|
![]() |
#1 |
Junior Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Virginia
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
|
![]()
Just wondering if anyone has done any testing with and without an air cleaner and how it effects ET
Also any testing between paper and k&n fliters. I have never run an air filter but i am thinking about running one just wondering how it would effect ET and wondering if the K&N fliter and the xtreme top if worth the money. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | |
VIP Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Glendale, Arizona
Posts: 3,044
Likes: 712
Liked 1,583 Times in 582 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Anthem, Arizona
Posts: 2,766
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
|
![]()
Agree w/ SSDiv6. I can tell you my Stocker ram-air '70 AMX did not slow at all with a 12" K&N with matching filter-charger top piece. I always ran it. There is a lot of dust in the air here in AZ and it's not worth paying for new cylinder walls, pistons, etc., for even a few hundreths in my opinion. Now that I run SS, I have a hi-rise intake and a filter is no longer an option. Wish it were...
__________________
Jeff Lee 7494 D/S '70 AMX |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: jackson
Posts: 1,165
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 3 Posts
|
![]()
on my Cutlass I run a Moroso 14" paper air cleaner...@ the fall classic last year I went a 12.84 with it & a 12.76 without...passes were made within a 1/2 hour of each other.
__________________
Greg Fulk 308 308X P/SA "ALL AMERICAN" |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
VIP Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Glendale, Arizona
Posts: 3,044
Likes: 712
Liked 1,583 Times in 582 Posts
|
![]()
The design of the air cleaner has a lot to do with performance. It is a known fact that the drop bases kill performance; however, due to clearance problems, many times your only choice is to run a dropped air cleaner base. Also, the K&N X-treme lid is way over rated and many engines loose power with the liod due to disruption of air flow affecting the metering system.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 728
Likes: 5
Liked 13 Times in 7 Posts
|
![]()
This was found on DRR from April 7th 2008
I know that a standard 14x3" paper filter slowed my mild (low 12-sec, 850 CFM) BBC door car slightly, (.03-.04), vs no filter. Tested a 4" tall K&N, with no added oil other than what it came with, and no change vs not having a filter. Oiled it thoroughly, and it did slow .015. Tried a Wix P/N 42096 14x4" paper element, which fits all standard (& "cheapie") chrome air cleaners, and it ran just like no filter. I've been using them for the past 9 years. Napa has a nearly identical one, (P/N 22096), for about half price, but tighter pleating, have not tested it in controlled manner, but did run one in a pinch.
__________________
N/A |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 | |
VIP Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Glendale, Arizona
Posts: 3,044
Likes: 712
Liked 1,583 Times in 582 Posts
|
![]() Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 728
Likes: 5
Liked 13 Times in 7 Posts
|
![]()
The flow rating for the Wix filter 42096R 14x4" paper element is 600 CFM.
Wix filter 46944R which flows 1000cfm is virtually the same as 42096. They are both 14X4 paper filters The two other differences are cost and filter thickness 46944R costs $28 and is 1.25 inches thick 1000CFM 42096R costs $13 and is 2.25 inches thick. I guess the thickness accounts for the flow rating
__________________
N/A |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|