Does anyone offer a Cold Air Intake for the LR 3.0 SC setup? Or even an ECU tune for that matter??

 

Considering your hood (yes the whole hood, really a neat concept), is you air intake (check out the intake routing). CAI intake would do nothing to boost performance. In fact it would hurt it significantly.
Also most CAI are nothing more than a fancy filter, and pipe. That reside in a hot engine bay. In most modern cars the intake itself draws air from the coolest place possible, without effecting aesthetics of the engine bay.
On the rare occasion a CAI is as described, it will usually draw air from the inside of the fender, or from the cowl area. The issues with this it is a low pressure area (usually), and the car engine has to work harder to draw this air in.
Ideally you would want a Ram Air CAI. Most cars cannot accommodate this just purely based on design. But this is the idea behind hood and grill scoops.

Also because the hood is part of the air intake system, it will be interesting when someone comes out with a Raised Air Intake System for the D5.

Now for the ECU Tune, look into Velocity AP. They have a tune for the SCV6, to about 416hp, or about another 50WHP..
You have to look under the Range Rover Sport tab for applications for the D5. I have already clarified it is the same tune.

 

K&N makes filters that come in a two pack for the Si6, and you only need one for the Td6 (you get an extra which is great when cleaning). Readily available online through K&N (about $100 for a pair), great fit, performance, and ultimately saves your wallet. I have over 350,000 miles on a single filter and still going strong (not on my D5). Given the wading capability of the D5, a CAI would not be advised if you ever intend on using the vehicle to its full capability.

 

I will never use an Oiled Cotton filter again.
They quickly lose efficiency as the oil collects even the smallest of particles.
Do they last a long time (the media), sure. But even after 4-5K miles the air flow efficiency drops below what an OEM or paper filter offers. At the same time the paper filter shows no depreciation in it's ability to "filter" out what it was intended for.
While new or refreshed the Oiled media filters are very good, they quickly become a liability. Unless you are washing and cleaning every 3-4K mles, they do not offer and appreciable difference in performance.

Quite a few quantifiable studies have been done.

https://nicoclub.com/archives/kn-vs-oem-filter.html
https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...12017316301475

 

Liability? Interesting, the scholarly research you cited indicated a performance gain with K&N over paper filters, but they recommended against them because they cost more, but failed to recognize they are reusable and can be easily cleaned. On the K&N site, the filters are $100.99 for a pair for the Discovery which will last longer than the vehicle. OE Land Rover air Filters run $56 a pair on Amazon and likely higher at the dealership. The interval to change the air filter is every 15,000 to 30,000 miles, depending on road conditions. I'll take an average life of an air filter at 25,000 miles since most Land Rover spend the majority of the miles on the road. Given that I have over 350,000 miles on my current K&N air filter without a single air intake related problem I would have gone through 14 paper filter sets which would have cost me over $700 or still be working fine on my first K&N filter. No doubt the K&N allows more particles through, but where is the research showing that the engines are damaged? I tried K&N and it is still working for me 350,000 miles later with the equivalent of an extra $600 in my pocket, with no engine damage. A professor once told me that an engineer does for a nickel what any idiot can do for a quarter. The point is that paper filters may be over designed and more costly that what is required to keep you engine in fine working order. Thanks for the articles.

 

I guess you only read what benefits your narrative.
However what you fail to mention, what the papers actually state.
While yes there may be a performance gain over the short term. Unless you clean and refresh you filter every 4-5K miles, the performance gain is quickly lost, and in fact becomes a detriment to both performance and fuel economy.
Also because the paper filter have more sustained higher air flow, over it's life. It becomes the better option for every day use.
The paper filter becomes even more of a benefit in more severe (high dirt) environments.
The oiled media do have their place, but IMO and supported by the aforementioned studies. They are not ideal for every day, normal use vehicles.
Cost being one major benefit to the oiled media filters, it seems a very short sighted argument. We drive Land Rovers, $60 every 20K miles is a minimal cost, compared to everything else.
If I was worried about long term ownership cost, I would buy a Toyota.

But as previously stated, we all make our own decisions on what is best for us based on our own knowledge and research.