i have some dyno proof on k&n filters, ya know ya wanna see it!!!

Discussion in 'SN95 4.6L Mustang Tech' started by stangman, Feb 9, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Any dyno is just a tool period. You make a change and put it on the dyno to tune for Max HP/TQ. One is not better than the other IMO they can't simulate real world racing.

    Like someone said before at the track you have varying conditions and have to lanch your car. What the wind resistance? How about the bite of the track? A CAI/Ram air and true breathing never comes into play on any dyno because there is no air movement.

    You want real world times and performance proof take your testing to the track and compare your 60fts times, 1/4 mile times, and MPH. Then you'll know for sure what your K&N is doing or any other mod for that matter.................

    Same day runs are a plus.
  2. It's like the guy that told me a stock 03 GT he drove got mid to low 12's in the 1/4 mile. When I told him it's not possible; his excuse is it boils down to "drivers".
  3. ok guys have seen a test where I guy uses a manometer or however it is spelled

    tried the K&N vs many other filters of both foam and paper style

    the K&N did read the highest flow of all the filters while the paper flowed the worst

    will see if I can bring up the test soon though
  4. but then also comes driver error
    everyway has it's flaws
  5. That's why they time you at different stages of the track, you get a good 60ft to compare too and it will tell you a lot.
  6. How much mileage and abuse has been put on the car since October?
  7. I swear by the K&N filter because I put one on my car, and therefore, it must be good.


    But seriously, they do flow pretty good. I mainly put 'em on because I am too lazy to bother with changing paper every 10K miles or so.

    It's why I buy the good fully synthetic oil too, because I'm too lazy to fiddle with changing crappy dinosaur oil every 3K miles (all its good for).

    If I'm gonna do work, I want some damned power out of it.
  8. I'm still confused here, so he's stock minus K&N and thinks he's putting 296 FWHP out???

  9. This industry standard for loss between the crank and drive wheels is 15%. That loss (or gain if you go the other way) will not be effected by which dyno you're on. The loss percentage is figured on the friction and 90 degree tork direction change (differential) of the car, regardless of what it happens to be sitting on.Therefore, your 220 RWHP works out to 253 HP at the crank (220 * 1.15).
  10. why the heck are you multiplying by .7???? its not a 70% loss?????? is this the ebonics of math or something???
  11. 0.70 = 70 %, therefore you multiply 296 by 70%, because you're taking 30% out of the equation for the drivetrain loss (as claimed by the author of this thread)

    i don't think thats ebonics math, i think its real math.

    example: if you have 10 dollars, and you lose 30% of the money, you have 70% left. to get 70% of 10 dollars, multiply .70 by 10, and you'll get 7.

    looks like you gotta get back to school huh? :notnice:
  12. :lol: Its a factory freak!

    Thanks for all the "proof"
  13. hahaha, you guys settle down. i don't think i'm running 296 flywheel hp, that was just a number that i got without a filter in & threw it in there cause i knew it would get a rise out of you all :p

    the post was just a broad comparison, not a detailed organized plan to see if a filter, of all things, would make or lose any power. once again i'll say, it was a spur of the moment thing, & it just happend to be close enough in weather conditions so that i could loosly compare the two days, between stock & with the filter. jeez guys lighten up :rolleyes:

    i do have a feeling that i will loose hp with it though after seeing that it lost that much (and yes i know it was two different days, but that is a large amount for rwhp) plus knowing that my buddy in his car DID FOR A FACT run slower at the trck with his. it may have been dirty or whatever, but it did nonethe less run slower.

    Now since everyone has seemed to be rubbed wrong by this little comparison, (not even meaning it to be taken so friggin seriously :rolleyes: ) i will do a full test on it later this week, next week at latest :rolleyes: when i put my car on the dyno before i put my exhaust on i'll bring both filters & make 2 to 3 runs with each filter & give you all the results. so you will have the numbers there in black & white, so you can choose to believe it or not. i'll actually try to go & do it tomorrow, but we'll see
  14. so you think youd have 296 flywheel hp if you ran the car with no filter?

    that is what " i don't think i'm running 296 flywheel hp, that was just a number that i got without a filter in " that says right?

    be just because jonjon hasnt chimed in yet WHAT ARE YOUR MODS?!!?! lol
  15. must be one of those monday motors.

    I've heard Mustangs (cars, not dynos) average a bit low on the HP loss through the driveline... meaning either they're really efficient, or under rated... can anyone confirm this?
  16. Ok first of all your numbers are all off, your dynos werent even on the same day, and you cant drive without a filter, so all of this is pointless. Stop messing around with your damn filters and get into some real mods, then get a dyno and give us some proof that can be helpfull. And also you cant really measure a FILTER by track times. Not only will your time be different every time at the track, but there are so many other factors you have to consider.
  17. The 03 Mach 1's and 03 Cobra's were under-rated. But I think the GT's are correct.

  18. ok, here's what you do.... 1)stand up.....2)reach back.... 3)proceed to pull your head out of your butt..... 4) re-read some stuff.

    this really wasn't meant to be very serious, it wasn't organized at all since i just decided to get a couple pulls in while i was down there. we all know that they weren't on the same day & that does make it impossibe to compare exactly----I KNOW THAT, its only a very rough comparison. & i'm not running without a filter, it was only done for one run on the dyno, because i didn't have another one to put in. & the "real mods" are sitting behind me waiting to be installed.

    so let it be until i get the whole friggin "test" done tomorrow (hopefully tomorrow anyway)

    btw---sorry i caused so many headaches..... :D i will think before i post from now on :flag: :D
  19. Well the title of your thread is i have some dyno proof on k&n filters, ya know ya wanna see it!!! So maybe your the one that needs to pull your head out of your ass and learn some things.
  20. FYI, all Ford 4.6 motors made on a day that ends with Y are freaks.

    Well I hope this one is serious unlike this thread... :shrug:

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.