Towing CAI Question

[SinCityFX4]

So, I have a guy on one of my other sites and he has a question about towing and cannot seem to get any help....
Here is his question...

"hello, i am new to this site, i recently purchaed a 2006 f150 king ranch 4x4. it has the k&n cold air kit, i pull a boat and cannot stand the noise it makes when under power. my first question is, does somebody make one that doesent sound like it's going to suck the hood in?? i will trade for a factory set up. i am located in central fl."

Any of you guys have some insight I can share with him???

Thanks!


Sin

[Jackpine]

He's probably complaining about the "drone" that some CAIs make. Bill can get rid of that drone with a custom tune, or, he can just return the intake to the stock one as he's indicated by trading for it. Personally, I'd get a Gryphon and a custom tune.

There's a chance too, that he could be running lean with the intake, but this may not be an issue on his model year truck. Again, a custom tune would eliminate that possibility.

- Jack

[OneTomcat]

I would have to agree with Jack..... my custom tunes with the Gryphon have eliminated the K&N drone with perhaps the exception of under WOT. But when that occurs things happen so fast ya won't notice any drone:evillol:

[SinCityFX4]

I figured...I will tell him he should hit up PHP..:2thumbs:

Thanx guys..I don't tow...so that one was certainly away from me. Knew about the drone but that was it.

[kd4crs]

All the CAIs I tried made that horrible drone while towing our travel trailer. It was so loud you could not talk in the cab without yelling. That is what led me to develop the DWV intake mod. Check this out: http://dygytalworld.ehost-services139.com/forums/faq.php?faq=technical#faq_snorkel1 You get a little power bump from it and it keeps the factory noise dampers which makes it tolerable while towing.

[88Racing]

Either the gryphon with custom tunes.

Or return back to stock and AEM dryflow drop in filter with the gotts/dwv mod.

Personally, the both of them. Just get rid of cai. The only reason I say this if the k+n ever gets over oiled after cleaning, it might lead to the maf sensor getting screwed up. That goes for any oiled filter.

Lars

[Keeblerz28]

The only reason I say this if the k+n ever gets over oiled after cleaning, it might lead to the maf sensor getting screwed up. That goes for any oiled filter.

Lars
:bullcrap::bullcrap:
I don't know if that is a true statement:
K&N Response to Mass Air Flow Sensor Concerns (http://www.knfilters.com/MAF/massair.htm)
That page has some video links describing some in house K&N testing regarding exactly this. They couldnt break a MAF even after submerging it in oil.

[Longshot270]

:bullcrap::bullcrap:
I don't know if that is a true statement:
K&N Response to Mass Air Flow Sensor Concerns (http://www.knfilters.com/MAF/massair.htm)
That page has some video links describing some in house K&N testing regarding exactly this. They couldnt break a MAF even after submerging it in oil.

It is not that the oil breaks the sensor, the problem is the oil is said to coat the sensor and mess up the readings.

[Jackpine]

That's an interesting link, Keebler. What I like about it is it seems pretty "calm", clear, to the point and was written by someone who knows how to write (at least the couple pages I've read so far). It makes me want to believe them.

Another thing I acknowledge is that "Bluejay", another Mod on f150online has been using a K&N drop in for years with no problems whatsoever. I suspect they DO have a product that works, although I can't really decide if it works any better than the OEM filters.

- Jack

[Longshot270]

I have a K&N drop in filter and I did notice a slight improvement after installing it. I'm sure that gain is from having a little bit less filtration. I dont really care about what advertisers say about that because I can look through my filter and make out objects. It is however still filtering quite well and greasy spots on the inside of the intake are dark but still pretty clean.

[Keeblerz28]

It is not that the oil breaks the sensor, the problem is the oil is said to coat the sensor and mess up the readings.

I don't think you clicked any of the video links on that page I linked earlier...

Out of 107 sensors returned: 65 functioning properly, 19 completely dead, 23 malfunctioning. Of the 23 malfunctioning, none had any evidence of k&n oil.
Mass Air Flow Sensors Intro & Test Results Summary (http://www.knfilters.com/MAF/1MAFSensorVideo.htm)

Test bench: 1000 CFM for 3 days straight using a 30% over-oiled filter = No oil loss from filter.
Can Oil Come Off Our Filters? High Airflow Testing & Engine Air Filter Dynamics (http://www.knfilters.com/MAF/2MAFSensorVideo.htm)

Dunking the MAF in a beaker of oil, initial readings were off, but sensor returned to normal operation after a few cycles.
What Does It Take to Foul a MAF Sensor? Extreme Testing (http://www.knfilters.com/MAF/3MAFSensorVideo.htm)

I think this myth is what Adam and Jamie would call:
BUSTED! :cheesy smile:

[Longshot270]

I'm not saying you or K&N are wrong.

It is not that the oil breaks the sensor, the problem is the oil is said to coat the sensor and mess up the readings.

That is just one of the general opinions and like many general opinions can be supported or rejected just as easily.

Also like I said, when I installed my drop in filter I did notice an instant improvement so they do have a good product. I have no problem with oiled filters because I've been using them for years on everything from gocarts and motorcycles to large diesel tractors and havent had a problem with them yet.

[88Racing]

I don't think you clicked any of the video links on that page I linked earlier...

Out of 107 sensors returned: 65 functioning properly, 19 completely dead, 23 malfunctioning. Of the 23 malfunctioning, none had any evidence of k&n oil.
Mass Air Flow Sensors Intro & Test Results Summary (http://www.knfilters.com/MAF/1MAFSensorVideo.htm)

Test bench: 1000 CFM for 3 days straight using a 30% over-oiled filter = No oil loss from filter.
Can Oil Come Off Our Filters? High Airflow Testing & Engine Air Filter Dynamics (http://www.knfilters.com/MAF/2MAFSensorVideo.htm)

Dunking the MAF in a beaker of oil, initial readings were off, but sensor returned to normal operation after a few cycles.
What Does It Take to Foul a MAF Sensor? Extreme Testing (http://www.knfilters.com/MAF/3MAFSensorVideo.htm)

I think this myth is what Adam and Jamie would call:
BUSTED! :cheesy smile:
How conviniant that K+N just so happens to use the GM mass air flow for its testing.
Also their tests are biased due to that they performed them and did not have third party intervention.
I challenge you to find third party testing before you announce BUSTED!

[88Racing]

That's an interesting link, Keebler. What I like about it is it seems pretty "calm", clear, to the point and was written by someone who knows how to write (at least the couple pages I've read so far). It makes me want to believe them.

Another thing I acknowledge is that "Bluejay", another Mod on f150online has been using a K&N drop in for years with no problems whatsoever. I suspect they DO have a product that works, although I can't really decide if it works any better than the OEM filters.

- Jack

Drop in air filters in the stock air boxes come after the MAF.

[Jackpine]

Drop in air filters in the stock air boxes come after the MAF.

Uh, I don't think so. At least it wouldn't be that way on my truck. If I understand a drop in filter correctly, it just replaces the OEM paper one and that thing is upstream of the MAF.

However, I agree it would be nice for K&N to have an independent lab do the testing. Regardless though, I liked the "tone" of what I read so far. No wild claims and no emotional tirades.

- Jack

[88Racing]

Uh, I don't think so. At least it wouldn't be that way on my truck. If I understand a drop in filter correctly, it just replaces the OEM paper one and that thing is upstream of the MAF.

- Jack

Yes you are correct, I ran out and looked.

[Jackpine]

I'm delighted that I'm not the only one to make dumb posts now and then! I was starting to feel like an idiot after my questions in the Moderator's forum. :happy-dancing:

- Jack

[88Racing]

I'm delighted that I'm not the only one to make dumb posts now and then! I was starting to feel like an idiot after my questions in the Moderator's forum. :happy-dancing:

- Jack

Here's one for me>>>:doh:

[Keeblerz28]

How conviniant that K+N just so happens to use the GM mass air flow for its testing.

:skeptic:
Why would the car brand make any difference? The same K&N filter technology & same oil is used on all their filters...

Also their tests are biased due to that they performed them and did not have third party intervention.
I challenge you to find third party testing before you announce BUSTED!

As for 3rd party testing, how about the 107 supposedly defective sensors that were returned to them, 65 were totally fine! They sent the 23 malfunctioning ones to an independent lab (3rd party) to examine and determine contaminants. NONE had k&N oil on them. This is all from the first video link I provided earlier.

What about the millions of other filters they have sold over the years? Just think of how many millions of miles have been driven with their filters? How more unbiased a study do you want?

I have a technical background, I work in a lab, and I do a lot of testing according to standards. So I can appreciate when a company spends the time to do the R&D, with a dedicated test fixture, with annually calibrated instruments. You won't even find that at Mythbusters...

This myth is busted, IMO

[Power Hungry]

As for 3rd party testing, how about the 107 supposedly defective sensors that were returned to them, 65 were totally fine! They sent the 23 malfunctioning ones to an independent lab (3rd party) to examine and determine contaminants. NONE had k&N oil on them.

There's no question that many automotive "Technicians" are merely parts changers, with often inadequate diagnostic training if any at all. I don't doubt that a number of sampled MAF sensors we completely fine and were replaced with the "Well, let's replace it and see if it fixes it" approach.

I think the point being made is that K&N was the party that was handling the testing (at least as far as which "independent" company handled the testing) as well as handling the information on their results. With this in mind, it's possible (although I'd hope unlikely) that they could intentionally obfuscate the facts in their favor. I think it would be more credible if a fully independent test, of which K&N had no control whatsoever, was done.

What about the millions of other filters they have sold over the years? Just think of how many millions of miles have been driven with their filters? How more unbiased a study do you want?

I can't offer any opinion on that without case studies of applications, vehicle types, induction systems, maintenance procedures, and about a zillion other things that would have any bearing on this discussion.

I have a technical background, I work in a lab, and I do a lot of testing according to standards. So I can appreciate when a company spends the time to do the R&D, with a dedicated test fixture, with annually calibrated instruments. You won't even find that at Mythbusters...

I can appreciate your work environment and training, and with that in mind I can understand how people can be opinionated, especially in regards to supporting opinions with empirical data. Again, if the testing was handled entirely by a third party, then I would have a better feeling about the results. Because K&N was so involved in the testing, it leaves room for doubt.

For example:

A few years ago, Ford was reflashing 6.0L trucks with updated ECM/TCM/FICM strategies and IMMEDIATELY (as in before they even left the parking lot) customers noticed a loss of performance and subsequently noticed losses in fuel economy. Ford, in response to these complaints, did study of these complaints and this was what they had found:

http://www.gopowerhungry.com/Downloads/6.0L Fuel Economy Test.pdf (http://www.gopowerhungry.com/Downloads/6.0L%20Fuel%20Economy%20Test.pdf)

Apparently, it's Ford's opinion that there is no problem with the updated strategies and that all the customers that have lost performance and fuel economy must be suffering from some sort of mass delusion. Just because the manufacturer claims it, doesn't make it so. :skeptic:

For what it's worth, I have PERSONALLY removed MAF sensors from vehicles that had oil residue on and in the units, not to mention all down the intake tubes. This would be, presumably, from improper/over oiling of the filter element. While the sensors hadn't "failed" per se, the oil coating the sensor wires would cause delayed response of the sensor by insulating the thermal transfer across the sensing element. This would result in backfiring, throttle hesitation, and minor drivability issues. A simple cleaning with electronics cleaner and the residue was removed and the drivability symptoms would clear right up. Based on K&N's testing though, I must be crazy to think their filter had anything to do with the problems.

This myth is busted and so are your pathetic arguments.

One final thought... We always enjoy in partaking of a hearty, and sometimes even heated, discussion on a variety of subjects. However, our forum is based on the respect of other members, and as such, insults will not be tolerated. Calling someone's arguments or opinions "pathetic" is not only unacceptable, it's not conducive to argument/debate process. If that type of behavior continues, the consequences will be swift and severe. Keep it respectful, and we'll all get along just fine. :2thumbs:

Take care.

[Jackpine]

I'm going to add something here. The rental property we own recently had a "gas furnace" problem. I investigated and found the furnace would light, but almost immediately, the gas would be shut off. There was a trouble code light, but six flashes was not on the list, so, I called in a "pro".

There's a "sensor", that detects flame and if it doesn't "see" the fire, it shuts off the gas to prevent a gas buildup. This sensing "probe" can become "dirty". The technician cleaned it (wiped it off on his pants actually) and surprise! The furnace works just fine!

Guess what? The sensor sends a millivolt signal to a control board. Sound familiar? It doesn't take a whole lot to corrupt this signal, and, I suspect it doesn't take a whole lot to corrupt the MAF sensor signal either.

So, I said I liked K&N's response and I even pointed out that Bluejay has been using a K&N filter without difficulty for MANY miles. But, what they say based on their own (probably biased) testing is NOT proof!

Please don't confuse a manufacturer's claims with fact. Everyone puts a "spin" on things.

And, here in the PHP forum, we treat each other with respect. We do not say something like: "This myth is busted and so are your ******** arguments."

Thanks in advance for understanding how we work here.

- Jack

[88Racing]

:skeptic:
Why would the car brand make any difference? The same K&N filter technology & same oil is used on all their filters...


As for 3rd party testing, how about the 107 supposedly defective sensors that were returned to them, 65 were totally fine! They sent the 23 malfunctioning ones to an independent lab (3rd party) to examine and determine contaminants. NONE had k&N oil on them. This is all from the first video link I provided earlier.

What about the millions of other filters they have sold over the years? Just think of how many millions of miles have been driven with their filters? How more unbiased a study do you want?

I have a technical background, I work in a lab, and I do a lot of testing according to standards. So I can appreciate when a company spends the time to do the R&D, with a dedicated test fixture, with annually calibrated instruments. You won't even find that at Mythbusters...

This myth is busted and so are your ******** arguments.
I guess 26+ years of working on vehicles and using performance products doesn't mean much when I try to add something to a discussion.

[Longshot270]

I guess 26+ years of working on vehicles and using performance products doesn't mean much when I try to add something to a discussion.

No, because companies dont lie to make you more willing to buy their product. Kinda like everyone knows redbull really gives you wings.

[88Racing]

No, because companies dont lie to make you more willing to buy their product. Kinda like everyone knows redbull really gives you wings.

There you go!
Poor that in your tank!
It will really give your truck wings!:hehe:
Redbull says it themselves!!!!!
But
Not the type of wings that will make your truck fly!
Only the ones it'll get after you have to put it in a grave yard!
:lol:

[Keeblerz28]

:surrender: I didn't mean to offend anyone, and I'm sorry if I did. :surrender:

I don't believe that I called anyone any names, used profanity, etc, and I also understand that everyone is entitled to their own opinions. I merely was trying to have a meaningful, fact-based debate by sourcing a reference. (ISO 9001 certified, fwiw)

I'm not trying to be difficult or a pain in the __. I just want the forums I spend time on to be able to answer questions as good as possible. I'm sure you understand that this often means its a group effort, so I just don't want anyone to take anything personally if it looks like I'm trying to correct someone.

I've been kicked off another forum before (reinstated after I talked to the moderator) and I don't want to have to go through that here.

I would gladly discuss anything further with anyone via PM.

According to a UCLA study, 93% of communication is non verbal cues... yet we find ourselves in a world of emails, texts, and other electronic messages (like this one)

-Dave

[88Racing]

How do I want to address your issue?
I'm not calling anyone names.
I'm just trying to dispell the corperate propaganda that these companies force feed the propective customers.
Alls I ever said was the testing was a bit one sided.
Believe it or not:
K+N IS one of the better CAI applications to tune with on these trucks.
It has the least amount of droan to contend with besides the 3" AF1(which is not made anymore).
Its just the customers own oiling practices sometimes defeat the sysytem and allow it to foul.
Yes.
I do believe that over oiling is a big factor with any oiled filter application not just to the MAF but to the gumming of the TB also.
Take a step back and look at the problem/situation from the whole perspective.
Set your learnings asside and open your mind to other members views and experiences.
Peace!:)

[Toigs325]

So, I have a guy on one of my other sites and he has a question about towing and cannot seem to get any help....
Here is his question...

"hello, i am new to this site, i recently purchaed a 2006 f150 king ranch 4x4. it has the k&n cold air kit, i pull a boat and cannot stand the noise it makes when under power. my first question is, does somebody make one that doesent sound like it's going to suck the hood in?? i will trade for a factory set up. i am located in central fl."

Any of you guys have some insight I can share with him???

Thanks!


Sin

I have the same trouble pulling my boat...Its worse with the K&N 77 series because it has a metal tube instead of plastic...it wont hurt anything though. I would go with plastic if I did it again though because it isnt nearly as loud and gets more power because the metal tube can heat up a bit.

[chill19872]

Just to throw this out there i have used K&N Drop in filters on my 97,04, F-150 I have had No problems at all with the oil affecting my MAS, I just make sure to wipe the filter down after oiling to ensure.On another note if your concerned about filter efficency and you just hate to "oil" your filter i would suggest a Volant Power core CAI. A buddy just had one installed on his 2009 f150(5.4) and just to clarify this system is a sealed unit with air flow coming from the factory hole near the fender/ and also coming from the front where you can add the "scoop" upgrade. Im sold on the idea of getting a Volant if i go to a CAI i like the sound lol of course i also like the sound of nitto mud grapplers over my radio :smiley_roll1:

[jmwilso2]

I just spray my maf with electrical contact cleaner at the oil change following a filter cleaning, I've never had a maf problem.

Joe