Contour Enthusiasts Group Archives Forums General Dyno and Drag Dyno Comparing Stock, K&N, KKM and "Poor Man's KKM"

Yep. I think those dyno #s are very realistic. I noticed the same things after I scrapped my aftermarket intake in favor of a good ole K&N and drilled stock airbox.

BTW folks.

For Ref - The Mustang filter (one pictured) has a smaller filtering area than the SVT Contour filter.

I ran a bench test last summer on the mustang K&N pictured. I tested the stock in the airbox, K&N in the airbox, stock open, and K&N open. Here are the results.

http://www.me.mtu.edu/~bjpontiu/WWW/Flow%20test/Flow%20analysis.xls

Here's how they ranked.

1. Open stock.
2. Open K&N.
3. Stock in airbox.
4. K&N in airbox.

Again, this was the mustang drop in filter.

Wow, and I'm still runing around with my stock airbox. What am I thinking???

That is some great information guys, I appreciate it. Right now I am running with a cut airbox and drop in K&N.

Anyone have any flow data on the stock flexible airpipe(accordion) versus pipes like the KKM and BAT pipe?

warmonger

Rara, those graphs appear a bit odd to me. Kind of up & down. Seems odd that KKM would be equal to K&N then drop down only to be slightly higher at the end. Not sure it was not artifact or another explaination. In my own comparo of KKM vs a different larger K&N I found the graghs were almost identical until 6500-7000 RPM were K&N was better but only by about 2 HP. For all intents and purposes "a draw", though possibly an indication that at higher flow rates K&N may prove better?

Brentos, flow data interesting. Others have shown removing stock airbox with K&N improved power but first Ive seen stock "open" paper filter comparable.

im a newbie to this stuff, can any one help me out with a link explaining the poor man's kkm? rara talks about it like its another one of those common CEG mods (TH fix, tranny cocktail, etc) but i searched, and couldnt find a damn thing. i drive a 96 duratec. actually, a link with a dyno plot of different intake systems would be great, different TBs and such... and what the hell is a MAF, or a MAF adapter?

Brentos, interesting flow data, I am curious to know the age/mileage of the stock filter used.
Because if it was new, it would support my theory that the stock filter flows very very well, but only when new or fairly new, ie that flow on the stock filter drops dramatically as it gets dirty.
Where the K&N remains pretty constant despite the dirt (to a reasonable point of course)

Dan,
Of course your results may vary . . .
In my own head, I attribute the differences (despite the larger flow area on the S&B filter used by KKM) to poor design in the S&B filter where the two airstreams come together (from the inner and outer sections) leaving a stagnation point (more like a ring here) in the middle of the flow area of the filter limiting flow capacity, especially at certain flow rates.

Of course, this is only theory, as some significant testing on a flow bench w/ smoke traces etc. would be required to prove or disprove it (this is prolly why S&B never did it)

Eli,
The "poor man's KKM" has been discussed before, though maybe not by that name. I believe that myself and svt2000 were the first ones to make note of it here on the CEG. Anyway, the possible unfamiliarity with it was the reason I included the photos above.

Rara, the stock filter was new, never used. The K&N had about 5 miles on it since cleaned and lightly oiled.

Rara...

Did you have the stock MAF screen in place for either or both of the runs with the stock (and modified) airbox?