RE: Performance concerns

From: Ayotte, Glen (ayotteg@espn.com)
Date: Sat Jun 13 1998 - 21:37:20 EDT


Jim,

        I installed an K&N OEM replacement filter on Tuesday of this week
(about $40.00). I don't think you will get the performance that you are
looking for. Throttle responce seems to be better, compared to the
stock filter. Other than that I can't tell you to much. I hope that my
mileage will increase a little? Good luck.................

Glenn
98 CC 4x4 5.2l 3.92...................

>-----Original Message-----
>From: jim miller
>Sent: Saturday, June 13, 1998 7:54 PM
>To: dakota-truck@buffnet.net
>Subject: DML: Performance concerns
>
>Jim Miller writes;
>I am still not satisfied with the way my new truck runs. It is a 98 reg cab
>swb 5.2L auto, 3.92 sg Mopar headers but stock exhaust behind it with 400
>miles on it. Today I put the Mopar FABM on it and tried a couple of 0-60
>runs. I was quite
>dissapointed. The truck actually seems to loose power with the FABM on it
>compaired to the factory air cleaner and filter with a fresh air duct opening
>beside the radiator in the grille area. Here are the results.
>With FABM 0-60 first try 9.98 seconds no power braking. second try 10.03
>seconds.
>With stock air cleaner and filter with fresh air duct 7.99 seconds and 8.01
>seconds.
>Outside air temp 102 degrees and 39% humidity and 600 feet above sea level
>elevation.
>There is minimal wheel spin with stock air cleaner and no wheel spin with
>FABM.
>Also with fabm the engine almost quits pulling totally about 4800 rpm, with
>stock filter it quits about 5k.
>I seem to loose a lot of torque with the open filter and gain no top end
>either.
>Could my problem be putting headers on with the stock exhaust is a very bad
>combination?
>I am waiting for a catback system I ordered but the dealer installed the
>headers when I bought the truck. Am I expecting too much from a 318? My 89
>Shelby Dak ran better than this truck does.
>That truck would smoke the tires 50 feet but had no high rpm performance. Of
>course I know it was only 175 hp but was a little lighter than the 98. I
>still believe the 98 should have more hp per pound. where am I going wrong.
>Can I put a K&N
>filter in the stock box and help myself. The underhood temp is just too hot
>in Texas summer for underhood air input.
>BTW I am running 87 octain gas, no ping at all and it cost 90.9. 93 octain
>is 100.9 here.
>Jim Miller
>Waco,Tx
>
>
>
>



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:08:56 EDT