Installed Cold Air Intake

I installed a K&N FIPK last night on my 04 silverado. It seems to be working great. But now my A/C is blowing really hot air. I followed the instructions, so i am not sure what i missed. Can anyone help me?

Reply to
mitchbottel
Loading thread data ...

Well, you either disconnected something electrical related to the A/C, or you accidentally removed or capped a vacuum line that goes to the blend door or something like that...you'll just have to look around the area where you were working...

Reply to
jeffcoslacker

Then be prepared for the following:

--Increased intake noise produces an illusion of increased power but no actual power increase is achieved.

--Problems with mass air flow sensor due to dirt passing through K&N filter. Also contamination of mass air flow sensor from the oil the filter is treated with.

--Reduced engine life due to passage of dirt through K&N.

I'd get rid of it today!!

Don

formatting link

Reply to
Donald Lewis

Have been running K+N's in everything for over half a million miles in three cars, have not seen any of this....

Reply to
jeffcoslacker

wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...

Mitch, honestly, and not intending ANY flame, please do a Google search and find independent tests done comparing this K&N to stock systems (and to other brands of filter elements, lke Fram, STP, K&N that merely replace OE/GM elements). I think you will find they(K&N) pass more trash, with larger particle size, thru to the engine than many others. End result would be shorter engine life and definitely would require more frequent oil changes just to try & keep oil clean. In the extreme comparison, think about how free the incoming air would flow without ANY element in the factory system. Sure, you have low restiction plus a sound mimicking an increase in power. But you have MUCH more trash, dirt, and debris. Nobody wants that! Your engine was engineered to run with 2 criteria that many people erroneously reduce: one is we lower restriction to the flow of incoming air; two, we reduce back pressure in the exhaust system. I've seen it happen many times--2-3 times to ME until I learned better. Put dual (Flowmaster) exhaust on a 5.7 Tahoe; sounded good; mileage dropped ~2 mpg, as measured before over a 1200 mile-distance, and after on a similar distance. Took guts outta the cat.-convertor on a Ford product with 5.0 engine: mileage fell noticeably--~4 mpg, from 20 to 16-- even tho' the exhaust did sound nice with just a tad more 'ring' to it, plus it ran 'easier' and as smooth as silk and would run regular(leaded) gas which was cheaper than unleaded at the time. And while you MAY be replacing this K&N system, just double-check your AC connections, one of which you could easily have inadverently disconnected. Hoping you do NOT take this as a personal fingerpointing, as I have done similar things myself, I also hope you find that loose connection quickly and easily. Should be quite visible with less hardware/plumbing under the hood. s

Reply to
lptpsam

There aref TSBs from different vehicle manufacturers addressing the problem with the oil and the mass air flow sensor. Obviously if you are prudent with the oil and let it soak in well the risk is less. In the diesel performance world K & N filters are a known cause of "sandblasted" turbo wheels. This has been verified by examining the intake ducting for dust. I have also seen independent tests where the K&N filter very poorly in dirt removal. Most of the diesel guys who run oversize injectors, turbo mods, chips etc and go from 14 PSI boost to 30+ and thus NEED increased intake air capacity, use enormous paper air filters such as are found on heavy equipment.

What is the point of a K & N system? The stock air intake system is not a bottleneck unless major modifications are made to the engine. It would be stupid beyond words for an automotive engineer to go to the trouble of designing variable valve timing and everything else they do for a modern engine and then throw away HP by misdesigning an air filter box and making it restrictive. That would be effectively the same as throwing away cubic inches.

Now if the engine has aftermarket camshafts and other modifications, RPM range extended a couple of thousand, etc. an aftermarket intake system will be called for. But by itself a K&N system only makes noise. K&N's claims of 10% horsepower and mileage increases are patently fraudulent.

New paper air filters aren't that expensive.

formatting link
formatting link
formatting link
formatting link
Don
formatting link

Reply to
Don

"lptpsam" wrote in news:C_qJg.13762$ snipped-for-privacy@bignews3.bellsouth.net:

This used to be an excellent link, but sadly it appears to be down now.

formatting link
's the "independent test" you refer to. I later found this thread, containing a sort of a retraction from Spicer:
formatting link

Reply to
TeGGeR®

Looks like Spicer caved to corporate pressure.

The MAF evidence is interesting in that the whole thing (from K&N) is carefully worded. Citing that no MAF failure can be attributed to a K&N filter ignores the very real effect of contamination. I've serviced enough K&N equipped vehicles for SES lights on and emissions failures to know that what they're saying is BS. All one needs to do is plug the MAF readings from a contaminated MAF sensor into a volumetric efficiency calculator and compare them to the reading you'd get after the sensor is decontaminated, and the fact that the SES light stays off and/or the vehicle passes an emissions test when it wouldn't previously.

It all dovetails nicely with the standard "you're the only one having problems with that part" corporate response so prevalent in the industry.

Reply to
aarcuda69062

Everything in a production car is a tradeoff of performance vs materials cost, EPA noise levels, interior sound levels, fuel economy, etc...

Most stock engines are able to make more power if given the chance, provided you are willing to trade sound levels and idle stability, and more often than not fuel economy...

You cannot tell me that my Lumina's stock airbox intake snorkel that is about 60% of the size of the throttle body bore is anything other than a compromise and an obvious bottleneck. Of course the average driver than has probably never pushed a gas pedal all the way down wouldn't notice that. I do.

I can see where turbo apps could suffer form less than ideal filtering. I do question the need for it in standard engines, however. I can't explain how I'm getting 200,000+ miles outta my cars with little or no oil usage and great compression if it was really an issue...I'm sure the worst K+N filters better than the best paper filter of 20 years ago....and they worked fine...

Reply to
jeffcoslacker

PS, if it's the independant test I'm thinking of, if you actually get down into the data of the standards and measurements they used, their methods and quantifications for the non-conventional filters tested were completely different from the paper ones, as far as airflow, vs loading and the size of the grit used....in other words, it was apples to oranges, and if you rectify the data to show what was really proven, it wasn't very impressive at all....

Reply to
jeffcoslacker

Don, on some cars (98-01 Camaro/Firebirds) you can get 10 easy hp just by ditching the stock airbox. They have noise baffling in there that kills hp. I'm not just going by the magazines - but if you do, I believe it was GM High Tech Perf that tested about a dozen of them, found they all made about 10hp, and the best one to buy was the cheapest because they were all about the same. For me, I use my timeslips - a full tenth at the quarter just with the lid. It also means that I didn't have to cut up the original lid for the nitrous install.

My car has a K&N filter, but I consider it to be worth 0 hp. I installed it because of the silly prices they want for a paper filter - on this car it's CHEAPER to run a K&N and clean it yearly. All my other cars just get stock filters. I do need to get the air cleaner "sock" for my dirt track car tho.

FWIW, my best time with my TA with drag radials and a stock airbox was a

13.232, with the aftermarket lid was a 13.116. Too bad the stock clutch is wasted and I haven't had time to swap it yet.

Oh, and more on the intake thing on why it works on some cars... 01 F-Bodies were rated at 310hp or 325hp@5200, and the 01 Vette was

350hp@5600. The difference between the two engines: throttle body, intake ducting, exhaust manifolds and piping, oil pan, and probably calibrations. The intake is the same. The cam is the same. Block and heads - same. Valvetrain - same. The F-Body engines were "choked" off at higher rpm by the intake and exhaust. Why? Cost, packaging, and making sure the F-bod was slower than the Vette by a tick.

Ray

Reply to
ray

Yeah, my LT1 '94 Impala SS had that big detour on top of the motor that was nothing but a big sound deadener that really convoluted the airflow entering the motor...the first thing you eliminate when you get one...creating a straight shot into the throttle body that improves response...

Reply to
jeffcoslacker

conversely, on my 86 2.8 Jimmy I don't think a K&N or any other tricks would add any more power... when you've only got 125 to begin with...

Reply to
ray

Could always put a Paxton on it...might get out of it's own way then...:lol:

Or the old 4.3 trick, where you take that 2.8 and throw it in the river, and put a 4.3 in there...

Reply to
jeffcoslacker

had the whole thing not pretty much rusted into nothingness, I woulda done the small block drop in everyone else does.

and by rusted -> I took the driver's side door off using only wire cutters. The hinges peeled off.

Reply to
ray

aarcuda69062 wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@newsclstr02.news.prodigy.com:

Sounds suspiciously like it, unfortunately. It's disappointing.

Spicer notes that K&N's test is slightly different from his, then appears to assume K&N's was more accurate.

I can understand if they said a "few" sensors went bad, but NONE? There are a number of Toyota MTDs I follow in some other groups, and all of them independently have seen MAF failures from filter oil.

Maybe it's very difficult to "properly" oil the filter so it doesn't damage the MAF. If so, that is a problem in itself.

Personally, I'm not at all confident with a K&N in a car I want to last

300,000 miles.
Reply to
TeGGeR®

Stating that a K&N intake will not gain HP and is "patently fraudulent" is like saying man never landed on the moon. That is such a ridiculous statement that I wonder if you really believe it. It doesn't matter if you like K&N or not but it seems that there are those that make up "facts" or what they heard to provide "evidence" for justification of their unsubstantiated belief system about K&N. It's kind of entertaining to read.

"--Increased intake noise produces an illusion of increased power but no actual power increase is achieved." My truck was dyno'ed before and after and it gained over 10HP after a K&N air intake was installed. I also know the difference between power and noise. K&N Provides many dyno charts for before and after power levels to show that their air intakes gain HP. In fact they guarantee that their intakes will provide a power gain. What is your evidence to support your statement?

"--Problems with mass air flow sensor due to dirt passing through K&N filter. Also contamination of mass air flow sensor from the oil the filter is treated with." What evidence can you provide? K&N provides lots of testing. In fact they have stated that they have covered MAF sensors with their filter oil and couldn't make one fail due to it. Dealerships can only make basic checks of a MAF sensor to see if it is good or bad. They have no way of knowing what the problem is without sending it to a laboratory. Please provide 1 example of a sensor that was sent to a lab that concluded K&N filter oil caused the failure. I'll save you some time; you can't. It's all about people's opinion not scientific fact. Want to read about testing? Go to

formatting link

"--Reduced engine life due to passage of dirt through K&N." Any evidence of a K&N filter passing dirt that damaged a vehicle? By evidence I mean more than an opinion with a guess. Lot's of things can cause problems but people who dislike a product can alway point it out to make themselves feel they are right.

Here's a story about a K&N user & his dealership service manager that K&N must have paid off to say he used a K&N air filter in his truck. The truck has over 1,000,000 miles on it without any engine work.

formatting link
Check out the video! This guy is agood actor.

I don't know who the Spicer guy is but he must have also been paid off by K&N if he is now saying that they aren't so bad!

Hey everyone has a favorite oil, polish, or filter and that's fine. It's just funny how strong claims are made when there are hundreds of possible causes for a problem. It's easier to blame what you don't like than to actually determine the cause by testing. The only thing I know for sure is that K&N stole their air filter designs from peaceful space aliens that were passing by in the '60s and it's a shame K&N got away with it.

Reply to
jim1500hd

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.