On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 01:44:38 GMT, "Whitelightning"
<white.lightning2@verizon.net> wrote:

>
>"David Kelly" <n4hhe@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:n4hhe-77411E.18362005012005@knology.usenetserver.com...
>> In article <10tn3f7nip3l4a1@corp.supernews.com>,
>> The link which started this thread was specifically interested in air
>> filter performance as related to Diesel engines. The intake equation is
>> different as the Diesel does not have a throttle. More air could result
>> in more efficiency.
>>
>Diesel doesn't have a throttle, now that's the damnedest thing I ever heard.
>Whitelightning
>
I was thinking the same thing. Diesel is injected, just like most
modern gas engines. The main difference is ignition. It's like the
dude was trying to imply gas engines still have the air and fuel mixed
before entering the cylinders while diesels don't. Fact is, many
modern gas engines dont mix until in the cylinders either.

If I understood that at least somewhat. Carborated vehicles might see a
benift, but the ones with compuer controls will overide the filter benifits
to keep the motor operating wthin spec. So you would need a tweak in the
programming to realize the benifits?


"David Kelly" <n4hhe@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:n4hhe-77411E.18362005012005@knology.usenetserver.com...
> In article <10tn3f7nip3l4a1@corp.supernews.com>,
> "Renegade Knight" <renegade.knight@no.spam.hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Air + Fuel + Efficiency.
>>
>> All other things being equil if you make the motor more efficient at
>> burning
>> gas and turning it into power you get more power. It takes work to creat
>> the vacume that draws air in. Less intake restriction means more of the
>> motors power can go to HP.
>
> Wrong.
>
> Lets say you are cruising at 80 MPH in your gasoline land ark at 3,000
> RPM. Note your throttle position with stock paper air filter. Now
> replace the filter with your choice of super non-restrictive filter and
> note your throttle position under the same conditions. It is closed more
> than previously because any and all restriction "saved" by the
> "performance" air filter is compensated for at the throttle body.
>
> Don't bother to actually try the above as you would have to be able to
> measure the throttle position *very* accurately (the difference between
> stock filter and no filter isn't much.) And then average the results
> because under these conditions everything is always changing.
>
> Under the stated conditions HP output remains constant. RPM remains
> constant. The quantity of air does not change. The engine will suck air
> on the intake exactly as hard with either filter. Look beyond the air
> filter, the only point "restriction" matters is that which is seen at
> the intake valves. K&N is happy if you only consider the restriction
> between the throttle and outside atmosphere.
>
> The only thing which is important is the *sum* of the intake
> restriction. For a given HP output on a gasoline engine that sum will
> remain constant because it is the very thing which regulates HP output.
>
> If the engine gets more air the fuel system will add more fuel to
> maintain combustion and emissions. More fuel = more HP = more faster,
> where the driver compensates by lifting on the throttle to reduce the
> air and therefore HP. The only time "less restriction" buys you anything
> is under full throttle.
>
> The link which started this thread was specifically interested in air
> filter performance as related to Diesel engines. The intake equation is
> different as the Diesel does not have a throttle. More air could result
> in more efficiency.
>

Whitelightning wrote:

> >
> Diesel doesn't have a throttle, now that's the damnedest thing I ever > heard.

Why, it does not operate as a throttle. It actually is a pump.
Kind regards,
Erik-Jan.


http://www.fotograaf.com/trooper

On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 01:44:38 GMT, "Whitelightning"
<white.lightning2@verizon.net> wrote:

>
>"David Kelly" <n4hhe@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:n4hhe-77411E.18362005012005@knology.usenetserver.com...
>> In article <10tn3f7nip3l4a1@corp.supernews.com>,
>> The link which started this thread was specifically interested in air
>> filter performance as related to Diesel engines. The intake equation is
>> different as the Diesel does not have a throttle. More air could result
>> in more efficiency.
>>
>Diesel doesn't have a throttle, now that's the damnedest thing I ever heard.
>Whitelightning

I think he's referring to a throttle plate (used to restrict air
flow). Diesels regulate the fuel delivery & the only intake air
restrictions are in place to minimize noise levels.

If 5-6 HP is the be all and end all, purchase & install good oil for
your engine, tranny, & Diff. there have been independent studies that
have measured a 5-8 HP at the wheel gain from that alone. PLUS.
You'll save fuel & potentially increase the life of your mechanical
parts.

For the best results? Sell your present car & purchase a more
powerful car. Less monkeying around, better reliability, more power.

On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 02:18:27 GMT, "Whitelightning"
<white.lightning2@verizon.net> wrote:

>
><MajorDomo@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>news:41DC3BF9.9699C32E@mailcity.com...
>> That is why they call that stuff "after market." If ANY of the
>> stuff actually did what they claimed it would not be "after
>> market," because every automotive manufacture would be using the
>> stuff. Every manufacture is looking for every advantage over the
>> other to meet or exceed CAFE
>> mike hunt
>
>Most "after market" stuff does work. But then most after market is geared
>at power and performance, which does not go hand and hand with CAFE, but
>usually against it. The after market has been providing roller lifters and
>rocker arms since the early 70's. why? Because they reduce friction in the
>valve train, which frees up horse power, and allows higher rpms. Guess what
>many auto manufactures are using these days?
Overhead cams?
> Do you think Chevy would have
>put V-8s in the Monza if there hadn't been so many people using after market
>to put them in Vegas? Or ford have put V-8s in the Mustang II if so many
>people hadn't used after market kits to do the same with Pintos and Mustang
>II's?
I don't think either Chev or Ford sold many V8 Monza's or Mustang II's
I think they decided to design cars to better handle a V8 after those
experiments
>Hot Rodders where rigging up snorkels with dryer hose and then after
>market kits to get cool air from out side the engine bay into the intake way
>back in the early 60's. How many manufactures don't have ducting from the
>radiator horn to the intake these days?
The manufacturers did it back in the 60's 70's & 80's. It usually got
pulled off the air horn by people "hot rodding" their engine's
>We knew back in the early 70's that
>an air dam across the front made the car handle better, and run faster, that
>ground affects kits got us better fuel mileage and handling..
You mean like the 1969 SuperBird, Charger Daytona & Ford Torino GT? I
think the manufacturers knew, used and installed these devices on the
cars where they wouldn't be ripped off. Keep in mind the environment
the cars from the 1960's & 70's were driving in. The plastics, roads,
fuel & tires have improved dramatically since then.
>How many cars
>today don't have some sort of air dam and ground affects ether as an added
>on piece like the S-10s, or incorporated into the bumper design and rocker
>panels like the Mustang, Monte Carlo, Impala and the Corvette? The after
>market has been providing performance suspension components for ever. Its
>only been in the last 10-15 years that you have seen manufactures start
>using teflon and polyurethane bushings, and performance shocks/struts like
>Bilstien.
Back to my earlier comment. Try driving down a gravel road on a car
with poly urethane bushings for more than 5 years. IF you could stand
the noise & feedback you'd be back at the dealer getting the bushings
changed so often you'd think Fiat is the way to go.

> It was the automotive enthusiast and the after market that got
>sway bars on oem.
>Like any other industy there are snake oil salesmen out there. But they
>make up a very small percentage of the industry.
>Of course if you were one of those that was always trying to get a bit more
>out of what the manufacturer sold you, you would know this. OEM never does
>anyhting that costs more till they are forced to by consumer demand and lost
>sales kick them in the gonads and getting their attention.
>
>Whitelightning

OEM wants to make a sale, & Keep the money, then make another sale to
the same person. If you sell a product that won't hold up, isn't
suited to the environment or will cause other problems you will either
not be able to make another sale to the same person or you will have
people asking for their money back (or both).

GM Makes amazing direct injection Diesels in Europe, However the Fuel
in this continent is so polluted and the roads are so rough that they
refuse to import them (an example of reality getting in the way of a
good idea).

A group of highly trained engineers working as a team for GM Ford etc,
are more likely to arrive at a more workable automotive solution to a
problem than the average K-Tel inventor.

GM experiments & tries new things (i.e. the experimental CVCC 350 they
tried years ago) however they won't sell such a product to your wife
if it will leave her stranded outside of Fargo on a cold winter day or
won't work within the constraints of the EPA or CAFE.

That's life.

On Mon, 3 Jan 2005 17:42:45 -0500, someone posing as Steve W. chisled in
the wall:

> http://home.usadatanet.net/~jbplock/ISO5011/SPICER.htm
>
>
> Let's see
> K&N passed MORE dirt/dust and plugged up faster than just about every
> other filter tested.
>

Just my $0.02...

I bought a K&N drop-in filter for my '95 Jimmy at around 70,000 miles. I
noticed absolutely no difference in performance.

I later bought a CAI kit at around 120K miles and still noticed very little
difference in performance. At around the same time I replaced the muffler
and cat with Flowmaster (and whatever the cat was) models. It was at that
time, I noticed a bit more OTL increase.

IOW, the filter did absoletly nothing by itself.

On my '98 Maxima, I took a different approach - I ensured that the $1.50
Autozone air filter was changed every 4K miles when I did an oil change.

Having just bought a Saturn VUE on Sunday, I plan to do the same.

This technique provides two advantages - first I don't let too much dirt
into the engine, where it "could" possibly cause some future damage.
Second, I ensure I always have a free-flowing filter at a very low price.

Anybody need some bottles of K&N filter oil?

--
kai - perfectreign at yahoo dot com
www.perfectreign.com
"i believe in what i'm doing but what is it i'm doing here?"

On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 02:26:20 GMT, secretspam@ihatespam.net
(SgtSilicon) wrote:

>:|On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 01:44:38 GMT, "Whitelightning"
>:|<white.lightning2@verizon.net> wrote:
>:|
>:|>
>:|>"David Kelly" <n4hhe@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>:|>news:n4hhe-77411E.18362005012005@knology.usenetserver.com...
>:|>> In article <10tn3f7nip3l4a1@corp.supernews.com>,
>:|>> The link which started this thread was specifically interested in air
>:|>> filter performance as related to Diesel engines. The intake equation is
>:|>> different as the Diesel does not have a throttle. More air could result
>:|>> in more efficiency.
>:|>>
>:|>Diesel doesn't have a throttle, now that's the damnedest thing I ever heard.
>:|>Whitelightning
>:|>
>:|I was thinking the same thing. Diesel is injected, just like most
>:|modern gas engines. The main difference is ignition. It's like the
>:|dude was trying to imply gas engines still have the air and fuel mixed
>:|before entering the cylinders while diesels don't. Fact is, many
>:|modern gas engines dont mix until in the cylinders either.
>:|
>:|

they're both injected, but that's about the total of their
similarities. Gas engines still (with the exception of the Isuzu 3.5l
Direct injection gasser) inject the fuel into the intake manifold,
before the intake valve, whether it be at the throttlebody, like in a
TBI system) or at the intake valve (SFI, CFI, MPFI systems). Diesels
inject the fuel directly into the cylinder at extremely high pressures
( max injection pressure on a Duramax is 25,000PSI) at a precise time
in the compresstion stroke to fire the cylinder. Gas engines are
stoichiometric, i.e. they require between 12:1-14.7:1 air/fuel to
operate. diesels are lean-burn... meaning they can idle at a
75:1-100:1 a/f mixture.

a diesels engine speed is controlled by the injection pump, there are
no throttle blades of any kind. the pump controls the amount of fuel
and the timing of the pulses. the more fuel the faster the engine
runs, the available amount of air never changes. in a gas engine the
more air is allowed in, the more fuel is added to maintain the A/F
ratio, which increases engine speed.

-Bret

Full_Name wrote:
> On Thu, 06 Jan 2005 02:18:27 GMT, "Whitelightning"
> <white.lightning2@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>
>><MajorDomo@mailcity.com> wrote in message
>>news:41DC3BF9.9699C32E@mailcity.com...
>>
>>>That is why they call that stuff "after market." If ANY of the
>>>stuff actually did what they claimed it would not be "after
>>>market," because every automotive manufacture would be using the
>>>stuff. Every manufacture is looking for every advantage over the
>>>other to meet or exceed CAFE
>>>mike hunt
>>
>>Most "after market" stuff does work. But then most after market is geared
>>at power and performance, which does not go hand and hand with CAFE, but
>>usually against it. The after market has been providing roller lifters and
>>rocker arms since the early 70's. why? Because they reduce friction in the
>>valve train, which frees up horse power, and allows higher rpms. Guess what
>>many auto manufactures are using these days?
>
> Overhead cams?
>
>>Do you think Chevy would have
>>put V-8s in the Monza if there hadn't been so many people using after market
>>to put them in Vegas? Or ford have put V-8s in the Mustang II if so many
>>people hadn't used after market kits to do the same with Pintos and Mustang
>>II's?
>
> I don't think either Chev or Ford sold many V8 Monza's or Mustang II's
> I think they decided to design cars to better handle a V8 after those
> experiments
>
>>Hot Rodders where rigging up snorkels with dryer hose and then after
>>market kits to get cool air from out side the engine bay into the intake way
>>back in the early 60's. How many manufactures don't have ducting from the
>>radiator horn to the intake these days?
>
> The manufacturers did it back in the 60's 70's & 80's. It usually got
> pulled off the air horn by people "hot rodding" their engine's
>
>>We knew back in the early 70's that
>>an air dam across the front made the car handle better, and run faster, that
>>ground affects kits got us better fuel mileage and handling..
>
> You mean like the 1969 SuperBird, Charger Daytona & Ford Torino GT? I
> think the manufacturers knew, used and installed these devices on the
> cars where they wouldn't be ripped off. Keep in mind the environment
> the cars from the 1960's & 70's were driving in. The plastics, roads,
> fuel & tires have improved dramatically since then.
>
>>How many cars
>>today don't have some sort of air dam and ground affects ether as an added
>>on piece like the S-10s, or incorporated into the bumper design and rocker
>>panels like the Mustang, Monte Carlo, Impala and the Corvette? The after
>>market has been providing performance suspension components for ever. Its
>>only been in the last 10-15 years that you have seen manufactures start
>>using teflon and polyurethane bushings, and performance shocks/struts like
>>Bilstien.
>
> Back to my earlier comment. Try driving down a gravel road on a car
> with poly urethane bushings for more than 5 years. IF you could stand
> the noise & feedback you'd be back at the dealer getting the bushings
> changed so often you'd think Fiat is the way to go.
>
>
>>It was the automotive enthusiast and the after market that got
>>sway bars on oem.
>>Like any other industy there are snake oil salesmen out there. But they
>>make up a very small percentage of the industry.
>>Of course if you were one of those that was always trying to get a bit more
>>out of what the manufacturer sold you, you would know this. OEM never does
>>anyhting that costs more till they are forced to by consumer demand and lost
>>sales kick them in the gonads and getting their attention.
>>
>>Whitelightning
>
>
> OEM wants to make a sale, & Keep the money, then make another sale to
> the same person. If you sell a product that won't hold up, isn't
> suited to the environment or will cause other problems you will either
> not be able to make another sale to the same person or you will have
> people asking for their money back (or both).
>
> GM Makes amazing direct injection Diesels in Europe, However the Fuel
> in this continent is so polluted and the roads are so rough that they
> refuse to import them (an example of reality getting in the way of a
> good idea).
>
> A group of highly trained engineers working as a team for GM Ford etc,
> are more likely to arrive at a more workable automotive solution to a
> problem than the average K-Tel inventor.
>
> GM experiments & tries new things (i.e. the experimental CVCC 350 they
> tried years ago) however they won't sell such a product to your wife
> if it will leave her stranded outside of Fargo on a cold winter day or
> won't work within the constraints of the EPA or CAFE.
>
> That's life.
nah ... that want to make a car that will outlast the loan and their
warranty by as little as possible

like anything else in this world .. it cant break till the warranty is up