Quote:
Originally Posted by Toma
I had a dirt track car many years ago and with KN we would always find oily dirt in the carburetor mouth. Their claim to why they even filter with such big pores is that the gauze fibers vibrate with airflow and filter better than with static flow.
But I digress. Dyno tested a drop in kn filter in an frs and there was zero difference anywhere. Hell. We are averaging 1 to 2 hp with entire cold air kits which is hard to see with normal run to run variance.
|
http://www.ft86club.com/forums/showthread.php?t=13245
^ +5whp gains for drop-in filters. ^
I don't know what to believe anymore. I've been seeing and hearing the same pro/con arguments for 20+ years now and still no concensus. You won't sell many drop-in filters if they don't add
something so the motivation to produce positive results is certainly there. It wouldn't be hard to provide slightly more favorable test conditions, even unintentionally.
Still, in theory there should be some slight improvement in VE by reducing the airflow resistance of the filter and it is well known that oiled cotton gauze has lower resistance than oem paper. OTOH OCG also allows more dirt to pass so there really is no free lunch here. In the end I went with K&N hoping that they know the correct balance between increased airflow and filtration efficiency.