Air Filter with best Filtration

[Job]

Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by Farnsworth
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJ3L-E-ufYo

Maybe this has been posted before. The 0-60 data, to me shows they are all the same power wise within such a test for normal consumer purposes. At least he did two runs not just one.


A much better testing process, and his dyno numbers correlated with 0-60 times. Bottom line again is that less intake restriction can add more HP at WOT. It's been proven a million times over the last 70 years.


As consumers we don't drive on dynos and looking at numbers to too many decimal points is meaningless to the average driver. The video I linked to does show quite a lot. And he did a pretty good job. Wix is quite impressive and the restriction it has over the others is meaningless in real life driving. On paper many things can be proven but that's quite often irrelevant for the scope of an average motorist. I felt it was a much better test than the dyno test which is not only one data point but there is no reference dyno test without an air filter.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted by Farnsworth
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by Farnsworth
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJ3L-E-ufYo

Maybe this has been posted before. The 0-60 data, to me shows they are all the same power wise within such a test for normal consumer purposes. At least he did two runs not just one.


A much better testing process, and his dyno numbers correlated with 0-60 times. Bottom line again is that less intake restriction can add more HP at WOT. It's been proven a million times over the last 70 years.


As consumers we don't drive on dynos and looking at numbers to too many decimal points is meaningless to the average driver. The video I linked to does show quite a lot. And he did a pretty good job. Wix is quite impressive and the restriction it has over the others is meaningless in real life driving. On paper many things can be proven but that's quite often irrelevant for the scope of an average motorist. I felt it was a much better test than the dyno test which is not only one data point but there is no reference dyno test without an air filter.

... tests done on a farm with homemade test equipment are so much better and realistic than tests done on a dyno back to back on the same day and same car.

Yeah, dynos are no good at measuring HP and what mods change the HP to the wheels.

Some people still think the Earth is flat.

 

[Job]

Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by Farnsworth
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by Farnsworth
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJ3L-E-ufYo

Maybe this has been posted before. The 0-60 data, to me shows they are all the same power wise within such a test for normal consumer purposes. At least he did two runs not just one.


A much better testing process, and his dyno numbers correlated with 0-60 times. Bottom line again is that less intake restriction can add more HP at WOT. It's been proven a million times over the last 70 years.


As consumers we don't drive on dynos and looking at numbers to too many decimal points is meaningless to the average driver. The video I linked to does show quite a lot. And he did a pretty good job. Wix is quite impressive and the restriction it has over the others is meaningless in real life driving. On paper many things can be proven but that's quite often irrelevant for the scope of an average motorist. I felt it was a much better test than the dyno test which is not only one data point but there is no reference dyno test without an air filter.

... tests done on a farm with homemade test equipment are so much better and realistic than tests done on a dyno back to back on the same day and same car.

Yeah, dynos are no good at measuring HP and what mods change the HP to the wheels.

Some people still think the Earth is flat.

Yeah some people even try to measure the earth in microns when it isn't round and has mountains all over it. If it's on a readout they believe it. Inexperienced in real life complexity.
I really like that Wix outcome, not so much the Fram and KN. How about you?

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted by Farnsworth
Yeah some people even try to measure the earth in microns when it isn't round and has mountains all over it. If it's on a readout they believe it. Inexperienced in real life complexity. I really like that Wix outcome, not so much the Fram and KN. How about you?


The WIX is a good air filter, but I don't buy air filters based of Project Farm home made test results. The ISO 5011 efficiency numbers (which is done in a controlled lab per an official test process) is what I look at, especially if the ISO 5011 test was done with "fine" or "course" dust specs. I think the WIX has a pretty decent ISO 5011 efficiency rating, not sure if it was done with course or fine dust.

I trust Engineering Explained test process with dyno and road times which correlate more than Project Farm's testing. His home made efficiency testing box and methods have a lot to be desired ... not an accurate way to test air filter efficiency (it's been discussed in another thread). A same dyno is very repeatable when it's used like Engineering Explained used it for his HP and T measurements.

If you don't believe in science, you shouldn't believe in anything, because without science, test methods and measurements the world is just what you mind perceives it to be which is not always accurate. But the key is distinguishing good science and testing from bad science and testing. In order to do that, the first thing that needs to be removed is biased viewpoints.

 

[circuitsmith]

If you don't believe in science, you're hypocritical to even be on the internet.

 

[CarbonSteel]

What are the thoughts about AFE filters?

https://afepower.com/afe-power-73-10280-magnum-flow-pro-guard-7-air-filter

 

[Job]

Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by Farnsworth
Yeah some people even try to measure the earth in microns when it isn't round and has mountains all over it. If it's on a readout they believe it. Inexperienced in real life complexity. I really like that Wix outcome, not so much the Fram and KN. How about you?


The WIX is a good air filter, but I don't buy air filters based of Project Farm home made test results. The ISO 5011 efficiency numbers (which is done in a controlled lab per an official test process) is what I look at, especially if the ISO 5011 test was done with "fine" or "course" dust specs. I think the WIX has a pretty decent ISO 5011 efficiency rating, not sure if it was done with course or fine dust.

I trust Engineering Explained test process with dyno and road times which correlate more than Project Farm's testing. His home made efficiency testing box and methods have a lot to be desired ... not an accurate way to test air filter efficiency (it's been discussed in another thread). A same dyno is very repeatable when it's used like Engineering Explained used it for his HP and T measurements.

If you don't believe in science, you shouldn't believe in anything, because without science, test methods and measurements the world is just what you mind perceives it to be which is not always accurate. But the key is distinguishing good science and testing from bad science and testing. In order to do that, the first thing that needs to be removed is biased viewpoints.


So now you have me not believing in science. Why can't you leave those comments at the door and stay on topic? I know about dyno testing. Farm test wasn't bad, good correlation for restriction versus efficiency, which means he was going about things pretty well for at home. He did measure restriction with no air filter, something the dyno test didn't do, and was nice to see. Of course in the real world air temp, tire rubber, road, and driver input variations mask any dyno microscopic readout numbers. That is science too.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Project Farm "tests" do typically show some kinds of correlations, but in his air filter testing, the way he tested and "measured" the air filter efficiency was pretty crude ... nothing even remotely similar to the official ISO test. Project Farm guy has found a way to make YouTube videos for a living and make a good salary from it.

Engineering Explained video simply proved that a better flowing air filter in the OEM filter box (the only change in the intake system) resulted in better and more air flow into the engine which gave a bit more HP & T. He didn't need to do a dyno run without an air filter to prove that. This has been proven on dynos for decades ... less air flow restriction gives more intake air flow and more power.

 

[Job]

Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Project Farm "tests" do typically show some kinds of correlations, but in his air filter testing, the way he tested and "measured" the air filter efficiency was pretty crude ... nothing even remotely similar to the official ISO test. Project Farm guy has found a way to make YouTube videos for a living and make a good salary from it.

Engineering Explained video simply proved that a better flowing air filter in the OEM filter box (the only change in the intake system) resulted in better and more air flow into the engine which gave a bit more HP & T. He didn't need to do a dyno run without an air filter to prove that. This has been proven on dynos for decades ... less air flow restriction gives more intake air flow and more power.

A reference hp with no air filter was needed, plus more runs. Everything has +/- tolerances. You want to show hp with no filter restriction, KN, then OE. Do it several times then average the results.
You know Fram states average efficiency on their oil filter box, not one test. They test a number of them.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted by Farnsworth
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Project Farm "tests" do typically show some kinds of correlations, but in his air filter testing, the way he tested and "measured" the air filter efficiency was pretty crude ... nothing even remotely similar to the official ISO test. Project Farm guy has found a way to make YouTube videos for a living and make a good salary from it.

Engineering Explained video simply proved that a better flowing air filter in the OEM filter box (the only change in the intake system) resulted in better and more air flow into the engine which gave a bit more HP & T. He didn't need to do a dyno run without an air filter to prove that. This has been proven on dynos for decades ... less air flow restriction gives more intake air flow and more power.

A reference hp with no air filter was needed, plus more runs. Everything has +/- tolerances. You want to show hp with no filter restriction, KN, then OE. Do it several times then average the results.


The Engineering Explained test baseline was the stock dirty air filter. The baseline doesn't need to be with no air filter to see how different air filters effect the HP & T output. Just because he didn't do a dyno run with no air filter does not invalidate what he was comparing. What are you going to proving by running a test with no air filter? ... nothing, just what it is without an air filter, which isn't the purpose of his tests. Notice his testing was with the charcoal filter still in-line, and yet using less restrictive air filters still increased the HP & T.

And if you watch the video he did 3 dyno runs for each test case. Dynos are pretty repetitive on the same day when the runs are done back-to-back. Also, EE did his car runs on the road with a standard transmission left in 2nd gear which is more accurate than someone doing it in a vehicle with an automatic transmission that's shifting which can cause variations between runs.

Originally Posted by Farnsworth
You know Fram states average efficiency on their oil filter box, not one test. They test a number of them.


Any company that tests air or oil filters per the appropriate ISO test procedure will report the efficiency per the ISO testing requirements. And that's not the same as the "Project Farm" efficiency test reporting, lol.

So are you still under the belief that a less restrictive air filter does not increase air flow into a NA engine at WOT and increase T & HP?