Ya know, the concept of parabolic bends providing smoother air flow than
radial bends kind of intrigues me, though in the real world it has to be
trivial. But the stuff about less air flow even with the additional reverse
cone is hard to swallow. I like to see K&N's engineering study on that.
Seriously, they are the ones who mentioned engineering - let's see them put
their paper work where their mouth is. In any case, the S&B filters flow
better than the throttle body anyway. The real weak point with these intake
tubes for the 4.7's is lack of a real cold air intake. K&N doesn't mention
that - could it be because they don't have a solution, either? I've got
nothing against K&N. I use one on my bike and I think it's a great product.
But I think this comment from K&N is pretty shallow.
--Rob--
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-dakota-truck@buffnet.net
[mailto:owner-dakota-truck@buffnet.net]On Behalf Of Ronald Wong
Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2001 1:45 PM
To: DML
Subject: DML: 4.7 Intake Options
A lot of you have gone with Intense Performance and some of you have gone
with QuickD. Some of you are still waiting. Here is K&N's reply to someone
on another Dakota forum. Some of it may be hype and it's true they are more
expensive....but sometimes...you get what you pay for...
<<From K&N>>
Dear customer,
It is due out this summer. I checked out the web site (Intense Performance),
not impressed. Metal tubes conduct and retain heat and the mandrel bends
create turbulence. We use plastic tubes with parabolic bends to reduce
turbulence and increase air speed. Not much engineering or R&D looks like it
went into anything on the site. Also,inverted cone tops do not work and
actually reduce air flow. Air takes the path of less resistance. This is
through the top since it is a straight shot. The air coming through the top
creates a pressure differential that does not allow air to enter the sides
until half way down. Since the sides where no air is entering have more
surface area than the top, the result is a loss of air flow. We came out
with those years ago and quickly dropped the line. They do not mention
filtration ability either. F&N is 99.05% effective on an SAE test, paper is
99.29% and the brand they use{un-named}is only 85.16% effective. The OEM
minimum is 96% which means the "new" filters they are pitching can cause
long term engine damage. Safe to say ,if you want the first gizmo out, go
with them. If you want a researched and tested product that makes real
horsepower ,wait for us.
Thanks for writing, Rick
<<End of Reply>>
Ron
00 PB SLT QC 4X2 5.9 46RE 3.92 LSD
For modifications see my DML Profile (URL follows)
http://www.twistedbits.net/WWWProfile/dakota/Kw9pV1EkFeOYY
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:00:54 EDT