Intake Power Gain Comparison (Factory, Banks, SXTH, K&N) — Same Truck, Day, Dyno, Surprising Results

[CAMTuning]

While this was all performed on a Tacoma, these platforms are essentially the same, and these results should be comparable:


2024 Tacoma Intake Comparison Testing – Stock Calibration vs Real-World Results

After much online discussion about intake performance on the new 2.4T Tacoma platform, I wanted to perform a controlled comparison between several popular intake systems using the same truck, same dyno, same fuel, and same testing procedure.

The goal was not to prove that one intake “wins,” but rather to document how these systems behave on the factory calibration and how the ECU responds to them under controlled conditions.


This testing was intended to provide comparative real-world data using a consistent and repeatable process. While no chassis dyno comparison can perfectly eliminate every variable, significant effort was made to keep testing conditions as consistent as possible between intake systems, including vehicle configuration, fuel, dyno setup, operating temperature, adaptation process, and test procedure.

The results shown here should be viewed as comparative findings from this specific vehicle and test environment, not as absolute universal performance numbers for every truck or condition.


Test Vehicle

• 2024 Toyota Tacoma (Non-Hybrid)
• 8-Speed Automatic Transmission
• Approximately 12,000 miles
• 91 octane fuel
• Dyno testing performed in 4th gear
• AFE charge pipes installed throughout all testing

Wheel & Tire Setup

• ICON alloy wheels
• Toyo Open Country A/T tires
• 35x11.50R17LT
• Load Range C

It is important to note that this truck is running a significantly heavier-than-stock wheel and tire package. This absolutely affects measured wheel horsepower and acceleration rate on a chassis dyno compared to stock-equipped trucks.

The objective of this testing was comparative consistency between intake systems — not chasing the highest absolute dyno number.


Intakes Tested

• Factory airbox
• Banks intake
• SXTH intake
• K&N intake (older version that does not replace the turbo inlet)

All intake comparisons shown below were performed on the factory calibration and stock turbocharger.

Test Procedure

Each intake was installed individually and tested using the same vehicle under the same conditions.

The following process was repeated for every intake:

1. ECU learning reset performed
2. Vehicle driven to begin repopulating learned airflow and fuel trim behavior
3. Three dyno pulls performed
4. Pull 0 was discarded because it was consistently lower immediately after the reset process began
5. Pull 2 was used as the stabilized comparison run

One thing that surprised me during testing was how quickly this platform adapts after an ECU learning reset. The difference between Pull 1 and Pull 2 was smaller than expected across all intake systems, indicating that long term fuel trims and airflow model corrections populate very rapidly on this platform.


Dyno Results – Stock Calibration

Despite significant differences in intake design, the dyno results were remarkably close.

Peak horsepower results:

• Banks: 244.98 whp
• SXTH: 244.58 whp
• OEM Airbox: 234.93 whp
• K&N: 243.86 whp

Torque curves were also extremely similar throughout most of the pull.

The biggest takeaway from the dyno portion of this testing is that on the factory calibration and stock turbocharger, the ECU’s torque and airflow management strategy minimizes outright power differences between quality intake systems more than many enthusiasts expect.

Fuel Trim Observations

While horsepower differences remained relatively small, fuel correction behavior varied much more noticeably between intake systems.

Approximate overall fuel trim behavior observed during testing:

• OEM airbox: approximately ±5%
• K&N: approximately ±5%
• SXTH: approximately 10–12%
• Banks: approximately 13–14%

This was in line with what I've seen on the other trucks I've tuned with tese intakes.
This does NOT necessarily mean one intake is “bad” and another is “good.” What it does show is that different intake geometries and MAF housing designs deviate from the factory airflow model by different amounts when operated on the stock calibration.

The factory ECU adapted quickly to all tested systems, but some required substantially more correction than others to maintain commanded fueling. None of them had any CEL during testing.


Final Thoughts

The most important aspect of this testing was consistency.

Every intake was tested:

• on the same vehicle
• on the same dyno
• on the same fuel
• on the same day
• using the same testing procedure

That consistency matters far more than comparing isolated dyno numbers from different vehicles, climates, dynos, or adaptation states.

Under those controlled conditions, all tested intake systems performed relatively similarly on the factory calibration and stock turbocharger.

After completing the stock calibration testing, the K&N intake was professionally calibrated on 91 octane for the owner of this truck. Once the truck received a complete calibration — including airflow modeling, torque request strategy, fueling, ignition timing, boost control, and transmission tuning — the intake responded significantly better than it did on the factory calibration while maintaining stable fuel correction behavior.

That is the biggest conclusion from this testing:

These intake systems are all relatively comparable on the stock tune, but they have substantially more potential once paired with proper professional calibration.

The factory ECU is capable of adapting surprisingly well on its own, but custom tuning allows the airflow model, fuel correction behavior, and overall performance to be optimized correctly rather than simply compensated for.

Sponsored

 

[Mad Ghost]

Thanks for sharing such a good write up.

 

[MikeD]

Cam: Really appreciate the scientific approach and controlling variables but that last graph is so compelling I've got to ask....

If you applied "a complete calibration — including airflow modeling, torque request strategy, fueling, ignition timing, boost control, and transmission tuning" for the other tested intakes, how would the results vary? Are there some key factors (airflow restriction?) that would limit the improvement that you show on the K&M for the OEM system? Would the other upgrades achieve comparable results as the K&M?

Since you don't say, I assume that you did not actually adjust the tune but your scientific approach and writing implies both integrity and expertise - and your answer will likely add to my noob knowledge of these physical systems as well as the ECU (which is an amazing collection of algorithms being fed by an amazing collection of sensors that I am very curious about).

Thanks

 

[CAMTuning]

Cam: Really appreciate the scientific approach and controlling variables but that last graph is so compelling I've got to ask....

If you applied "a complete calibration — including airflow modeling, torque request strategy, fueling, ignition timing, boost control, and transmission tuning" for the other tested intakes, how would the results vary? Are there some key factors (airflow restriction?) that would limit the improvement that you show on the K&M for the OEM system? Would the other upgrades achieve comparable results as the K&M?

Since you don't say, I assume that you did not actually adjust the tune but your scientific approach and writing implies both integrity and expertise - and your answer will likely add to my noob knowledge of these physical systems as well as the ECU (which is an amazing collection of algorithms being fed by an amazing collection of sensors that I am very curious about).

Thanks

That's why intentionally kept the intake comparison portion of the testing on the factory calibration. To be completely clear, every intake in this test was dyno’d on a 100% stock engine and transmission tune. The only change made whatsoever was a minor shift schedule adjustment that allowed the truck to stay in 4th gear during the dyno pull from low RPM without commanding an automatic downshift. No airflow, fueling, ignition timing, boost, torque management, or power-related calibration changes were made during the intake testing.

Once tuning gets involved, the conversation becomes much harder to isolate objectively because calibration itself becomes another major variable. If I custom tuned all four intakes, it would be very easy for people to argue that one setup received a more aggressive calibration than another, even if that wasn’t the case.

The goal of this test was to compare how the intake systems themselves behaved under the exact same conditions on the factory ECU logic. I absolutely believe the other intakes would improve with proper calibration as well.

The bigger question is probably how large the differences between them would become after tuning. My personal opinion is that at stock turbo power levels, the delta between quality intake systems would still likely remain fairly small. Once you move into higher airflow demand situations — larger turbocharger, higher boost levels, ethanol blends, etc. — intake design and restriction likely become much more significant factors.

My conclusion is less “this intake makes X more horsepower” and more that "all of these systems appear capable of supporting very similar performance on the stock turbo and stock calibration, while professional calibration allows the ECU strategy to take fuller advantage of whichever hardware is installed."

 

[mfoga]

Now if one of them would get CARB certification

 

[CAMTuning]

Now if one of them would get CARB certification

I could be wrong, but I think the Banks is CARB.

 

[BlinkerFluid]

What are you thoughts on how these will compare vs the stock TRD Pro intake system? Especially when paired with a tune?

 

[mfoga]

I could be wrong, but I think the Banks is CARB.

50 state compliant
D-161-172 for 2024-2025 Tacoma Only

 

[CAMTuning]

What are you thoughts on how these will compare vs the stock TRD Pro intake system? Especially when paired with a tune?

I have had a few TRD Pro's on my dyno with stock intakes, and they perform pretty close to the same as other non Pro hybrids with stock intakes. It would be interesting to run a back to back test using both OEM intakes, and then copy in all of the OEM MAF tables for the intake being used to see if there is a difference. That may be something I try in the future.

 

[Dobbler]

Perhaps I've missed it in the posts above... what are the dyno numbers on stock intake with a custom tune?

 

[CAMTuning]

Perhaps I've missed it in the posts above... what are the dyno numbers on stock intake with a custom tune?

I didn't tune this particular truck on the stock airbox, but I have done a number of them. Tire size has a decent effect on peak numbers, so I focus more on the delta between the stock tune and the custom tune. Here is an example on on one of the non hybrid 4Runners I tuned recently on 91. The 86 number is there because of some earlier testing on lower octane. If you want to see hybrid numbers, I can post those as well.
This graph shows roughly 41whp and 50wtq on a 100% stock 4Runner.

 

[Dobbler]

So...... looking at this graph, and the one above....... doesn't seem like the aftermarket intakes have much impact?

 

[CAMTuning]

So...... looking at this graph, and the one above....... doesn't seem like the aftermarket intakes have much impact?

It depends, but in my experience an intake is usually good for 10-15hp over the stock airbox on a tuned vehicle. Not every truck is the same though, which is why custom tuning is custom.

 

[powder]

This is a hard pill for the “just installed my intake and it makes more power seat of the pants” posts.

 

[CAMTuning]

This is a hard pill for the “just installed my intake and it makes more power seat of the pants” posts.

There is definitely real power available from an intake alone — the testing showed that. And to be fair, increased sound and response can absolutely amplify the seat-of-the-pants feeling too.

I’ve shown how much tuning alone can unlock, even on the factory airbox. On a stock truck especially, the calibration side of things ends up being a bigger part of the equation than most people realize. And for anyone already running an intake, pairing it with a proper tune helps make sure you're actually getting the most out of the setup and the parts you already have.

Sponsored