K&N modifications, can it be improved?

[ShoBoat]

I am definitely heading to Toronto Motorsports (Cayuga) tonight. It would awesome to see some other Ecoboosts there. I'll be doing 3 runs with each setup, break boosting at 2k rpm. I am really interested in the results. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Larrylu]

Interested in the results too!

 

[SHODYOU]

The j pipe is what makes the k&n louder... resonance thru the bend in the pipe.

 

[ShoBoat]

A little tease, I don't have time to do the write up right now. But let's just say this. It wasn't what I expected. More to come later today!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SHODYOU]

:foottapping:

 

[ShoBoat]

Okay so my findings from last night at the track. I have to admit I was a little surprised at the results. First I did 3 runs with my modified K&N typhoon with the K&N filter. DA was terrible and my launches were even worse. That said I launched the same every time. 2K only waiting 2 seconds of break boost for each run. Then I did one run with the typhoon and the S&B filter, no surprise here 3 tenths slower than the K&N filter. I only did one pass as I could immediately feel the difference between the 2. I then swapped out the typhoon for the stock box, I let the car cool down for 30 min and began the process again same as above 3 runs. Data logging was done by my laptop and FORScan. So on to the results. On average the stock intake ran slightly quicker then my modified K&N typhoon, but only slightly on all the runs. The kicker is that IAT1 (the one in the CAI and stock air box) was reading 12C (22F) higher then the Stock intake.

Here are the 2 runs with nearly identical 60 foot times.
            K&N            Stock with K&N panel
60          1.935          1.936
1/8        8.421          8.397
MPH        83.88          84.24
1/4          13.081        13.036
MPH        103.95        104.54

I know the 60s were terrible, I was however trying to launch the car exactly the same every time. And for the most part it seemed to have worked. Times were only slightly lower with the Stock box, trap was 1 to 2 mph higher with the stock box. When comparing the logs from the runs I can see that the car did pull slightly more timing with the K&N CAI. The interesting thing from the logs was comparing IAT1, IAT2 and CAC temps. Even though at the beginning of each run IAT1 was reading 22F higher in the K&N CAI by the 3 second mark IAT 2 and cac closed to 10F by 8 seconds the 2 runs were only separated by 2F difference for IAT2 and CAC temps from the 2 runs with the different intakes. I am going to dig a little deeper into the logs, I would really like to better understand the differences. But at least with the modifications might have made a difference, I also think that the location of the sensor on the K&N CAI might be reading a bit higher than actual (if that is possible). I hope this makes sense. I will try to do a CSV export of the 2 runs for comparison from the logs. 

Bottom line the stock box is still slightly better performing. And if you buy an S&B filter make sure its a lot bigger than the K&N its replacing.

 

[BiGMaC]

Excellent report ShoBoat!

Confirms again in a real world situation what I saw on the dyno.  One of the better engineered parts of the SHO is the OEM intake and filter.  As I have pointed out before.... On the dyno there is no delta between performance of OEM intake and filter vs removing the and only leaving the "saxophone" open. (Hood up, fan on engine both ways... Back to back.

Preliminarily I think the temps you report are due to the metal tubing on the K&N transferring heat more than the OEM plastic.

 

[ShoBoat]

Thanks BiGMaC. Now that I have put this behind me, I wonder if there are any gains to be had on the rest of the cold side piping?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BiGMaC]

Thanks BiGMaC. Now that I have put this behind me, I wonder if there are any gains to be had on the rest of the cold side

I believe there are.... I believe that Spartn27 has few design elements that might do it in his design.... He's busy, but we are designing a one- of based on his design.... I hope we can provide dyno data at least in the near future. 

I'd at least like to add the underwood eye candy without feeling like I had compromised the performance of the car.

 

[ShoBoat]

Cool looking forward to it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ShoBoat]

So after a few weeks going back and forth with S&B I still don't have a replacement filter. The S&B filter was supposed to replace the K&N from the Typhoon. After doing the tests above I found it to be much more restrictive. Even though it was stated to be a direct replacement.So after speaking to them they wanted to ensure that the new filter was going to flow enough. I have been waiting weeks to have them bench test the replacement. I have grown tired of this BS and I cannot recommend S&B. I am sure they have a decent product, by my experience with their customer service department has left me disappointed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SHOdded]

which s&b filter were you using, shoboat?  specific to the sho, or a universal one?  maybe you could do a comparo with the filter tomc is running?

 

[ShoBoat]

which s&b filter were you using, shoboat?  specific to the sho, or a universal one?  maybe you could do a comparo with the filter tomc is running?

http://www.sbfilters.com/index.php/universal-filter-2145.html



SKU R1233
Weight 0.8100
UPC841372030048
Oil Color Blue
Flange ID (a3) 6
Flange Height (a4) 1.75
Top Width (a1) 5.25
Pleat Height (a8) .5
Type of Flange (a9) Traditional
Element Height (l) 6
Base Width (a6) 7.5
Type of Top (a10) Power Stack: Black Rim
Type of Media (a11) Cleanable, 8-Layer Cotton (Blue Oil)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SHO-Time]

You can try wrapping the K&N metal tubing in exhaust wrap to see if it brings the IAT temps down a little bit.

 

[ShoBoat]

You can try wrapping the K&N metal tubing in exhaust wrap to see if it brings the IAT temps down a little bit.

I actually tried that also, any attempt to "insulate" the tube was only effective until heat soak set in. Once that happened it held the heat in even longer. To the point that during a normal drive it would stay much above ambient even at highway speeds. I did have some luck with a heat shield only on the bottom of the tube. In an attempt to reflect the heat. This was marginally better also with the stock box.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[SHO-Time]

You can try wrapping the K&N metal tubing in exhaust wrap to see if it brings the IAT temps down a little bit.

I actually tried that also, any attempt to "insulate" the tube was only effective until heat soak set in. Once that happened it held the heat in even longer. To the point that during a normal drive it would stay much above ambient even at highway speeds. I did have some luck with a heat shield only on the bottom of the tube. In an attempt to reflect the heat. This was marginally better also with the stock box.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If there are any companies in your area that do custom carbon fiber molds, they could copy the tubing from the K&N. I'm sure the tube alone would be anywhere from $200-$400, but it's an idea.

 

[SHOdded]

http://www.sbfilters.com/index.php/universal-filter-2145.html

tomc was using the one that comes with the o3-04 Cobra kit S&B Filter KF-1003, supposedly good for at least 550hp

http://www.sbfilters.com/index.php/year-make-model-engine/2003/replacement-filters-cotton-cleanable-kf-1003.html

 

[ShoBoat]

good idea, I'll have to look into that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ShoBoat]

Just to give an update here, S&B finally got back to me today with a filter recommendation. They did give me a discount on the replacement filter. So I ordered it. Once it has arrived I'll let you guys know how well it works.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Lanson]

Your findings of elevated IAT's is exactly what I experience with my N/A engine, K&N intake.  With my SCT X4 datalogging, I found dramatic differences between the K&N intake and the stock intake.  ~43 degree delta average once the engine is warm.  There's significance here, with all other variables being roughly equal.  Now the weird thing is that even while in-motion on the highway, with tons of airflow moving through the engine bay and through the intake itself, the IAT's are much higher with the K&N, like 138-145 degrees (with ambient being an admittedly hot 110+), and that would skyrocket to 168+ in some situations, especially when the A/C fan kicked on and started blowing all that hot air out the engine bay.  I suspect the lack of shielding from the cooling fans and the engine bay itself, and I suspect that pretty metal tube.

With that high of an IAT, the engine is a dog unless you flog it.  And mind you, that's sans turbos so you have to know the turbo-charged versions are hitting much higher temps.

Okay so my findings from last night at the track. I have to admit I was a little surprised at the results. First I did 3 runs with my modified K&N typhoon with the K&N filter. DA was terrible and my launches were even worse. That said I launched the same every time. 2K only waiting 2 seconds of break boost for each run. Then I did one run with the typhoon and the S&B filter, no surprise here 3 tenths slower than the K&N filter. I only did one pass as I could immediately feel the difference between the 2. I then swapped out the typhoon for the stock box, I let the car cool down for 30 min and began the process again same as above 3 runs. Data logging was done by my laptop and FORScan. So on to the results. On average the stock intake ran slightly quicker then my modified K&N typhoon, but only slightly on all the runs. The kicker is that IAT1 (the one in the CAI and stock air box) was reading 12C (22F) higher then the Stock intake.

Here are the 2 runs with nearly identical 60 foot times.
            K&N            Stock with K&N panel
60          1.935          1.936
1/8        8.421          8.397
MPH        83.88          84.24
1/4          13.081        13.036
MPH        103.95        104.54

I know the 60s were terrible, I was however trying to launch the car exactly the same every time. And for the most part it seemed to have worked. Times were only slightly lower with the Stock box, trap was 1 to 2 mph higher with the stock box. When comparing the logs from the runs I can see that the car did pull slightly more timing with the K&N CAI. The interesting thing from the logs was comparing IAT1, IAT2 and CAC temps. Even though at the beginning of each run IAT1 was reading 22F higher in the K&N CAI by the 3 second mark IAT 2 and cac closed to 10F by 8 seconds the 2 runs were only separated by 2F difference for IAT2 and CAC temps from the 2 runs with the different intakes. I am going to dig a little deeper into the logs, I would really like to better understand the differences. But at least with the modifications might have made a difference, I also think that the location of the sensor on the K&N CAI might be reading a bit higher than actual (if that is possible). I hope this makes sense. I will try to do a CSV export of the 2 runs for comparison from the logs. 

Bottom line the stock box is still slightly better performing. And if you buy an S&B filter make sure its a lot bigger than the K&N its replacing.