I answered Timmy's PM this morning before I saw this thread, so I figured I'll post exactly what I sent to him right here for everyone to see. He said to me that the Injen and GrimmSpeed intakes look the same to him, and wanted to know what made the GrimmSpeed intake better:
"Hey Timmy,
It's good to see you are doing your research instead of just blindly buying something. The differences between our intake and Injens are substantial over just the difference in filter.
1. An oiled filter is less restrictive than a dry filter, and less restriction is better for making power. That is why we offer our intakes standard with oiled filters, but we do have a dry filter for sale separately that fits on our website if it ends up being a deal breaker.
2. The differences in the airbox designs are substantial. Injen took a lazy approach and just made the open face of the airbox face the front of the car. Super easy to fit and design, but not good for intaking cold air, especially with its proximity to the radiator. Ours seals to the factory snorkel, which gives a much better supply of cool air. If you go through our development thread i believe we showed where we didnt attach the snorkel to our intake, and actually lost power. I feel that this is the largest flaw with Injen's airbox.
3. The tube routing. The injen intake uses the stock intake tube route which requires a longer tube and a 90 degree bend angle. More angle and more tube length = more restriction. Our intake uses literally the minimum length and bend angle necessary which allows for the least amount of restriction.
4. The MOST important is the large difference in MAF placement and how they tune. The Injen MAF placement is not great. Since the MAF is placed AFTER the 90 degree bend and the reduction in tube diameter, Injen relies on a development where they weld in another smaller tube into the intake tube near the MAF to try and trick the MAF into reading properly. This strategy kind of works, but really doesn't, which requires this intake to be tuned to have the MAF scaled more often than not. Our intake was designed so carefully with everything from MAF tube diameter, to location, clocking, depth, and even has the same factory design air straightener. This is why our intake is regarded so highly, because it follows the OEM MAF curve, and is only off by about 4%. A difference so low that it doesnt require a MAF rescale at all, and has never thrown a CEL.
I would suggest you dig a little deeper on the Injen intake, because there have been TONS of instances of the MAF reading so poorly that the car throws a CEL. On this forum I've read more reviews about the Injen intake that were negative, than that were positive, but I've been on this forum for 4 years now too.
Hopefully this gives you some stuff to look into, and helps out in your search!
Chase
Engineering"
The cheat test eh? I could go on and on about the fact that we're the only manufacturer to show as much development, or the only manufacturer to show the testing on the stock intake, or to provide dynos of stock intake, inlet tube, drop in filter, other intakes, and OFT tuned intakes. But that dead horse has already been beaten.
BUT, I jumped into the way back machine here because I knew for a fact that we posted a dyno run of the stock intake with OFT tune, vs our intake untuned, and with the same OFT tune. You might even recognize the name of the guy asking the question:
http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showp...7&postcount=33
So I think we actually passed your cheat test. Twice now
Chase
Engineering