K&N's are greatly over rated and have been proven to filter air less
too. If you are looking for a makes cure for MPG, K&N is not the
answer. Custom tune would be money better spent.
When Snoman says it filters less he means that it filters less, not flows
less. It flows more, and filtration rate is more than adequate. I used a
Hypertech programmer on my '04 Avalanche Z71 along with a K&N. The
difference over stock performance is a lot. Especially with the premium fuel
Your gain is from the combo of program and better fuel, not the
filter. Even if you just ran 89 or better long term stock you would
likely see a MPG gain and better fuel is a must with a programmer if
you want best return because 87 octane can severly limit spark curve
and resulting efficeny and power. The masses though tend to be hung up
on 87 octane and this is why Detriot has spent billions over the years
on advanced knock control systems to keep consumer "happy" (no knocks)
while they burn cheapest fuel they can find ignorant to that it is
likely increasing overall operating cost due to reduced efficency
because of constant need to adjust spark curve at times increase fuel
consumption. 87 octan came out in 70 and was designed for 8 to 1
compression engines and now engine are 9 to 1 and higher (and would be
higher still were it not for 87 octane because there is limits to how
much you can mask octane requirements). America s love for 87 is kinda
its own undoing.
On Sat, 03 Feb 2007 01:21:24 GMT, "NinetyThreeRedCapri"
It is not s stupid question.(really no such thing as one either) If
you play with the display (like I did once) you will find the it is a
VERY fine adjustment to make it favor K&N (very fine). A modern engine
controlls fuel air mixture regardless of air density so even if the
pressure dropp through filter is say 1% less (any is is a very small
difference indeed) it will have no effect on the MPG on a closed loop
fuel injected motor because it will adjust mixutre. With a old carb, a
bit less retriction on intake cause carb to lean out a bit which is
good or bad depending on what A/F ratio for it currently is. People
want to beleive is silver bullets though so myth lives on. (just like
they wanted to beleive in 50 MPG carbs locked in a vault many many
years ago) Ask yourself this, if there was any real merit to this and
dual exhausts truck would come with them because detriot is under a
LOT of pressure to get MPG and power up and if this worked that great,
new trucks would have a form of them on them.
Do you still drive a Model T? That is the same type of ignorant thinking
that hindered many advancements in all fields. What it really boils down to
is $$$$$$$$$$$$. It costs MONEY to put in the best equipment, MONEY that
the average buyer does NOT want to spend. Yes, they are under lots of
pressure to get MPG up, but also under even MORE pressure to keep costs
down. MONEY was the issue in EVERY election for decades. People vote by
their greedy pocketbooks and not by issues. People buy vehicles more by
their out-of-pocket expense than by long term savings in gas mileage. Those
people most interested in fuel economy also want the least expensive cash
Yes, there are many stupid gimicks out there (gas pills, vortex addons to
the intake, gas magnets, etc.). That does not mean that everything out
there not OEM is a gimick.
The ignorance is yours not mine because you seem to know far more than
the engineers that built them and me too on the subjest of engine
design and theromdynamic preciples and efficencys of a IC engine even
though you likely never studied it like I have and its designers have.
People like you think WOT all the time and 5000 RPM but the reality is
what might help a bit at 5000 RPM and WOT, hurts you the rest of the
time. YOu can beleive what you want but it does no change the physics
involed because they is a LOT more to engine design and efficency than
just chopping it up and adding a new air filter (with less filtering
capacity) and a different exhaust on a closed loop engine. After
market makers love you guys and laugh all the way to the bank. Ill bet
you thing 87 octane is the best possible fuel for it too even though
detriot has long used 93 octane for their MPG tests (but they never
tell you that on stick because the law does not require them to tell
Let me help you out. He is aware that you and he are just about neighbors.
Thus it would be real easy for you to disprove what he offers up. Sorta like
telling me I have some interest in 87 octane. He makes these statements,
then ignore's anybody who ask's for clarification or proof. It is the same
thing he's always done.
Under the Old Testament you would be stoned to death for such a false
prophecy. No, a LONG string of false prophecies. Engineers do not sell
cars, businesses do. My expertise is business, Bachelors of Science,
Management Major, Daemen College class of '83, Snyder, NY. If engineers had
their way there would be no auto industry because they would make products
too expensive to buy. Your thinking would have a budget car priced at over
$30,000. Engineers can do and have done MUCH more that is available on the
dealer lots. They are called concept cars! They are WAY too expensive for
the average buyer.
I think crusing RPM (targeting about 75% of the peak torque RPM), not WOT.
I rarely put the pedal to the metal. I am not into drag racing. I am into
driving to the store, to church, to school, to my favorite first grandson
and my favorite second grandson's home, to the hospital, to the theater, to
friend's homes, to the restaurant, etc.
I prefer 89 octane gasohol. That is where I get the best gas mileage on
most of my vehicles since I started buing new vehicles around 1988. Higher
octane has not proven to give better gas mileage.
You are a liar as to your education, unless it was from a mail-order
catalog. If you had any real knowledge of fluid dynamics you would
understand about exhaust and intake restrictions and design and why very
small changes (details optomized by the aftermarket) can yeld exponential
results (rule of squares sound familiar). Your grammar stinks. I thought
MINE was bad, but I still get A's and B's graduate level marked down only a
half a letter grade due to grammar. Yours would get lowered to near
failing. Lack of reasoning skills drops you below F.
The condemnation on the K&N filter comes from those who never used it and
don't want you to prove they are stupid. As far as whether or not it is
worth the monty, it is your choice. Consider the simple cost of replacing
the filter ever 15,000 versus paying once for the expected length of
ownership. I have changed over to the K&N in just about every vehicle I
have had since the late 80's and always had an immediate increase in mileage
and power. The mileage increase has varied from just measurable to
considerable (when I used to check out ever tank full, but that was long
ago). Probably the most dramatic demonstration of the noticable power
increase came from my Jeep Cherokee, an '88 I think. Pre K&N using the
cruise control at 55 the Cherokee would downshift about half way up a
particular hill. The day after I installed the K&N air filter and nothing
else it would not downshift until almost all the way up the hill and
sometimes not at all.
"It [K&N air filter] won't void your warranty. By federal law, the only time
an aftermarket part can void a warranty is if that part can be proven to be
the cause of the problem with the vehicle."
From a dealer (owner) on:
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.