Does K&N FIPK on 2000 4.7 liter V8 make my Jeep louder?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Does K&N FIPK on 2000 4.7 liter V8 make my Jeep louder?
I certainly found it to be true when I put one of their filters, a Turbo
City air tube, and a cat back system on my four cylinder Wrangler. I record
the mileage and amount of fuel with every fill up, I am getting 22-25 mpg,
and I live in the mountains. I don't mind the economy benefit, but I was
looking for 10-20 hp gain in power, like it said in the ad. :^(
Earle
"Dave in Colorado" <DontSpam@me.in> wrote in message
news:KhPmf.108$KJ6.15959@news.uswest.net...
> Earle wrote:
>
> >There are likely to be economy gains with this device too.
>
> I wonder if this is actually true. I would think that because of the
recent
> high price of gasoline, if it was true why wouldn't K&N market that fact
> when they obviously market increases in power.
>
> Dave
>
>
City air tube, and a cat back system on my four cylinder Wrangler. I record
the mileage and amount of fuel with every fill up, I am getting 22-25 mpg,
and I live in the mountains. I don't mind the economy benefit, but I was
looking for 10-20 hp gain in power, like it said in the ad. :^(
Earle
"Dave in Colorado" <DontSpam@me.in> wrote in message
news:KhPmf.108$KJ6.15959@news.uswest.net...
> Earle wrote:
>
> >There are likely to be economy gains with this device too.
>
> I wonder if this is actually true. I would think that because of the
recent
> high price of gasoline, if it was true why wouldn't K&N market that fact
> when they obviously market increases in power.
>
> Dave
>
>
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Does K&N FIPK on 2000 4.7 liter V8 make my Jeep louder?
Dave in Colorado proclaimed:
>>Not to mention incresed 'crud' making its way through the air filter and
>>into the engine.. Bottom line is K&N is a less restrictive filter. It lets
>>more air in, which lets more 'crud' in.
>
>
> K&N has a LOT of information on their site about filtration--explaning why
> their filters are both less restrictive AND better filtering. Is there any
> reason to believe they are lying?
Is there any reason to presume that marketing claims are the full and
total truth? Or is there possibly sufficient evidence to be somewhat
sceptical of any marketing claim not backed up by independent
verification?
>
> It seeems reasonable that it is possible to improve apon the standard paper
> element air filter, and that's what they've claimed to have done.
It may seem reasonable, but that doesn't mean anything one way or another.
Those fancy aftermarket filters have been around for decades, EMPI,
EICO, etc.
A cold air intake kit can help on vehicles that don't already have a
good pickup for cold air--and drive in conditions where this makes much
of a difference. If the filter is kept clean and maintained by the
owner and has less air restriction [which is not a given] you get a bit
more power...under driving conditions pretty rare on the trail.
On the other hand, the nice sealed box filters tend to keep just a bit
more crud out of your engine with a pretty good compromise of air
restriction vs protection.
>>Not to mention incresed 'crud' making its way through the air filter and
>>into the engine.. Bottom line is K&N is a less restrictive filter. It lets
>>more air in, which lets more 'crud' in.
>
>
> K&N has a LOT of information on their site about filtration--explaning why
> their filters are both less restrictive AND better filtering. Is there any
> reason to believe they are lying?
Is there any reason to presume that marketing claims are the full and
total truth? Or is there possibly sufficient evidence to be somewhat
sceptical of any marketing claim not backed up by independent
verification?
>
> It seeems reasonable that it is possible to improve apon the standard paper
> element air filter, and that's what they've claimed to have done.
It may seem reasonable, but that doesn't mean anything one way or another.
Those fancy aftermarket filters have been around for decades, EMPI,
EICO, etc.
A cold air intake kit can help on vehicles that don't already have a
good pickup for cold air--and drive in conditions where this makes much
of a difference. If the filter is kept clean and maintained by the
owner and has less air restriction [which is not a given] you get a bit
more power...under driving conditions pretty rare on the trail.
On the other hand, the nice sealed box filters tend to keep just a bit
more crud out of your engine with a pretty good compromise of air
restriction vs protection.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Does K&N FIPK on 2000 4.7 liter V8 make my Jeep louder?
Dave in Colorado proclaimed:
>>Not to mention incresed 'crud' making its way through the air filter and
>>into the engine.. Bottom line is K&N is a less restrictive filter. It lets
>>more air in, which lets more 'crud' in.
>
>
> K&N has a LOT of information on their site about filtration--explaning why
> their filters are both less restrictive AND better filtering. Is there any
> reason to believe they are lying?
Is there any reason to presume that marketing claims are the full and
total truth? Or is there possibly sufficient evidence to be somewhat
sceptical of any marketing claim not backed up by independent
verification?
>
> It seeems reasonable that it is possible to improve apon the standard paper
> element air filter, and that's what they've claimed to have done.
It may seem reasonable, but that doesn't mean anything one way or another.
Those fancy aftermarket filters have been around for decades, EMPI,
EICO, etc.
A cold air intake kit can help on vehicles that don't already have a
good pickup for cold air--and drive in conditions where this makes much
of a difference. If the filter is kept clean and maintained by the
owner and has less air restriction [which is not a given] you get a bit
more power...under driving conditions pretty rare on the trail.
On the other hand, the nice sealed box filters tend to keep just a bit
more crud out of your engine with a pretty good compromise of air
restriction vs protection.
>>Not to mention incresed 'crud' making its way through the air filter and
>>into the engine.. Bottom line is K&N is a less restrictive filter. It lets
>>more air in, which lets more 'crud' in.
>
>
> K&N has a LOT of information on their site about filtration--explaning why
> their filters are both less restrictive AND better filtering. Is there any
> reason to believe they are lying?
Is there any reason to presume that marketing claims are the full and
total truth? Or is there possibly sufficient evidence to be somewhat
sceptical of any marketing claim not backed up by independent
verification?
>
> It seeems reasonable that it is possible to improve apon the standard paper
> element air filter, and that's what they've claimed to have done.
It may seem reasonable, but that doesn't mean anything one way or another.
Those fancy aftermarket filters have been around for decades, EMPI,
EICO, etc.
A cold air intake kit can help on vehicles that don't already have a
good pickup for cold air--and drive in conditions where this makes much
of a difference. If the filter is kept clean and maintained by the
owner and has less air restriction [which is not a given] you get a bit
more power...under driving conditions pretty rare on the trail.
On the other hand, the nice sealed box filters tend to keep just a bit
more crud out of your engine with a pretty good compromise of air
restriction vs protection.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Does K&N FIPK on 2000 4.7 liter V8 make my Jeep louder?
Dave in Colorado proclaimed:
>>Not to mention incresed 'crud' making its way through the air filter and
>>into the engine.. Bottom line is K&N is a less restrictive filter. It lets
>>more air in, which lets more 'crud' in.
>
>
> K&N has a LOT of information on their site about filtration--explaning why
> their filters are both less restrictive AND better filtering. Is there any
> reason to believe they are lying?
Is there any reason to presume that marketing claims are the full and
total truth? Or is there possibly sufficient evidence to be somewhat
sceptical of any marketing claim not backed up by independent
verification?
>
> It seeems reasonable that it is possible to improve apon the standard paper
> element air filter, and that's what they've claimed to have done.
It may seem reasonable, but that doesn't mean anything one way or another.
Those fancy aftermarket filters have been around for decades, EMPI,
EICO, etc.
A cold air intake kit can help on vehicles that don't already have a
good pickup for cold air--and drive in conditions where this makes much
of a difference. If the filter is kept clean and maintained by the
owner and has less air restriction [which is not a given] you get a bit
more power...under driving conditions pretty rare on the trail.
On the other hand, the nice sealed box filters tend to keep just a bit
more crud out of your engine with a pretty good compromise of air
restriction vs protection.
>>Not to mention incresed 'crud' making its way through the air filter and
>>into the engine.. Bottom line is K&N is a less restrictive filter. It lets
>>more air in, which lets more 'crud' in.
>
>
> K&N has a LOT of information on their site about filtration--explaning why
> their filters are both less restrictive AND better filtering. Is there any
> reason to believe they are lying?
Is there any reason to presume that marketing claims are the full and
total truth? Or is there possibly sufficient evidence to be somewhat
sceptical of any marketing claim not backed up by independent
verification?
>
> It seeems reasonable that it is possible to improve apon the standard paper
> element air filter, and that's what they've claimed to have done.
It may seem reasonable, but that doesn't mean anything one way or another.
Those fancy aftermarket filters have been around for decades, EMPI,
EICO, etc.
A cold air intake kit can help on vehicles that don't already have a
good pickup for cold air--and drive in conditions where this makes much
of a difference. If the filter is kept clean and maintained by the
owner and has less air restriction [which is not a given] you get a bit
more power...under driving conditions pretty rare on the trail.
On the other hand, the nice sealed box filters tend to keep just a bit
more crud out of your engine with a pretty good compromise of air
restriction vs protection.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Does K&N FIPK on 2000 4.7 liter V8 make my Jeep louder?
GOD! You must drive slow! You would have been shot long ago on our
Los Angeles freeways.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Earle Horton wrote:
>
> I certainly found it to be true when I put one of their filters, a Turbo
> City air tube, and a cat back system on my four cylinder Wrangler. I record
> the mileage and amount of fuel with every fill up, I am getting 22-25 mpg,
> and I live in the mountains. I don't mind the economy benefit, but I was
> looking for 10-20 hp gain in power, like it said in the ad. :^(
>
> Earle
Los Angeles freeways.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Earle Horton wrote:
>
> I certainly found it to be true when I put one of their filters, a Turbo
> City air tube, and a cat back system on my four cylinder Wrangler. I record
> the mileage and amount of fuel with every fill up, I am getting 22-25 mpg,
> and I live in the mountains. I don't mind the economy benefit, but I was
> looking for 10-20 hp gain in power, like it said in the ad. :^(
>
> Earle
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Does K&N FIPK on 2000 4.7 liter V8 make my Jeep louder?
GOD! You must drive slow! You would have been shot long ago on our
Los Angeles freeways.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Earle Horton wrote:
>
> I certainly found it to be true when I put one of their filters, a Turbo
> City air tube, and a cat back system on my four cylinder Wrangler. I record
> the mileage and amount of fuel with every fill up, I am getting 22-25 mpg,
> and I live in the mountains. I don't mind the economy benefit, but I was
> looking for 10-20 hp gain in power, like it said in the ad. :^(
>
> Earle
Los Angeles freeways.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Earle Horton wrote:
>
> I certainly found it to be true when I put one of their filters, a Turbo
> City air tube, and a cat back system on my four cylinder Wrangler. I record
> the mileage and amount of fuel with every fill up, I am getting 22-25 mpg,
> and I live in the mountains. I don't mind the economy benefit, but I was
> looking for 10-20 hp gain in power, like it said in the ad. :^(
>
> Earle
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Does K&N FIPK on 2000 4.7 liter V8 make my Jeep louder?
GOD! You must drive slow! You would have been shot long ago on our
Los Angeles freeways.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Earle Horton wrote:
>
> I certainly found it to be true when I put one of their filters, a Turbo
> City air tube, and a cat back system on my four cylinder Wrangler. I record
> the mileage and amount of fuel with every fill up, I am getting 22-25 mpg,
> and I live in the mountains. I don't mind the economy benefit, but I was
> looking for 10-20 hp gain in power, like it said in the ad. :^(
>
> Earle
Los Angeles freeways.
God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Earle Horton wrote:
>
> I certainly found it to be true when I put one of their filters, a Turbo
> City air tube, and a cat back system on my four cylinder Wrangler. I record
> the mileage and amount of fuel with every fill up, I am getting 22-25 mpg,
> and I live in the mountains. I don't mind the economy benefit, but I was
> looking for 10-20 hp gain in power, like it said in the ad. :^(
>
> Earle
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Does K&N FIPK on 2000 4.7 liter V8 make my Jeep louder?
I drive it at 3,000 rpm most of the time. This appears to be the best way
to get economy out of the 2.5 litre engine, and yields a decent road speed.
I have driven it in Seattle and Denver, rush hour, and lived. It keeps up
pretty well, but passing is just a dream.
Earle
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:439C7E06.A92D4E87@***.net...
> GOD! You must drive slow! You would have been shot long ago on our
> Los Angeles freeways.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Earle Horton wrote:
> >
> > I certainly found it to be true when I put one of their filters, a Turbo
> > City air tube, and a cat back system on my four cylinder Wrangler. I
record
> > the mileage and amount of fuel with every fill up, I am getting 22-25
mpg,
> > and I live in the mountains. I don't mind the economy benefit, but I
was
> > looking for 10-20 hp gain in power, like it said in the ad. :^(
> >
> > Earle
to get economy out of the 2.5 litre engine, and yields a decent road speed.
I have driven it in Seattle and Denver, rush hour, and lived. It keeps up
pretty well, but passing is just a dream.
Earle
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:439C7E06.A92D4E87@***.net...
> GOD! You must drive slow! You would have been shot long ago on our
> Los Angeles freeways.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Earle Horton wrote:
> >
> > I certainly found it to be true when I put one of their filters, a Turbo
> > City air tube, and a cat back system on my four cylinder Wrangler. I
record
> > the mileage and amount of fuel with every fill up, I am getting 22-25
mpg,
> > and I live in the mountains. I don't mind the economy benefit, but I
was
> > looking for 10-20 hp gain in power, like it said in the ad. :^(
> >
> > Earle
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Does K&N FIPK on 2000 4.7 liter V8 make my Jeep louder?
I drive it at 3,000 rpm most of the time. This appears to be the best way
to get economy out of the 2.5 litre engine, and yields a decent road speed.
I have driven it in Seattle and Denver, rush hour, and lived. It keeps up
pretty well, but passing is just a dream.
Earle
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:439C7E06.A92D4E87@***.net...
> GOD! You must drive slow! You would have been shot long ago on our
> Los Angeles freeways.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Earle Horton wrote:
> >
> > I certainly found it to be true when I put one of their filters, a Turbo
> > City air tube, and a cat back system on my four cylinder Wrangler. I
record
> > the mileage and amount of fuel with every fill up, I am getting 22-25
mpg,
> > and I live in the mountains. I don't mind the economy benefit, but I
was
> > looking for 10-20 hp gain in power, like it said in the ad. :^(
> >
> > Earle
to get economy out of the 2.5 litre engine, and yields a decent road speed.
I have driven it in Seattle and Denver, rush hour, and lived. It keeps up
pretty well, but passing is just a dream.
Earle
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:439C7E06.A92D4E87@***.net...
> GOD! You must drive slow! You would have been shot long ago on our
> Los Angeles freeways.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Earle Horton wrote:
> >
> > I certainly found it to be true when I put one of their filters, a Turbo
> > City air tube, and a cat back system on my four cylinder Wrangler. I
record
> > the mileage and amount of fuel with every fill up, I am getting 22-25
mpg,
> > and I live in the mountains. I don't mind the economy benefit, but I
was
> > looking for 10-20 hp gain in power, like it said in the ad. :^(
> >
> > Earle
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Does K&N FIPK on 2000 4.7 liter V8 make my Jeep louder?
I drive it at 3,000 rpm most of the time. This appears to be the best way
to get economy out of the 2.5 litre engine, and yields a decent road speed.
I have driven it in Seattle and Denver, rush hour, and lived. It keeps up
pretty well, but passing is just a dream.
Earle
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:439C7E06.A92D4E87@***.net...
> GOD! You must drive slow! You would have been shot long ago on our
> Los Angeles freeways.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Earle Horton wrote:
> >
> > I certainly found it to be true when I put one of their filters, a Turbo
> > City air tube, and a cat back system on my four cylinder Wrangler. I
record
> > the mileage and amount of fuel with every fill up, I am getting 22-25
mpg,
> > and I live in the mountains. I don't mind the economy benefit, but I
was
> > looking for 10-20 hp gain in power, like it said in the ad. :^(
> >
> > Earle
to get economy out of the 2.5 litre engine, and yields a decent road speed.
I have driven it in Seattle and Denver, rush hour, and lived. It keeps up
pretty well, but passing is just a dream.
Earle
"L.W. (ßill) ------ III" <----------@***.net> wrote in message
news:439C7E06.A92D4E87@***.net...
> GOD! You must drive slow! You would have been shot long ago on our
> Los Angeles freeways.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
> mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>
> Earle Horton wrote:
> >
> > I certainly found it to be true when I put one of their filters, a Turbo
> > City air tube, and a cat back system on my four cylinder Wrangler. I
record
> > the mileage and amount of fuel with every fill up, I am getting 22-25
mpg,
> > and I live in the mountains. I don't mind the economy benefit, but I
was
> > looking for 10-20 hp gain in power, like it said in the ad. :^(
> >
> > Earle
