Has anyone actually noticed any difference at all , useing aftermarket air filters....some manufacters claim as much as 5 hp. gain over stock filters on the FZ6...boy I'd like to see some dyno specs on that ! Daryl 
Air flow....?
- Thread starter Daryldaddy
- Start date
If someone tells you they actually felt the difference in power, they're lying to you imo
/thread closed.
/thread closed.
Here is what I was able to find out about K&N, along with other members pros and cons on the K&N: http://www.600riders.com/forum/fz6-mods/17056-k-n-air-filter-performance-gain.html
If you really want to see an airflow horsepower increase, check out the threads on the Airbox Mod :justkidding: :spank:
If you really want to see an airflow horsepower increase, check out the threads on the Airbox Mod :justkidding: :spank:
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2007
- Messages
- 5,442
- Reaction score
- 99
- Points
- 48
- Location
- Adelaide,South Australia
When I installed mine the only things I noticed was the induction noise was louder and the bike seemed to rev easier.
The definative word...
The "What's in the AF1 shop" Thread - Page 238 - ApriliaForum sponsored by AF1 Racing, inc.
"I have K&N filters in a couple of my engines, but most I keep the stock filter. After almost a decade of dyno tuning I have yet to see an actual gain on a modern sportsbike from a low restriction filter and often a tiny loss. I assume this due to a diminished resonant effect in the airbox since the filter "backflows" air as well as it does let it into the box to began with. Resonant frequency is determined by several variables including total airbox volume which is the volume from the filter to the intake valves of the motor. Now exceptions to this general rule are made for cruisers, especially Yamaha cruisers with their TINY little air filter, replacing it with a low restriction unit definitely makes power. The SXV and RXV are another example of anything or nothing being better than stock.
I suppose the thing we have to remember is that we do not care at all about big "flow" numbers, we care about charge trapping efficiency. This is what makes power, bigger holes and less restrictive filters will definitely win on a flow bench, we are not driving/riding flow benches.
In general sportbike airboxes seem to be very well designed and thought out from the factory. The Honda CBR1000RR is no exception but this was the first and only time I have ever had to actually read the instructions to install an aftermarket intake filter...."
The "What's in the AF1 shop" Thread - Page 238 - ApriliaForum sponsored by AF1 Racing, inc.
"I have K&N filters in a couple of my engines, but most I keep the stock filter. After almost a decade of dyno tuning I have yet to see an actual gain on a modern sportsbike from a low restriction filter and often a tiny loss. I assume this due to a diminished resonant effect in the airbox since the filter "backflows" air as well as it does let it into the box to began with. Resonant frequency is determined by several variables including total airbox volume which is the volume from the filter to the intake valves of the motor. Now exceptions to this general rule are made for cruisers, especially Yamaha cruisers with their TINY little air filter, replacing it with a low restriction unit definitely makes power. The SXV and RXV are another example of anything or nothing being better than stock.
I suppose the thing we have to remember is that we do not care at all about big "flow" numbers, we care about charge trapping efficiency. This is what makes power, bigger holes and less restrictive filters will definitely win on a flow bench, we are not driving/riding flow benches.
In general sportbike airboxes seem to be very well designed and thought out from the factory. The Honda CBR1000RR is no exception but this was the first and only time I have ever had to actually read the instructions to install an aftermarket intake filter...."
fazer.rider
Super Member
sxty8goats
Senior Member
On my 2004 GTO, LS1 V8, installed headers and did a dyno tune. Then did a few dyno pulls to try a couple intake mods. All runs were with an aftermarket intake tube as the stock tube is bad...
Stock paper filter / stock air box 330 RWHP 340 TQ
K&N Filter / Stock air box 332 RWHP 340 Q
Cone Filter / Intake Tube 330 RWHP 339 TQ
Sure it is a different animal but there was no diference. =/- 10 HP/TQ can happen with no changes. These pulls were all done @ 30 minutes apart.
Not much of a fan of the oil on cotton filters. I"m still running paper.
Stock paper filter / stock air box 330 RWHP 340 TQ
K&N Filter / Stock air box 332 RWHP 340 Q
Cone Filter / Intake Tube 330 RWHP 339 TQ
Sure it is a different animal but there was no diference. =/- 10 HP/TQ can happen with no changes. These pulls were all done @ 30 minutes apart.
Not much of a fan of the oil on cotton filters. I"m still running paper.
urbanj
Junior Member
Take a look at the size of the filter and then take a look at the size of a filter for a small car (civic, corolla, etc). the filter almost guaranteed has more of a flow rating that what the engine can flow.
But wait there is more...
Follow on post from above quote...
"Yes, the EVO airkit actually works, good for 1.5-2 bhp consistently but good for closer to 3-4 bhp with the stock filter instead of the aftermarket item. Beneficial resonance is the only thing I can nail down in my head as to why this is. BTW, for those of you who have not figured this out yet, the best seal and fit for the EVO kit is to use only one of the two supplied rubber gaskets and NO GREASE! All the grease seems to do is make the gasket swell over time and loose it's ability to seal properly. Odd huh?
I personally think that stock paper element filters are the way to go for most applications because their filtration is indeed FAR superior to wire and gauze or foam type materials. Tiny particles do matter over long periods. I have seen inside some pretty interesting bike and car engines over the years from AMA to F1. There is but one common theme, they either run a paper element or no filter at all (maybe a wire mesh screen). On my old 1999 Mille I did a dyno test with full EGA on the stock filter, EVO, K&N, a Foam one I made and none at all. The dyno graphs all directly overlaid one another as did the mixture trace lines.
Filtration is key for a filter and this applies to oil filters as well. I only use paper element oil filters in engines I build and service as those "washable" stainless mesh oil filters have not fared well in terms of filtration in independent testing, the only place they seem to do well is in the testing done by the people marketing and selling them. Dirt bike guys love the washable oil filters, especially KTM guys where they have two or more to replace every few hundred miles."
Follow on post from above quote...
"Yes, the EVO airkit actually works, good for 1.5-2 bhp consistently but good for closer to 3-4 bhp with the stock filter instead of the aftermarket item. Beneficial resonance is the only thing I can nail down in my head as to why this is. BTW, for those of you who have not figured this out yet, the best seal and fit for the EVO kit is to use only one of the two supplied rubber gaskets and NO GREASE! All the grease seems to do is make the gasket swell over time and loose it's ability to seal properly. Odd huh?
I personally think that stock paper element filters are the way to go for most applications because their filtration is indeed FAR superior to wire and gauze or foam type materials. Tiny particles do matter over long periods. I have seen inside some pretty interesting bike and car engines over the years from AMA to F1. There is but one common theme, they either run a paper element or no filter at all (maybe a wire mesh screen). On my old 1999 Mille I did a dyno test with full EGA on the stock filter, EVO, K&N, a Foam one I made and none at all. The dyno graphs all directly overlaid one another as did the mixture trace lines.
Filtration is key for a filter and this applies to oil filters as well. I only use paper element oil filters in engines I build and service as those "washable" stainless mesh oil filters have not fared well in terms of filtration in independent testing, the only place they seem to do well is in the testing done by the people marketing and selling them. Dirt bike guys love the washable oil filters, especially KTM guys where they have two or more to replace every few hundred miles."
S
Shamus McFeeley
Foam filters work well for off road applications. I use(d) a foam filter with pre-filter cover on the dirtbikes/4-wheelers I've had/have. It's primarily for trapping all the dust, and I can tell you that my pre-filter would get black with dirt after a long days ride.
Street bikes and cars/trucks are a different story, especially now with engine control being delivered electronically. I don't see how you can expect a hp gain through better air flow with no adjustment to fuel flow or fuel scheduling. I suppose that for K&N to make those claims they do some test on a ragged out engine and then tune it up and add their air filter: Voila! Instant 5 hp increase.
Street bikes and cars/trucks are a different story, especially now with engine control being delivered electronically. I don't see how you can expect a hp gain through better air flow with no adjustment to fuel flow or fuel scheduling. I suppose that for K&N to make those claims they do some test on a ragged out engine and then tune it up and add their air filter: Voila! Instant 5 hp increase.
madmanmaigret
Mad like crazy not angry
Or use a clogged up filter that is robbing the engine of 6-7 hp and put a clean one in to show increase.......
Similar threads
