Lower restriction filter / cold air intake = better MPG?

Page 1 of 2  
(aside from the obvious tips on driving slower ...)
I've read a number of posts suggesting that a low restriction cotton-gauze filter can marginally increase fuel economy and power.
I've heard other speak in favor of mods like cold air intake, headers, cat-back exhaust providing marginal benefit.
Assuming that the maintenance is all kosher and the proper driving techniques are in place, what mods (in the few hundred dollar range) would hold some promise of delivering improved fuel economy for an '05 Accord LX i4 M5? +-----------------------------------------+ | Charles Lasitter | Mailing/Shipping | | 401/728-1987 | 14 Cooke St | | cl+at+ncdm+dot+com | Pawtucket RI 02860 | +-----------------------------------------+
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Charles Lasitter wrote:

Perhaps, but then you might shorten the engine's life span since you could be reducing the filtering capacity of the intake system. If I remember correctly, there have been some posts on this newsgroup of people stating that their engines have starting to burn oil after driving around with these "low restriction" intake systems for a while.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That could be one of the reasons every time I am behind one of the garbage can muffler equipped cars, that I either smell the odour of burning oil or am at a loss as to where the road is due to the cloud of oil smoke in front of me.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

We use the endearing term "Honda Turds"....
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Fortunately, it's not only Honda products that have this problem.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Of course, but when the term is used, no matter the original maker, the travesty can be imagined.. ;-(
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

More advertising hype, but AEM has a product advertised for trucks that uses a dry polyester filter and they claim a dust capture ability of as small as a micron ...
http://tinyurl.com/p7lmh
http://tinyurl.com/oxhns http://trucks.aempower.com/dryflow/SWRIresults_injen5inch-kn9inch-airaid9inch.pdf
http://tinyurl.com/qm2bv http://trucks.aempower.com/dryflow/SWRIresults_9inchdryflow_coarsedust.pdf
http://tinyurl.com/ozph8 http://trucks.aempower.com/dryflow/SWRIresults_9inchdryflow_newandcleaned.pdf +-----------------------------------------+ | Charles Lasitter | Mailing/Shipping | | 401/728-1987 | 14 Cooke St | | cl+at+ncdm+dot+com | Pawtucket RI 02860 | +-----------------------------------------+
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'm not having that much luck finding empiracle data on this topic, but this test of K&N filters was a start:
http://tinyurl.com/2jucn
The subject is not without controversy, but I'd love to see more references to careful testing of the filtration and performance gains. +-----------------------------------------+ | Charles Lasitter | Mailing/Shipping | | 401/728-1987 | 14 Cooke St | | cl+at+ncdm+dot+com | Pawtucket RI 02860 | +-----------------------------------------+
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Here's a better one. http://home.usadatanet.net/%7Ejbplock/ISO5011/SPICER.htm
A K&N filter will allow lots more dirt into your engine, grinding your rings, bores and bearings much more quickly. It will increase the amount of abrasive silica in your oil. It will gum up the IAC/EACV much more quickly.
Any performance gains on a road-going Honda are likely to be measurable only with a dynamometer. Hondas, like most small-capacity 4-cylinder engines, do not have excessive intake restriction to begin with.

See my link above. I would NEVER use a K&N on ANY Honda that I intended to make last for a long time.
--
TeGGeR

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload


Everyone agrees that dirt in the oil is bad, and the URL you provided has information in the form of graphs, which is useful, but here's the question I have trouble with:
Both had tests with ISO 5011 standards, and page I found used other standards for additional tests, and the results quoted there cast K&N in a more favorable light.
So what are the key differences between the tests, and what is the rate of filtration that Honda sets as "good enough" for its engines? How does the factory issued filter perform? +-----------------------------------------+ | Charles Lasitter | Mailing/Shipping | | 401/728-1987 | 14 Cooke St | | cl+at+ncdm+dot+com | Pawtucket RI 02860 | +-----------------------------------------+
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Charles Lasitter wrote:

why don't you address the real point? hondas don't have restrictive intakes unlike say a 5.6L dodge whose ducting is narrower than a 1.5L civic. "cold air" is mostly unnecessary unless you're right at the top of the power band. and even then, in my experience, most people that consider themselves hot-shots off the lights change /way/ too early and /never/ get into a rev range where there could be any advantage. [not counting the stock system's advantages of resonance tuning of course.]
i gun my [motor all stock] civic pretty hard, use the full rev range, and guess what, i can drag most riced civics up to about 60. why? because i have everything adjusted perfectly, /not/ because i ponce about with a stupid air intake that i don't need. save your money - use oem filtration and enjoy both better mid-range performance and longer engine life.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I guess you never have removed the intake on one.They are restrictive AND suck hot underhood air.The intake makes all sorts of turns,has a resonator tank,and the final duct to the throttle body is corrugated,not smooth.

Again,not true.I got much better low-end performance on my 94 Integra GSR,with a $60 chinese CAI off Ebay.It's filter is as good as the OEM filter.IIRC,they use the same material. You could feel the difference in performance.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

to add to my previous post;Honda Tuning Magazine flowbench and dynoTESTED CAIs and short ram intakes and documented the power and torque gains. With a benchmark test of the OEM system to compare against.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

In addition to the advertising hype there are obviously different opinions on the issue of filters and CAIs, and this exchange of views is almost exactly what I was hoping for.
I'm really not expecting any of these mods to pay for themselves in terms of fuel economy, and I am not interested in HP gains that are so small they can be measured on a dyno but not felt.
The factory setup is almost always going to be best for the largest number of drivers, and I appreciate your comments.
One thing I find curious is the absence of CAI listings for '05 2.4L Accords. I was just out trying to follow the air inlet path, and it seems to end just forward of the drivers front wheelwell.
It's shielded, no doubt to protect against water ingestion, but it seems that this location would normally provide it with a source for (relatively) cold air. +-----------------------------------------+ | Charles Lasitter | Mailing/Shipping | | 401/728-1987 | 14 Cooke St | | cl+at+ncdm+dot+com | Pawtucket RI 02860 | +-----------------------------------------+
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Honda Tuning Magazine's tests got 20 hp gains on an RSX with the CAIs,5-7 hp with short rams.I could definitely feel the gain on my GSR after the CAI was put in. IMO,a short ram was not worth the trouble or cost.

Like in my Integra,you may find that the intake curves UP into the top of the fender and back into the engine compartment,along with a resonator tank in that wheelwell area.The Type-R difference is that the pipe ends at the top inside of the fender,not reentering the engine compartment.The length of the intake piping increases low-end torque,I've read.

Not when the pipe loops back into the engine compartment.(like my Integra)
One Integra modder had a diagram of the Integra intake plumbing on their website,and a copy of the Type-R's intake,too.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Jim Yanik wrote:

intake design is a complex subject. turbulence and resonance are *major* factors in design that i do not see addressed in the typical "cai". if the resonance is factored right, it can redress some of the volumetric efficiency quirks any particular motor may have. conversely, a bigger pipe with incorrect bend design can cause more turbulent airflow than a narrower pipe with good bend design.
bottom line, yes, some cai's can work on some cars. detroit garbage is almost invariably advantaged. it's /not/ a given however that something with a complex tuned induction system like a honda, that replacement automatically means better results. otherwise every rice-kiddie's mickey mouse civic would spank my 1.5 dpfi. they don't, much to their annoyance. mine's old school automatic too, so it should be at a substantial efficiency disadvantage.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Of course, any gasoline engine running at less than wide-open throttle has intake restriction, regardless of the air intake or filter... it's called a throttle plate. Any benefit of intake or exhaust mods can only be felt at full throttle and high rpms. I've never understood the attraction myself.
Mike
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

altering the length of the intake alters the HP and torque at any given RPM,and ingesting colder air allows the ECU to add more fuel,making more power,regardless of what RPM. Honda Tuning Magazine's dyno test graphs showed that,in their intake systems testing a couple of years ago.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You're missing the point of the OP - he wants a little more power and a little better economy. If "colder air allows the ECU to add more fuel" he's going to lose MPG, not gain. The point of whether or not he gets more HP out of a CAI is moot.
Doug
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You don't get increased power AND increased fuel economy at the same time. However,having more power output at a given throttle opening,you can back off on the throttle and use less fuel and not suffer a performance loss(from original). With the added benefit of having more power available when wanted.
IMO,driving -style- is more influential on fuel economy,gentler starts and coasting when possible do more for fuel economy than any mods. Sure,he could strip out excess weight like insulation,unused seats,clean out the trunk,no spare tire,but that's impractical.(and unwise)
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.