Dyno results: TRD intake + Millers Oil = 6hp MORE than K&N drop in/silicone tube

[prandelia]

Ok, real world data. Lots of internet chatter about how the TRD intake doesn't make power, and is a "waste of money, just use the stock intake". Nobody ever has dyno numbers though. Well, clearly it does make power over the drop-in setup, along with the oil. In my case, 6hp is a massive pickup for racing, well worth the money spent IMO.

Also, it is one of the only intakes that works with an oil cooler, that I know of (clears the Jackson Racing kit). Both setups were dyno tuned, same dyno. These aren't marketing pulls, these are SAE, correct 5th gear pulls. Legit numbers.

194hp with K&N drop-in and silicone tube, and Mobil 0W40 oil.
200hp with TRD intake, and Millers 5W40 NT oil.

So if you have an oil cooler and want ~6 extra ponies, there's your ticket.

[Joveen]

that's a lot of money for 6hp. Millers oil is not cheap.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[Breadman]

isnt this just because the filter has more surface area in teh trd so it has less pressure drop. couldnt you do the same with just an aftermarket filter

[prandelia]

Originally Posted by Breadman

isnt this just because the filter has more surface area in teh trd so it has less pressure drop. couldnt you do the same with just an aftermarket filter

Did you even bother to read the post? I already dyno'd a KN drop-in filter w/ silicone tube. The TRD made 6hp MORE than that setup, which already makes a good 6-8hp.

The TRD simply allows for more air, and a straighter entry to the manifold.

[Breadman]

Originally Posted by prandelia

Did you even bother to read the post? I already dyno'd a KN drop-in filter w/ silicone tube. The TRD made 6hp MORE than that setup, which already makes a good 6-8hp.

The TRD simply allows for more air, and a straighter entry to the manifold.

so is the trd filter not bigger than the kn?

[prandelia]

Originally Posted by Breadman

so is the trd filter not bigger than the kn?

Yes, considerably. It's about the same height, but obviously about 50% longer than stock.

[Summerwolf]

Originally Posted by Breadman

so is the trd filter not bigger than the kn?

He didn't debate filter size comparisons ..... simply stating what changed and what worked in this situation.

[Breadman]

you know what just forget it i guess cone filters arent a thing because they have more surface area and thus less pressure drop. and i guess its also why all the fast cars are just a filter on the end of the throttle body.

[prandelia]

Originally Posted by Breadman

you know what just forget it i guess cone filters arent a thing because they have more surface area and thus less pressure drop. and i guess its also why all the fast cars are just a filter on the end of the throttle body.

I agree, if it would fit, I would have used the K&N Typhoon intake kit, it's dyno proven to make the most power, HOWEVER, it will not fit with an oil cooler, or atleast the one I have.

So the next best thing is the TRD. It's not that much different from the TMG Racing one, which is Toyota motorsports, which also uses a flat panel filter that goes straight into the throttle body.

The design of the TRD is to mimic the larger surface area cone filters, hence why it's so big. That's why it works.

[Lantanafrs2]

Originally Posted by Breadman

you know what just forget it i guess cone filters arent a thing because they have more surface area and thus less pressure drop. and i guess its also why all the fast cars are just a filter on the end of the throttle body.

Not really. Iats go up with just a cone filter.

[86MLR]

How do they compare in relation to m2.

Pre 17 OEM = 0.193m2

17 + OEM = 0.77m2

I acknowledge that the 17+ housings/intake tube and design are slightly larger/different but it was the filter design that was the main reason for the greater surface area.

If I recall correctly the K&N surface area is smaller than the 17+ OEM filter, the media in the K&N allows for more flow though.

Im off to google

[86MLR]

Math with oranges and apples for the win.

I couldn't help myself, I pulled my K&N for a look.

ORANGE = 2017 manual K&N airfilter (mine):

Size = 27 folds, fold height = 27mm therefore 1 fold = 54mm x 27 folds = 1.458m

Width of oiled section (not glue) = 0.1m

2017 K&N m2 = 0.145m2

So, smaller m2 than all OEM paper filters.

Assumptions:
OEM filter is paper and highly efficient at filtering, drawback is slight restriction due to this.

K&N filter is filter media is very thin and relys on oil to capture contaminates, thus less restrictive than OEM.

APPLE = TRD airfilter size?

The TRD media is a oil filter, but, is 4 ply.

Assumption: The TRD being a thicker media would be more restrictive than the K&N type.

Conclusion: could someone count the pleats and post up the dimensions of the TRD to compare against the m2 of all the other filters.

I acknowledge that the elephant in the room is the filter media, but, these comparisons are fun, and if a TRD intake filter is measurably better than a 17+ intake I might get a TRD intake.

As for the efficiency of the K&N, well it breaths effortlessly, but it only really stops rocks and leaves.

[Chuckls]

How are you in Louisville and we not be friends lol?

I'm in that area.

[PulsarBeeerz]

I'm am surprised and appreciative.