6-HP GAIN WITH K&N AIR FILTER!
07-29-2006, 05:30 PM
#1
Banned
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: San Francisco, CA
Age: 42
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
6-HP GAIN WITH K&N AIR FILTER!
http://www.cardomain.com/ride/486705/1
TL Manual made 219-HP with stock air filter. Made 225-HP with K&N air filter.
TL Manual made 219-HP with stock air filter. Made 225-HP with K&N air filter.
07-29-2006, 11:04 PM
#4
acura-cl.com OG
Originally Posted by Jesstzn
Was it Dyno'd stock and if so were both dyno runs made on the same day .. same conditions? Within minutes ?
07-30-2006, 07:18 AM
#5
6 hp might be possible if the K&N replaced a really dirty stock filter. From what I've read, the stock TL air box is pretty restrictive and I saw one test where the hp was virtually the same with or without an air filter. Minor airbox modifications pulled more hp increase than any filter changeout.
07-30-2006, 11:09 AM
#6
Please Read This...
We all know that an engine is an air pump. You have to maintain an A/F ratio which means air and fuel must be mixed in the cylinder. The amount of air and fuel that can be compressed is limited in any engine regardless if it is naturally aspirated or with forced induction (i.e. supercharger or turbocharger).
An engine has a volumetric efficiency (VE) which is also called "load". To reach 100% VE is EXTREMELY difficult with ANY naturally aspirated engine. However a supercharged or turbocharged engine can reach 100% VE quickly.
What is VE? Theoretical airflow divided by actual airflow = VE. I found my 4.6L SOHC V-8 engine (1995 T-Bird) to be around 300 cfm of airflow. The paper element filter flows 650-700 cfm according to the manufacturer. So the paper filter is NOT a restriction to the engine's breathing ability. When I supercharged the 4.6L engine with an Eaton M90(S) blower and added the Mustang GT PI heads and PI cams, the cfm climbed to 625. The engine was producing 380 HP and 450 TQ with 9-psi of boost.
So with an ex-Ford engineer present (now the president of SCT) on the dyno we tuned the T-Bird and did a test. With a K&N panel replacement (750 cfm) air filter in the stock airbox without any restriction or "silencer" to the airbox we dynoed the car to 320.5 RWHP and 379.5 RWTQ (SAE). Then I removed the entire factory airbox assembly and attached a K&N conical 9" long air filter to the Mass Air Meter. We then dynoed the car again, but without any changes to the EEC program.
This time the car made 325.1 RWHP & 379.5 RWTQ (SAE). The reality is 4.6 RWHP and ZERO gain in torque is PEAK number. The 4.6 additional horsepower did not increase the entire length of the curve...only a small peak at the high rpm.
Why did this happen? Well for one a 1000 cfm K&N conical flows nearly double of what my engine was capable of breathing. So there was no real gain to be had. The proof for me was putting the stock airbox back on and trying the K&N panel again...320 RWHP/379 RWTQ (SAE). So there you have it.
I don't expect your naturally aspirated or supercharged TL's to respond to a K&N at all. So if you see a gain on a dyno, take it with a grain of salt and make sure it's not just a peak number.
Here is the dyno chart from the pulls.
Notice the red and blue line pulls are identical to each other with the difference of 4.6 RWHP. This peak number would not be felt on the street or shown in the 1/4 mile. I also find it hard to believe that the Honda engineers used a restrictive airbox from the factory to choke off the engine's ability to breath so they could promote the aftermarket and K&N.
The fact is, they tried very hard to achieve the 270 HP they claimed they had only to have SAE revise the rules of measurement. So the engine is down to 259 HP, a loss of 11 horsepower. So the K&N can bridge the gap...I doubt it.
Then you have to consider how the K&N works in the first place. It allows more air to travel through it so no matter how many ways you look at it, the K&N filters less particles. It has been proven that an engine equipped with a K&N filter will show more silicate in it's oil than an engine with a "paper" element.
Don't believe me? Analyze you own oil before and after a K&N install. I did.
Another problem which actually became a TSB from Ford Motor Company was the use of oils to aid in filtering aftermarket air filters (meaning K&N and Accel). The oil from the filter migrates to the mass air meters hot wire element. The resistor becomes insulated and skews the mass air flow transfer function throwing the A/F ratio off compared to the spark timing. The engine knocks or pings and the customers complain.
The fix was to remove the air filter from the vehicle and clean the MAF hotwire or pull the OCTANE ADJUST pin. This pin was located near the MAF and when the shorting bar is removed it triggers the computer to retard the spark timing by 3.5 degrees. That removes the knock and about 5 HP.
What have you gained?
I have no idea what your backgrounds are, but many of you are not mechanical engineers in the automotive fields. I understand you want to "hot rod" your cars, but you have to understand if the K&N filter is so good why doesn't Acura, Honda, GM, Ford, etc. use these type of filters from the factory. They offer longevity right? More power and torque? More fuel economy? Right?
Right...
A-Train
An engine has a volumetric efficiency (VE) which is also called "load". To reach 100% VE is EXTREMELY difficult with ANY naturally aspirated engine. However a supercharged or turbocharged engine can reach 100% VE quickly.
What is VE? Theoretical airflow divided by actual airflow = VE. I found my 4.6L SOHC V-8 engine (1995 T-Bird) to be around 300 cfm of airflow. The paper element filter flows 650-700 cfm according to the manufacturer. So the paper filter is NOT a restriction to the engine's breathing ability. When I supercharged the 4.6L engine with an Eaton M90(S) blower and added the Mustang GT PI heads and PI cams, the cfm climbed to 625. The engine was producing 380 HP and 450 TQ with 9-psi of boost.
So with an ex-Ford engineer present (now the president of SCT) on the dyno we tuned the T-Bird and did a test. With a K&N panel replacement (750 cfm) air filter in the stock airbox without any restriction or "silencer" to the airbox we dynoed the car to 320.5 RWHP and 379.5 RWTQ (SAE). Then I removed the entire factory airbox assembly and attached a K&N conical 9" long air filter to the Mass Air Meter. We then dynoed the car again, but without any changes to the EEC program.
This time the car made 325.1 RWHP & 379.5 RWTQ (SAE). The reality is 4.6 RWHP and ZERO gain in torque is PEAK number. The 4.6 additional horsepower did not increase the entire length of the curve...only a small peak at the high rpm.
Why did this happen? Well for one a 1000 cfm K&N conical flows nearly double of what my engine was capable of breathing. So there was no real gain to be had. The proof for me was putting the stock airbox back on and trying the K&N panel again...320 RWHP/379 RWTQ (SAE). So there you have it.
I don't expect your naturally aspirated or supercharged TL's to respond to a K&N at all. So if you see a gain on a dyno, take it with a grain of salt and make sure it's not just a peak number.
Here is the dyno chart from the pulls.
Notice the red and blue line pulls are identical to each other with the difference of 4.6 RWHP. This peak number would not be felt on the street or shown in the 1/4 mile. I also find it hard to believe that the Honda engineers used a restrictive airbox from the factory to choke off the engine's ability to breath so they could promote the aftermarket and K&N.
The fact is, they tried very hard to achieve the 270 HP they claimed they had only to have SAE revise the rules of measurement. So the engine is down to 259 HP, a loss of 11 horsepower. So the K&N can bridge the gap...I doubt it.
Then you have to consider how the K&N works in the first place. It allows more air to travel through it so no matter how many ways you look at it, the K&N filters less particles. It has been proven that an engine equipped with a K&N filter will show more silicate in it's oil than an engine with a "paper" element.
Don't believe me? Analyze you own oil before and after a K&N install. I did.
Another problem which actually became a TSB from Ford Motor Company was the use of oils to aid in filtering aftermarket air filters (meaning K&N and Accel). The oil from the filter migrates to the mass air meters hot wire element. The resistor becomes insulated and skews the mass air flow transfer function throwing the A/F ratio off compared to the spark timing. The engine knocks or pings and the customers complain.
The fix was to remove the air filter from the vehicle and clean the MAF hotwire or pull the OCTANE ADJUST pin. This pin was located near the MAF and when the shorting bar is removed it triggers the computer to retard the spark timing by 3.5 degrees. That removes the knock and about 5 HP.
What have you gained?
I have no idea what your backgrounds are, but many of you are not mechanical engineers in the automotive fields. I understand you want to "hot rod" your cars, but you have to understand if the K&N filter is so good why doesn't Acura, Honda, GM, Ford, etc. use these type of filters from the factory. They offer longevity right? More power and torque? More fuel economy? Right?
Right...
A-Train
Trending Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
rcs86
Car Parts for Sale
3
08-02-2016 06:52 PM
