Matlock All American 1255 Posts user info edit post |
So I was going to install cold air intake into my 2005 4.0 5sp. Ranger, but when I got to talking to a guy a work he said that some problems could arise if you drive in dusty conditions often which I do. My job involves alot of off road driving and driving near large construction sites so unless it has recently rained it is constantly dusty. I am installing the cold air intake to improve gas mileage since I get paid for mileage and any extra mpgs I can get help.
I wanted to know if anybody knew anything about dust hampering cold air intakes and if the pros for improved gas mileage would outweigh the cons, or vice versa, in this situation. 9/3/2008 11:35:28 PM |
TKE-Teg All American 43410 Posts user info edit post |
Dude its pretty simple. Most CAI's have a reuseable K&N filter that you clean on a regular basis. If you're in a dusty environment a lot then just clean it more often.
Thats it.
Of course, if it was me I wouldn't put a CAI on a truck that goes off road. 9/3/2008 11:39:18 PM |
Matlock All American 1255 Posts user info edit post |
well its not so much off road like mudding or anything like that, just mostly agriculture land and actually mostly around constuction. Thanks. 9/3/2008 11:43:44 PM |
TKE-Teg All American 43410 Posts user info edit post |
Shouldn't be a problem.
Enjoy the improved gas mileage and the lovely intake growl! 9/3/2008 11:45:55 PM |
arghx Deucefest '04 7584 Posts user info edit post |
Many people believe (myself included) that those aftermarket replacement filters simply don't filter as well as OEM style paper elements, although I couldn't quantify how much worse. I think you should keep the stock airbox. I can't see how an aftermarket cone filter, seeing how it's not enclosed in a plastic box, would have equal protection from offroading conditions.
What it comes down to is that you have a Ford Ranger, which would experience hardly any benefit from this modification, and the fact that you drive in dusty conditions. Noticeably improved gas mileage? Maybe, maybe not, I believe exhaust would help you more. It certainly won't improve for long if your filter is regularly clogged with dust and you forget to clean it (and the cleaning kit costs what, $20 if you have an oiled filter?) There also could just be a placebo effect, meaning you will unconsciously drive easier. Lots of heavily modified turbo cars run without air filters at all, but they are not driving in your conditions, they stand to gain more from an efficient intake system, and they don't expect OEM longevity. 9/4/2008 1:32:18 AM |
Hurley Suspended 7284 Posts user info edit post |
^ x2 9/4/2008 8:05:30 AM |
optmusprimer All American 30318 Posts user info edit post |
Quote : | " Most CAI's have a reuseable K&N filter that you clean on a regular basis. If you're in a dusty environment a lot then just clean it more often.
Thats it.
Of course, if it was me I wouldn't put a CAI on a truck that goes off road.
" |
Google prefilter. Its like a fine screen that goes over the filter and PREfilters it.9/4/2008 10:42:14 AM |
Seotaji All American 34244 Posts user info edit post |
Quote : | "Many people believe (myself included) that those aftermarket replacement filters simply don't filter as well as OEM style paper elements," |
it's true. you're trading a little more flow for better filtering and engine life.9/4/2008 10:47:25 AM |
NeuseRvrRat hello Mr. NSA! 35376 Posts user info edit post |
damn, i used to have a link where this Ph.D. did some experiments with the different filter medias and found that the k&n washable filters filter horribly. they're good for high performance apps, but suck for DD. 9/4/2008 12:36:13 PM |
Aficionado Suspended 22518 Posts user info edit post |
well durr
if you are going to have more air flow, something has to give 9/4/2008 12:47:10 PM |
Hurley Suspended 7284 Posts user info edit post |
sounds like an application for a BHAF
surface area, ftw 9/4/2008 12:58:51 PM |
Mitch Taylor All American 763 Posts user info edit post |
Cleaning kits are 10 and can be used about 20 times. If you are keeping your truck forever then I wouldnt do one but whats it going to hurt in the short term? I would just do the replacement filter as true cai dont really consistently see mpg increases. 9/4/2008 2:55:21 PM |
Hurley Suspended 7284 Posts user info edit post |
im going to go ahead and suggest you install a 4BT before anyone else does. There's your MPG's
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZODP23UI1pM
[Edited on September 4, 2008 at 3:03 PM. Reason : PSI, embed plz. (even though it's not your type)] 9/4/2008 2:59:54 PM |
Matlock All American 1255 Posts user info edit post |
Well there are a few others that I work with that do have CAI. I may have been unclear with the amount of off road driving I do. On a given work day 25-35% of my driving is off road, but if I am parked it is always around construction (dozers etc. kicking up large amounts of dust though granted my truck isn't always running). I also do a fair amount of state to state driving, and several road miles as the project I am currently on is 120 miles long. I am averaging 18-19mpg per workday so I was just looking for any advantage I could get and CAI seemed to be the simplest and easiest to accomplish, but perhaps I was wrong, thus this thread. 9/4/2008 6:27:11 PM |
TKE-Teg All American 43410 Posts user info edit post |
Quote : | "Many people believe (myself included) that those aftermarket replacement filters simply don't filter as well as OEM style paper elements, although I couldn't quantify how much worse. I think you should keep the stock airbox. I can't see how an aftermarket cone filter, seeing how it's not enclosed in a plastic box, would have equal protection from offroading conditions. " |
I'm gonna have to disagree to a point. Yes it probably doesn't filter as well. Does it hurt reliability? At least for me, no way. I've got 272k miles on my car and its had a CAI w/cone filter on it for the last 100,000 miles. No increased consumption of oil, no burning oil, no reduction in fuel mileage. So from my experience I wouldn't think twice about putting a K&N on another car.
Personally I did experience better gas mileage after installing a CAI, exhaust header, and cat-back exhaust. Of course I didn't do it for that reason, nor would I ever recoup the cost in gas savings.9/4/2008 8:28:34 PM |
Matlock All American 1255 Posts user info edit post |
^Well I'm not so much trying to save money at the pump, rather I am trying to make the most of getting mileage per diem, and when you drive 1000 miles a week it can add up.
[Edited on September 4, 2008 at 8:37 PM. Reason : .] 9/4/2008 8:36:54 PM |
optmusprimer All American 30318 Posts user info edit post |
Quote : | "No increased consumption of oil, no burning oil, no reduction in fuel mileage." |
Compared to what exactly? Pat, it probably seems like I am on your case a lot lately, I promise I am not trying to- I just get a kick out of reading your posts. Seriously, you have no control group to judge your experience against over the kind of mileage you have put on using these filters do you?9/4/2008 8:41:59 PM |
TKE-Teg All American 43410 Posts user info edit post |
^its cool Joel I take no offense
I compare it to the 40,000 miles or so I had the car before installing bolt-on modifications. Gas mileage improved slightly thanks to the mods, and hasn't diminished at all. Other than oil consumption and gasoline consumption short of strapping my car to the dyno again I don't know how else to judge the engine's performance (i.e. look for a decline).
Am I not looking at this the right way? 9/5/2008 1:00:30 AM |
clint_taurus Suspended 439 Posts user info edit post |
smoothing out the intake piping, ie. getting rid of the silencers and chambers does a lot more than a high flow filter
on most vehicles, the stock paper filter flows 2-3 times the engines max cfm capacity, so increasing to 4-5 times that doesn't do much
since most people install it as a kit, they assume that the air filter, and not the smoother intake piping is where you pick up the gains, even so, 1-2% is about all you could hope for, unless you have done a lot of engine modifications that can benefit from that, such as a high intake duration cam that reduces vacuum to the point that you need that kind of flow to reduce intake pressure pulses 9/5/2008 8:00:28 AM |
Hurley Suspended 7284 Posts user info edit post |
^niiice tech. reminds me of the honda guys throwin big (relative) numbers with factory intakes 9/5/2008 9:27:39 AM |
sparky Garage Mod 12301 Posts user info edit post |
i had an issue with the oils from my CAI fouling my HFM on the M3. make sure when you clean it that you don't use too much oil. 9/5/2008 10:05:09 AM |
arghx Deucefest '04 7584 Posts user info edit post |
^^^ you sound like a big believer in the "smooth bellows" mod on LS1's, which is a big scam to sell a silicone coupler with twice the normal markup... 9/5/2008 4:09:34 PM |
Matlock All American 1255 Posts user info edit post |
So is there any way we can come to a consensus on what is the best, simplest to install, relatively inexpensive way that more fuel mileage can be achieved? 9/5/2008 9:53:57 PM |
zxappeal All American 26824 Posts user info edit post |
My 2 cents worth: water injection 9/5/2008 11:48:41 PM |
BigBlueRam All American 16852 Posts user info edit post |
^^yeah, sell it and use the money to buy a 4 cylinder something. 9/6/2008 12:54:25 AM |
TKE-Teg All American 43410 Posts user info edit post |
^DING DING DING.
Honestly, unless you have the need for a HUGE payload maybe you should buy/use an Impreza Wagon. 9/6/2008 1:10:28 AM |
Matlock All American 1255 Posts user info edit post |
no can do, need the ground clearance, 4x4, and payload. 9/6/2008 7:46:32 PM |
tchenku midshipman 18586 Posts user info edit post |
if you want one that badly, get an ebay knockoff. same thing for much less $ 9/6/2008 8:43:06 PM |