What did you do TO your Bronco Sport today?

[Meanderthal]

I just played that full video, and can’t connect the dots between your recommendation for using a paper filter versus the point this gentleman makes about K&N. His point is that there is nothing that performs like a K&N for both flow and filter. That if you want peak performance, K&N is the way to go, and he explains the science behind that position. He makes it very clear that the only test where the K&N does poorly is in a static environment, meaning, a test that mimics the absence of an engine. But put a K&N on an engine with actual vibration, and the K&N filter is the best on the market.
Luckily I’ll only use mine with an engine.

What you missed is that a turbo removes the variation in the intake that makes the K&N work. Essentially a turbo makes an engine work more like a vacuum cleaner and less like a piston pump. It’s not vibration of the engine itself, it’s about the variation of intake vacuum. There essentially isn’t any variation on a small timescale when you have a turbo.

Sponsored

 

[Elegance]

I know functionally it does nothing, but I bought this locking cover for the hitch.

 

[CableXJ]

Installed my aftermarket mud guards today.

 

[delm]

What you missed is that a turbo removes the variation in the intake that makes the K&N work. Essentially a turbo makes an engine work more like a vacuum cleaner and less like a piston pump. It’s not vibration of the engine itself, it’s about the variation of intake vacuum. There essentially isn’t any variation on a small timescale when you have a turbo.

Maybe you’re thinking about a different video? That point is never made in this video. This video makes a compelling argument for why K&N is by far the best filter you can buy. And the very last words on this video are if you’re in any kind of doubt as to what filter to buy just do yourself a favor buy K&N.

as to your point that a turbo synchronizes, essentially with the vibration of an engine so to do away with any meaningful vibration the filter may utilize I have to respectfully disagree. Perhaps, in certain conditions that might be the case. But in real life, the filter end of my air in take system is pretty far away from the turbo unit and I have no doubt there is substantial vibration for K&N to do what it does.

 

[CallMeBill]

Even in Sport mode. If you put your foot all the way down there's a hesitation sometimes. This gets rid of that. I think it's a driving style thing.

But when i watched the video on Youtube from Pandaworks even they state that there is still some hesitation from transmission having to catch up. So do you find that true as well?

 

[Meanderthal]

Maybe you’re thinking about a different video? That point is never made in this video. This video makes a compelling argument for why K&N is by far the best filter you can buy. And the very last words on this video are if you’re in any kind of doubt as to what filter to buy just do yourself a favor buy K&N.

as to your point that a turbo synchronizes, essentially with the vibration of an engine so to do away with any meaningful vibration the filter may utilize I have to respectfully disagree. Perhaps, in certain conditions that might be the case. But in real life, the filter end of my air in take system is pretty far away from the turbo unit and I have no doubt there is substantial vibration for K&N to do what it does.

He does not address specifically in the video the turbo issue. What he does is discuss how the fibers of the filter move on an engine and how they don’t move when hooked to a vacuum. Again, it’s not physical vibrations that make it work but pulses in the intake pressure. A turbo is essentially the same as a vacuum.
I know that you are unmoved by all of this but maybe others will think twice.
Again, take it or leave it.

 

[seoden88]

I don't think you would like this if you don't know what I'm talking about. This stops the unpredictable hesitation in the pedal. Especially if you have a heavy foot. Plus unlimited custimization of the throttle responce.

all it does is increase signal to pedal, you get same effect by pressing gas pedal harder. Pedal commanders are a known scam

 

[delm]

He does not address specifically in the video the turbo issue. What he does is discuss how the fibers of the filter move on an engine and how they don’t move when hooked to a vacuum. Again, it’s not physical vibrations that make it work but pulses in the intake pressure. A turbo is essentially the same as a vacuum.
I know that you are unmoved by all of this but maybe others will think twice.
Again, take it or leave it.

I’m honestly open to being moved by the information. I value your opinion. I respect where you are coming from enough to watch the video you posted. I just think that you are making some major leaps that don’t align with the video’s description as to why K&N is so effective.

you are trying to argue that a turbo functions like a vacuum, and the K&N is ineffective in a vacuum environment. I think you discard the fact that the engine does create the very vibration that makes the K&N superior in the first place, despite the “vacuum” function of a turbo. It does sound like a turbo in a controlled environment (ie, one without the engine) would render the K&N less efficient. But the fact is, the engine and its vibration exists. And that is the fundamental condition that makes the K&N filter superior to paper filters.

you’ve basically posted a video that goes into great length making a compelling argument from “the” authority on the topic that the K&N is a superior filter if used on a car with an engine. But then you point to what you call an inference that I don’t believe exists as a key point in your argument that a high quality paper filter is better. I really don’t mean disrespect, but you are saying that 1+1 = 5 with no dots to connect to get there.

I’m open to a good discussion, and I’m open to learning something. But I don’t like flawed logic or fallacies, and so I hope nobody reads this thread and is moved to think K&N are not superior air filters….based on anything presented here so far.

 

[HTYuhurd]

Had an issue when i installed my 1.5” lift kit on to my OBX, the top and bottom bolt of the sway bar was coming loose causing a thumping noise when going over bumps. This forum is the one that helped me diagnose it!

 

[Mark S.]

I know functionally it does nothing, but I bought this locking cover for the hitch.

Of course it does something, it makes you smile. Sometimes that's all you need for an accessory.

 

[Mark S.]

I’m open to a good discussion, and I’m open to learning something. But I don’t like flawed logic or fallacies, and so I hope nobody reads this thread and is moved to think K&N are not superior air filters….based on anything presented here so far.

I've looked through K&N's website pretty carefully, and I can't find anything in its description of test procedures regarding the presence or absence of vibration or flow pulsation, or that either is a necessary component of K&N's filter efficiency.

Personally, I think the reason the K&N filter performed so poorly on the efficiency test conducted by Project Farm is due to the material used by the presenter to simulate "dust." How does flour compare to actual atmospheric dust—the material the filter is designed to capture? We don't know.

This test, conducted by an outfit calling itself Project 200, seems to be a lot more "scientific" than the one conducted by Project Farm. It used a test "dust" material used by ISO, which I believe provides more meaningful results in comparison testing.

You can look through the results and draw your own conclusions, but it's pretty obvious to me from this graph alone that the K&N does not filter as efficiently as the other filters it was compared to.

Whether the difference between 99.93% and 96.8% matters is up to you.

 

[delm]

I've looked through K&N's website pretty carefully, and I can't find anything in its description of test procedures regarding the presence or absence of vibration or flow pulsation, or that either is a necessary component of K&N's filter efficiency.

Personally, I think the reason the K&N filter performed so poorly on the efficiency test conducted by Project Farm is due to the material used by the presenter to simulate "dust." How does flour compare to actual atmospheric dust—the material the filter is designed to capture? We don't know.

This test, conducted by an outfit calling itself Project 200, seems to be a lot more "scientific" than the one conducted by Project Farm. It used a test "dust" material used by ISO, which I believe provides more meaningful results in comparison testing.

You can look through the results and draw your own conclusions, but it's pretty obvious to me from this graph alone that the K&N does not filter as efficiently as the other filters it was compared to.

Whether the difference between 99.93% and 96.8% matters is up to you.

I've never seen anything from K&N that explains the role of vibration in their filter's performance either, Mark. Did you watch the video that Meanderthal posted from Goodson, contradicting Project Farm's test? It is a fascinating video.

Goodson explains his history with K&N going back to the 1970s, when he met the CEO at a SEMA convention. He explains how paper filters either supported air flow OR they filtered, but not both. K&N comes along with a filter that did both exceptionally well. In the video, he then goes on to explain the problem with Project Farm's testing, along with most filter testing, and how K&N cannot be tested with standard filter tests because it is what he calls an "active filter" whereas everything else is a passive filter.

Goodson goes on to explain that he discovered that the K&N filters function much like human lungs in that it is the material with hair-like fibers that collect the dust particles, while the filter continues to support maximum airflow. Goodson goes on to explain how those fibers work off of the engine's vibration, and that this is really the "secret sauce" that so many people fail to understand.

 

[Mark S.]

I've never seen anything from K&N that explains the role of vibration in their filter's performance either, Mark. Did you watch the video that Meanderthal posted from Goodson, contradicting Project Farm's test? It is a fascinating video.

Yes, I watched it, which is why I went to K&N's website for information about how they conduct efficiency tests. It said nothing about vibration or flow pulsation. From what I could see it uses the same ISO testing procedure as other manufacturers, which appears to be a steady-state flow test, and that's the testing on which K&N's claims regarding efficiency are based.

I'm not by any means an expert in fluid dynamics, but I can't for the life of me see how moving the fibers around increases their chances of capturing particles. Common sense tells me the only way to increase air flow is to reduce filtration efficiency, which is what I see from the testing at the link I provided.

Again, I acknowledge there isn't much difference between 99.9% and 96.8%. But the extra power claimed by K&N isn't enough in my mind to justify ANY reduction in filter efficiency. Even if K&N's claims about power gains are accurate, I don't really feel like I need another 5-10 HP.

 

[delm]

Yes, I watched it, which is why I went to K&N's website for information about how they conduct efficiency tests. It said nothing about vibration or flow pulsation. From what I could see it uses the same ISO testing procedure as other manufacturers, which appears to be a steady-state flow test, and that's the testing on which K&N's claims regarding efficiency are based.

I'm not by any means an expert in fluid dynamics, but I can't for the life of me see how moving the fibers around increases their chances of capturing particles. Common sense tells me the only way to increase air flow is to reduce filtration efficiency, which is what I see from the testing at the link I provided.

Again, I acknowledge there isn't much difference between 99.9% and 96.8%. But the extra power claimed by K&N isn't enough in my mind to justify ANY reduction in filter efficiency. Even if K&N's claims about power gains are accurate, I don't really feel like I need another 5-10 HP.

I hear you.

I gained about 25 horses when I put the same thing on my Aston Martin DB9 and it went from a very fun car to drive to a very fun rocket to drive. Definitely wasn't looking for mimicking that with a Bronco Sport, but I also didn't want to feel like I lost HP with my heavier tires.

 

[Glamdring70]

Love to see a poll of how many people experience this mysterious "pedal hesitation" effect.

Not sure if you can still buy them, but you also used to be able to get these sort of clip-on magnets for fuel lines to align the gas molecules and improve your overall MPG. Because you know, auto makers totally wouldn't add a one cent magnet to increase the EPA rating on the Monroney.

Sponsored