-
Welcome to the Contour Enthusiasts Group, the best resource for the Ford Contour and Mercury Mystique.
You can register to join the community.
K&N filters
- Thread starter D.Acker
- Start date
No car comes with a K&N from the factory, unless you custom order yor car from an alternative performance company. example like steeda, saleen etc
I agree that any ebay kit is worthless anyone buying one and using the filter needs some help in the education department.
I assumed you are new since your join date is 06:shrug:
What is stock w/kn,stock svt w/kn. ?? This means you owned a standard v6 contour and not an svt contour?
95pgt-t
Hard-core CEG'er
correct,i've owned both. 96se duratec,and 99svt
mikey
CEG'er
I have both the stock SVT air intake with a k&N filiter. as well as the Mirko air intake with a K&N RU 3130 filter. I acutally always have two filters cause I clean them pretty often and it's a hastle to wait unitl it is dried and oiled.
I like the sound of the open Mirko, and when I swapped out the stocker (and K&N) my but dyno told me I got noticably more HP. Of course that was 6 years ago, and my memory is fading (heh..heh).
I have never had a noticable problem from heat soak, of course I'm in the PNW.
The stocker has been sealed in a box, and I expect it will stay that way.
Mirko used to race these things, and he generally (no actually most of the time) knows what he is talking about.
mikey
I like the sound of the open Mirko, and when I swapped out the stocker (and K&N) my but dyno told me I got noticably more HP. Of course that was 6 years ago, and my memory is fading (heh..heh).
I have never had a noticable problem from heat soak, of course I'm in the PNW.
The stocker has been sealed in a box, and I expect it will stay that way.
Mirko used to race these things, and he generally (no actually most of the time) knows what he is talking about.
mikey
95pgt-t
Hard-core CEG'er
i'm sticking to the placebo effect. "since its louder,it most be making more power" like ricer's w/fart cans
I don't think your sticking with anything.
I think your just closed minded lol.
Wow i hear my intake....my car must be faster...lmao. I guess ceg as a whole thinks like this:laugh:
Honestly who throws a shoe?
95pgt-t
Hard-core CEG'er
i've thrown shoe's before:shrug:
Here's my two bits. An open cone filter stuck underhood without heat shielding will more than likely cause a drop in horsepower. More hot air is not better than slightly less "cool" air. If you've equipped your car with a heat shield, you may see a couple extra nags, but that's about it. Results should be similar with a true cold air fender setup using the same filter.
Some cars react better to K&Ns than others. My '87 Taurus saw 2-3 extra MPG with a K&N panel filter, and suffered no side effects. The same setup in the SHO buggered the MAF. The drop in conical replacement for the stocker in the SVT also coated the MAF wire with oil, despite exceptionally light oil applications.
Now, I run a stock paper filter in the original conical enclosure, and enjoy trouble-free high performance. The car is as quick as it's ever been, and is a joy to drive. As an added bonus, the paper filter fits properly -- the K&N never did due to an engineering flaw; its a few millimeters too long.
One of the greatest SHO resources, SHOtimes.com, has a great discussion about the K&N filter. One of the most astute observations therein is that the K&N can flow "x" number of CFM, and in order to take full advantage, you'd have to rev the SHO engine to 13 or 17 thousand RPM -- which, as they point out, is a shattered engine. The question is how many CFM do you need under the car's full potential load, and are you getting it from a stock filter? If you are, then the K&N will not get you any worthwhile bonus, though it may cause a nice bucking under hard throttle when it buggers the MAF.
Some cars react better to K&Ns than others. My '87 Taurus saw 2-3 extra MPG with a K&N panel filter, and suffered no side effects. The same setup in the SHO buggered the MAF. The drop in conical replacement for the stocker in the SVT also coated the MAF wire with oil, despite exceptionally light oil applications.
Now, I run a stock paper filter in the original conical enclosure, and enjoy trouble-free high performance. The car is as quick as it's ever been, and is a joy to drive. As an added bonus, the paper filter fits properly -- the K&N never did due to an engineering flaw; its a few millimeters too long.
One of the greatest SHO resources, SHOtimes.com, has a great discussion about the K&N filter. One of the most astute observations therein is that the K&N can flow "x" number of CFM, and in order to take full advantage, you'd have to rev the SHO engine to 13 or 17 thousand RPM -- which, as they point out, is a shattered engine. The question is how many CFM do you need under the car's full potential load, and are you getting it from a stock filter? If you are, then the K&N will not get you any worthwhile bonus, though it may cause a nice bucking under hard throttle when it buggers the MAF.
95pgt-t
Hard-core CEG'er
well said
jmcgee2000svt
CEG'er
I have had an ebay intake, a weapon-r dragon, and now the MAF adapter with the K&N 3530...
The ebay ones are useless as we had it on our cougar, and quickly removed it..PLUS they rust...??
I had a dragon on my SVT, I immediately did notice a that there was a slight drop in HP compared to my stock setup. I have since replaced it with the K&N and I can't really say its added horsepower but it feels like it is more back to the stock feel for me just with an open filter..I think if I could do it all over again I would have left the stock set-up and just did the K&N drop in filter for it.
I usually drive 80MPH no matter where I go, and my SVT gets on avg. 25 mpg, so to me I haven't had a set up that really effects my pwr or gas mileage. I think its all personal preference to what you want. My dad is a mechanic, been working on cars for 30 yrs and he swears that the CAI don't do anything for your car..LOL.
The ebay ones are useless as we had it on our cougar, and quickly removed it..PLUS they rust...??
I had a dragon on my SVT, I immediately did notice a that there was a slight drop in HP compared to my stock setup. I have since replaced it with the K&N and I can't really say its added horsepower but it feels like it is more back to the stock feel for me just with an open filter..I think if I could do it all over again I would have left the stock set-up and just did the K&N drop in filter for it.
I usually drive 80MPH no matter where I go, and my SVT gets on avg. 25 mpg, so to me I haven't had a set up that really effects my pwr or gas mileage. I think its all personal preference to what you want. My dad is a mechanic, been working on cars for 30 yrs and he swears that the CAI don't do anything for your car..LOL.
95pgt-t
Hard-core CEG'er
again,CAI is being tossed around to freely. a cai can do something for just about any car. but a open filter sitting in a hot engine bay generally wont(not saying it cant in some instance's)
See my car makes loud noise so it is very fast
It makes me :drool: when i drive it fast.xtascox
Hard-core CEG'er
I agree with that completely. Sometimes I wish I still had my stock airbox. But to fix this problem I am in the process of designing a shield/intake that mimics the stock airbox but allows for an conical filter and for better airflow from the fender without any cutting or drilling. So it's basically going to be a stock airbox on crack:crazy:
I'm hoping to have a prototype in the next week or two.
yamaha racer 686
Hard-core CEG'er
im probally going to run the N.P.G in the fender on the car till i go forced induction eventually.
Big Jim
Hard-core CEG'er
Just for fun I'll toss in a few comments. Cold Air Intake means drawing the air is from some place other than under the hood. The factory set-up does that. It pulls air from the fender.
The factory set-up (SVT and non SVT) is restrictive in the area that feeds the airbox. The SVT is especially so.
Drawing hot air cuts the power way back. Probably in the neighborhood of 205 to 30%. An open element intake drawing underhood air often suffers greatly in hot weather.
An oiled gauze or foam filter marginally allows more air to pass than a clean paper filter. It is only marginally better. The price you pay for that very slight benefit is less filtering. As to if the lower filter efficiency really amounts to a hill of beans is widely debated. As to if a drop-in oiled gauze filter really provides any better performance is also highly debated. My opinion is that it doesn't.
What to look for or to design to in an effective intake system is less restriction and retaining cold air input. The restriction can be from getting rid of the accordion tube wrinkles as well as smooth bends.
With all of that, don't forget to keep the intake protected from water ingestion when there is a lot of water on the road.
The factory set-up (SVT and non SVT) is restrictive in the area that feeds the airbox. The SVT is especially so.
Drawing hot air cuts the power way back. Probably in the neighborhood of 205 to 30%. An open element intake drawing underhood air often suffers greatly in hot weather.
An oiled gauze or foam filter marginally allows more air to pass than a clean paper filter. It is only marginally better. The price you pay for that very slight benefit is less filtering. As to if the lower filter efficiency really amounts to a hill of beans is widely debated. As to if a drop-in oiled gauze filter really provides any better performance is also highly debated. My opinion is that it doesn't.
What to look for or to design to in an effective intake system is less restriction and retaining cold air input. The restriction can be from getting rid of the accordion tube wrinkles as well as smooth bends.
With all of that, don't forget to keep the intake protected from water ingestion when there is a lot of water on the road.
It might assume to use less fuel as well, as the oxygen density in hotter air is less than colder air. Thus, the parameters to create an ideal stoich condition has changed.
I don't know much about contours yet, although I will go out on a limb to assume that they use narrow-band for feedback. Given that is true, the system might not actually tune /that/ well (if at all) for minor nuances in intake differences. So, It might be safer to assume that this response might be more probable in a wide-band configuration.
mmm.
Just to toss back a couple of comments, as the devil's advocate.
Most of what you say I will agree with, however..
When you are drawing an ambient air charge with atmospheric pressure, the small accordion-style ripples from flexible hoses are negligible, at best. Your statement does however hold true for systems which are over or under atmospheric pressure, require considerable velocity such that a reciprocating engine simply cannot demand, or when the charge is composed of non-gas elements such as liquids, or its composition is considerably light - such as hydrogen gas, or its composed of a heavy gas.
Oil-coated cotton filters (like K&N) have the best CFM rate of any air filter out there - until they get dirty. If you have an environment where the filter will not get get much blow-by, such under the hood with out direct access to out-side elements (warm-arm intake, air filter box, etc), then a K&N is going to be superior. If the filter is going to be directly exposed to the out-side, such as a /true/ cold-air intake, then it will only flow a little better than a paper filter. Why? Because that oil which is used to trap particles and dirt does a really good job! So good, in fact, that the dirt will cling there until it's cleaned. A paper filter will cost a lot less than a good K&N filter, so if it's going under the splash guard, keep this above mentioned statement in mind. You'll spend as much on a replacement paper filter as you will on K&N oil. But the filter oil will save you from throwing away yet-another 'disposable' item into the land fill. Filter oil and cleaner is the best eco-friendly option.
A foam filter, however.. is something to consider IMHO. They don't have the initial CFM of a gauze-oil filter, but they are considerably better than a paper filter. Foamy material has far more avenues for air to travel past, so when the filter does get dirty, there will be less over-all restrictions on absolute air flow. So it will work better after it's been installed and used for a while. I like to consider the entire life of an item before I install it into a car, not just how good it looks or works five minutes after it's been put on. I believe that most of these foam filters clean up pretty good with soap and water as well. You will need to use common sense though, don't use bleach to clean it, and let it dry out FULLY before installing it again. If it's soaked in water it will make your engine sputter a little, but rest assured, it isn't nearly enough to instanciate a hydrolock.
Most of what you say I will agree with, however..
When you are drawing an ambient air charge with atmospheric pressure, the small accordion-style ripples from flexible hoses are negligible, at best. Your statement does however hold true for systems which are over or under atmospheric pressure, require considerable velocity such that a reciprocating engine simply cannot demand, or when the charge is composed of non-gas elements such as liquids, or its composition is considerably light - such as hydrogen gas, or its composed of a heavy gas.
Oil-coated cotton filters (like K&N) have the best CFM rate of any air filter out there - until they get dirty. If you have an environment where the filter will not get get much blow-by, such under the hood with out direct access to out-side elements (warm-arm intake, air filter box, etc), then a K&N is going to be superior. If the filter is going to be directly exposed to the out-side, such as a /true/ cold-air intake, then it will only flow a little better than a paper filter. Why? Because that oil which is used to trap particles and dirt does a really good job! So good, in fact, that the dirt will cling there until it's cleaned. A paper filter will cost a lot less than a good K&N filter, so if it's going under the splash guard, keep this above mentioned statement in mind. You'll spend as much on a replacement paper filter as you will on K&N oil. But the filter oil will save you from throwing away yet-another 'disposable' item into the land fill. Filter oil and cleaner is the best eco-friendly option.
A foam filter, however.. is something to consider IMHO. They don't have the initial CFM of a gauze-oil filter, but they are considerably better than a paper filter. Foamy material has far more avenues for air to travel past, so when the filter does get dirty, there will be less over-all restrictions on absolute air flow. So it will work better after it's been installed and used for a while. I like to consider the entire life of an item before I install it into a car, not just how good it looks or works five minutes after it's been put on. I believe that most of these foam filters clean up pretty good with soap and water as well. You will need to use common sense though, don't use bleach to clean it, and let it dry out FULLY before installing it again. If it's soaked in water it will make your engine sputter a little, but rest assured, it isn't nearly enough to instanciate a hydrolock.
RogerB
CEG'er
Welp, I'm putting SVT intake bits on my non-SVT car from the fender to the TB. (Keeping my stock non-SVT TB)
I'm replacing an ITG open foam intake that I've had on for about 10 years. I do notice some bog with this filter in hot weather, but only when starting from a stoplight.
Anyway, in looking for a better and true "cold" air system, I figured I couldn't go wrong with a better OEM box, and the SVT kit seems like the way to go for me. The fender snorkel is huge compared to what came off, and there is no resonator. In addition the filter area is considerably larger than my old panel.
The only question I have is when I compare the paper SVT filters to the gauze filters (K&N, Airhog, etc.), the "vanes" on the paper filters seem like they'd generate turbulence in the incoming airflow, vs the gauze filters that seem like they'd accept air into the airbox more smoothly. (making sense?)
Is this really an issue? Maybe turbulance upstream of the filter element doesn't really matter, since the filter itself will act to equalize pressure across its surface (i.e., "straighten the airflow"). Maybe I just answered my own question.
Any thoughts?
I'm replacing an ITG open foam intake that I've had on for about 10 years. I do notice some bog with this filter in hot weather, but only when starting from a stoplight.
Anyway, in looking for a better and true "cold" air system, I figured I couldn't go wrong with a better OEM box, and the SVT kit seems like the way to go for me. The fender snorkel is huge compared to what came off, and there is no resonator. In addition the filter area is considerably larger than my old panel.
The only question I have is when I compare the paper SVT filters to the gauze filters (K&N, Airhog, etc.), the "vanes" on the paper filters seem like they'd generate turbulence in the incoming airflow, vs the gauze filters that seem like they'd accept air into the airbox more smoothly. (making sense?)
Is this really an issue? Maybe turbulance upstream of the filter element doesn't really matter, since the filter itself will act to equalize pressure across its surface (i.e., "straighten the airflow"). Maybe I just answered my own question.
Any thoughts?
95pgt-t
Hard-core CEG'er
i'd swap tb's while your in there..the added throttle response alone is worth the swap