've got a buddy/customer with an extra, I plan to try it and will try to report on any changes. there will be no dyno reports but I travel from covington, va to birmingham twice a month, same route, same stops, same speed (as fast as i can get away with)



Has anyone else heard of this or tried it, i did a forum search before posting in an attempt to prevent duplication.



thoughts?

 

[Prairie Dog]

Nope, the taller 6. 7 filter fits fine in my 03 airbox with several inches below to spare. I think quite a number of us are using it. And it does flow very good - I have one of the early filter indicators that was "too sensitive" that drops withthe slightest restriction. The stock filter could pull it down a fair ways where as the 6. 7 filter barely moves it.

EDIT: there was one brand of 6. 7 filter that didn't fit well in the 5. 9 box but I can't remember what it was.

 

[Trizae]

Thanks, thats good to know. I'd like to keep my airbox stock, i have considered a home made cold air tube I read about in an issue several years ago

 

[Shadrach]

Dodge does offer a large (6. 7 size) filter for the stock 5. 9 box. You can't just use the 6. 7 lower housing because the lid "hinges" on the wrong side, You will need to use the complete box and lid plus the turbo to air box hose ( it's a different size on the filter end ). You also need to plug of one hole as the 6. 7 box use 2 sensors and the 5. 9 only 1. The 6. 7 turbo hose also needs to have the tube that comes from the valve cover plugged off. The filter minder is in a different spot also. I have the 6. 7 on my 03. L to R in the picture: aftermarket set up, 5. 9 and 6. 7 ( missing the lower hose) I got it all for nothing.



<a href="http://s447.photobucket.com/albums/qq195/shadrach1984/03%20CTD%20Rebuild/?action=view&amp;current=DSCN0244.jpg" target="_blank">#ad
</a>



Shad

 

[Prairie Dog]

Thanks, thats good to know. I'd like to keep my airbox stock, i have considered a home made cold air tube I read about in an issue several years ago

Oh ya, the home depot intake - I did that before the bigger filter. Good mod!

Shad, is the first one a Bully Dog intake? I've got one of those in the attic that I should get rid of.
I think I would keep the 5. 9 intake, it looks like it would breath better anyway.

 

[JFought]

yea i use the 6. 7 filter.
When i shove it in i have to tuck the sides of the pleats in so i don't catch them on the internal renenforcing ribs. Easy to do. (i have since grinded them flat)

I was always pretty darn sure the surface are was much larger than the 5. 9 filter.

 

[Shadrach]

Prairie Dog It's an Airaid
Shad

 

[CKelley1]

the 6. 7 filter will not fit the 5. 9 box they make a deep pleat filter wix 49946 for the 5. 9 the 6. 7 air box fits the 5. 9. the psm kit will fit the box have several trucks using the 6. 7 box. best thing i ever did to the intake, some i bought this site still had the factory installed filter in them and one truck still has the same filter in it

#ad


#ad

 

[seafish]

I was going to use an oem 6. 7 box and filter in a 5. 9 until Fleetguard came out with the newer, deeper 5. 9 filter that is pretty much identical to the 6. 7 filter, but is sized to fit the 5. 9 oem box. The difference in size between the the newer, deeper 5. 9 air filter compared to the oe 6. 7 filter is negligible. Once I added the deeper filter and did an HDCAI mod to the 5. 9L air box, I doubted that much would be gained from swapping the actual box.

 

[JFought]

The 6. 7 will fit (with a little compression on the side to funnel the pleats in) in the factory 5. 9 box

 

[DGamelin]

I installed a 6. 7 box back in 2009 and it works fine. Mine was collapsing the stock air cleaners. At the time Fleetguard didn't have a filter that would fit in the 5. 9 box.



https://www.turbodieselregister.com/forums/5-9l-engine-transmissions-2003-2007/215355-ok-ive-had-enough-stock-air-box.html



The 6. 7 has a larger intake hole in the side, the outlet hole out the top and hose to the turbo is large also. At the time I did this, I found the info on how much more the 6. 7 box flowed, but I don't remember now. This box with a fleetguard filter flows more then the 5. 9 needs and this filter will do a much better job of keeping dirt out of your high dollar engine then most after market set ups. After market filters are designed to have less restriction. So they usually don't filter as well regardless of what they're advertising.



I don't believe wadding up a 6. 7 filter into a 5. 9 box is going to work well. Crushing the pleats will restrict air flow, unless the filter was made to fit.



__________________________

93 250 2wd xc 354 auto 294k

04. 5 3500 4wd cc dully 373 6speed

 

[EMAC2]

Any updates?

 

[Prairie Dog]

The 6. 7 Wix filter fits perfectly into the 5. 9 box - no forcing, wadding or any other unusual action needed.

 

[AH64ID]

With the 4" OEM filter there is zero reason to swap to a 6. 7 box or filter. The 6. 7 filter flows more than the old 2" OEM filter, but is rated the same as the new 4" filter.

Put a home depot CAI, and an Airaid MIT on your 5. 9 box and you will outflow a 6. 7 box, most CAI's, and still have OEM quality filtration.

 

[NavyDood]

Another/better option IMO than the Airaid MIT is the AFE Torque Booster Tube. If you look around you can get it for $80 shipped.

Modding the OEM 5. 9 airbox like the PSMBuick and running the new deep pleated filter for the 5. 9 is second to none unless you are running 500+ HP. You can fit the 6. 7 OEM style air filter if you are careful even the though physical dimensions aren't the same. The 6. 7 style filter hits the bottom of the 5. 9 airbox. You have to slightly distort the pleats to make it fit. But, why go through all that trouble when there is a deep pleat filter made for the 5. 9 airbox and the filter specs are the same?

Listed below are the part numbers and specs of the new 03-07 5. 9 deep pleated filter. I don't think it has been confirmed yet, but I'm pretty sure the Mopar branded filter is made by WIX. When I removed the deep pleated Mopar filter and installed the deep pleated Napa filter last summer, they were identical in color, physical attributes and the specs were printed in the exact same location. Font and size looked the same also. As we all know, the NAPA filter is a WIX filter.

Dodge P/N 53034249AA
Napa P/N FIL9946
WIX P/N 49946
Dust capacity - 540g
Max air flow rate - 675 CFM
Max pressure drop - 0. 36 PSI
Efficiency - 99. 6%
42 pleats 3. 75" tall

Here's some info on a few filters and their specs.

<O</ONew deep pleated Mopar filter 53034249AA. It is the same filter as the WIX 49946 and Napa FIL9946. The specs are printed on the filter. Dust capacity of 540g. Max air flow rate 675 CFM. Max pressure drop 0. 36 PSI. Has 42 pleats that are 3. 75" tall. Efficiency is 99. 6%. Approx cost - $26. It can be found cheaper if you look.

Old style Mopar filter 53032700AA. It is the same filter as the Fleetguard AF26106. The specs are printed on the filter. Dust capacity 450g. Max air flow rate 675 CFM. Max pressure drop 0. 51 PSI. Has 88 pleats that are 2. 0" tall which includes the thickness of the foam pad. Efficiency is 99. 5%. Approx cost - $20.

Amsoil EEA189. Nanofiber OEM style. Dust capacity 39g. Max air flow rate unknown. Max pressure drop unknown. Has 46 pleats that are 1. 75" tall. Efficiency is 98. 3%. Approx cost was - $45. Amsoil no longer makes the Eaa189 because of its inability to hold up to the longevity that they claimed.

aFe 30-10102. Pro-Guard 5 oiled filter. Dust capacity unknown. Max air flow rate unknown. Max air pressure drop unknown. Has 22 pleats that are 1. 25" tall. Efficiency is less than 99%. Approx cost - $80.

aFe 73-10102. Pro-Guard 7 oiled filter. Dust capacity 233g. Max air flow rate unknown. Max air pressure drop unknown. Has 22 pleats that are 1. 25" tall. Efficiency is 99. 2%. Approx cost - $85.

 

[AH64ID]

Another/better option IMO than the Airaid MIT is the AFE Torque Booster Tube. If you look around you can get it for $80 shipped.

Maybe on a 03-04, but on a 04. 5-07 keeping the lower 90° elbow lets you keep the directional vanes, which improve low-mid range flow and decrease turbulence. A Holset/Cummins article said it provided up to a 30% increase in turbo efficiency.

For reference, I am at or sligtly above 400 rwhp, use a OEM 4" air filter, Home depot CAI, Airaid MIT, and GDP intake horn. I also have a cam/Garrett turbo. I don't even budge my filter minder.

 

[cerberusiam]

A Holset/Cummins article said it provided up to a 30% increase in turbo efficiency.

I think somebody went a little off the reservation with that kind of statement. 30% increase in turbo efficiency is more than a little hard to swallow.



From what I gather, the whole induction system pre-turbo inlet is a Dodge item anyway. It is doubtful that Cummins\Holeset would have those numbers because it is specific to the Dodge platform.



My understanding is the whole TQ tube desing and vanes is an attempt to relieve the restirction introduced by all the NVH initiatives. They made it quiet and stopped it up in the process. :-laf



What makes a whole lot more sense is the NVH crap netted a 30% increase in restriction until the vanes and other changes were made to compensate. Thats where the 30% number bandied around came from. Also, that was with bone stock everything.



A 30% reduction in turbo efficiency is HUGE. That would be SOP noticeable. I know for a fact it would show big time on dyno sheets and nobdy has posted a huge net loss of power by adding a CAI or other mods. My truck consistently dynoed better stock power than the run of the mill unmodified trucks.



It lost the vanes and the TQ tube early on in its life and there was never any indication of driveability issues in th elow to mid range. If anything it was better and more efficient all the way around.

 

[AH64ID]

I was able to find the info several years ago, but recent searches have left me empty handed, I am not sure if the pages were deleted??

From what I recall it was in the low/mid range, something dyno sheets wouldn't show as they are WOT runs. Look at from a aerodynamics, or fluid dynamics stand point and it makes perfect sense. They don't do anything for sound, that's what the "torque tube" is for.

You can improve airflow and not effect much in the terms of power, other then your not working as hard to move the same airflow. The intakes are Dodge, but still have to meet Cummins flow requirements.

I'll try again to find the info.

EDIT:

I want to say the info was part of this page, but none of the links work now.
http://www.cummins-sp.com/support/index.htm#dodge

 

[cerberusiam]

I think somebody pointed out that egg on the face was not an acceptable state. :-laf



Oh, the system as whole makes a difference in sound, it was deisgned as such. Very noticeable. Remove the TQ tube, vanes and silencer ring and one gets a nice whistle.



Dyno runs made at WOT? Not on an accelerometer dyno. The whole idea is to start the run at as low an rpm as possible to see the effect of the mods across the power band. Believe me, a 30% drop in turbo efficiency is a glaring departure.



More air equates to more boost sooner in the rpm band which on an engine that is fuel managed by boost equates to more power. This is why we start the runs with as high of boost and low of rpm as achievable.



The more power early in the run equates to more load at the end for higher peak #'s.



On a stock system you might see a gain with its inherent restrictions, but, removing the restrictions is still going to equate to gains across the board negating a lot of the fixes.

 

[AH64ID]

Oh, the system as whole makes a difference in sound, it was deisgned as such. Very noticeable. Remove the TQ tube, vanes and silencer ring and one gets a nice whistle.

I've done it all, and didn't notice anything with just the vanes. The tube and ring did make a difference.

Dyno runs made at WOT? Not on an accelerometer dyno. The whole idea is to start the run at as low an rpm as possible to see the effect of the mods across the power band. Believe me, a 30% drop in turbo efficiency is a glaring departure.

Yes you start at low rpms, but you don't do the run at 40% throttle, you do it at WOT. You still see the effect of mods, but only at WOT, you won't know what they do at 2K rpms and 40% throttle.

More air equates to more boost sooner in the rpm band which on an engine that is fuel managed by boost equates to more power. This is why we start the runs with as high of boost and low of rpm as achievable.



The more power early in the run equates to more load at the end for higher peak #'s.

Starting at as high of boost as possible and lowest rpms possible will not let you see any difference in the low rpm spool, you are already past that. To see difference in low end spool mods you need to go into the run at low boost/low rpms.

On a stock system you might see a gain with its inherent restrictions, but, removing the restrictions is still going to equate to gains across the board negating a lot of the fixes.

I just do not see the vanes adding any restriction under 95% of use. Maybe if you lived on the track at high rpms and high boost you would gain something, but for at least 95% of the time people are not maxing out their intake flow, but they are up and down on boost with hills, wind, loads, speed changes, etc. The vanes can only help in those instances where you may go from 5 - 30 - 5 psi in a matter of 1/2 mile.







I don't disagree that 30% is a HUGE number, which is why it stuck in my memory when I read it. But it said "up to 30%", not a straight 30%. If you get a 30% better response at low rpms, and it takes 30% less time to go from 0 to 5 psi then it's a 30% improvement, but you may only get 1% better flow at WOT/rated rpm. It's a marketing thing for sure (just like the 40hp gain on SW1 on the Smarty JR, it has a 40hp gain in the mid range, not peak), but they will help most drivers get better turbo response at low/mid boost/rpms.



I have read several posts over the years of people feeling like they lost performance by removing them, and many who haven't. In the end it's the owners truck and their choice, but my point is the setup with the vanes is not bad, probably better than most, and doesn't need to be ditched to improve the intake.



Look at what a TAG does, that's the same principle. I don't think the TAG does it as efficiently thou.



Just to clarify, I am purely talking about the directional vanes in the lower 90° elbow, not the vanes/ridges in the straight tube.