Quote:
|
Originally Posted by eb2flyz
please correct me if i'm wrong, but dont trucks actually draw more air in than a car would, so by doing tests to find out restrictions/flow rates would have alot of bearing on pwr/tq, also by measuring the amount of dust that goes through the filter can also play a big bearing engine life, a lot of us think that 200k is a lot of k's for a car, but with trucks they usually expect to get over the 1 000 000 km mark, before they need to do a rebuild, thus by knowing that a certain filter actually traps more dirt/dust without affecting pwr/tq can be quite important.
i myself am quite supprised with the results of the k & n and personnaly thought that they would have been higher, but you get that
|
If your talking many 1,000s of Ks in adverse dusty condition the tests may have a bearing. I'd think twice before using one in these conditions.
In city and most rural driving a sedan car will not experience this stuff. There are a myriad of independant dyno tet that have proven the K&N offers better airflow and thus Kws. And with widespread use over many years I dont see hooroor stories of "my filter did not protect my engine". I dont doubt the test results I just dont think they fit car applications.