|
logic goof!..I should have said "...or larger pores with the same size of element area...". Since no one corrected, either y'all knew what I was fumbling to say - (or no one read the post).
Automotive engineers are far from stupid, but their "ideal" designs are often watered down by the cost-efficiency folks at the factory. Your car engine IS optimized from the factory! It's optimised to fit the compromise. The compromise of: power; fuel efficiency; reliability; smoothness and silence; infrequent need for tune-ups; emissions; easy starting and cold running...a very long list. That said there's no technical downside, and zero incremental expense, in making an air filter big enough to handle the engine's needs and then some.
When assessing the benefits of any engine modifications, I've learned to trust a stopwatch, timing lights, many back-to-back fillups and mileage calculations...ANYTHING but the seat of my pants. The trouble is that you want so badly for the marketing claims to be true, that you really are not objective. You need measurable evidence. And one's butt is a poor measuring tool.
I have read SAE (yes, I'm an engineer) papers in which they state that very few drivers can detect power/torque improvements of less than 10%, and none detected changes of less than 5%.
--
Bob (81-244GL B21F, 83-244DL B23F, 94-944 B230FD; plus grocery-getter Dodge minivan, MGB, and numerous old motorcycles)
|
