Serving Ford Ranger, Bronco II, Explorer & Mazda B-Series Owners Since 1999

 
 
Home Forums Info - Technical Info - Other TRS News Photo Galleries Shirts & Decals Parts Store Classifieds

 

Go Back   The Ranger Station Forums > Engine & Transmission Forums > V6 Forums > 3.0 Liter Forum

Notices

Post New Thread Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-27-2012, 01:23 PM   #13
Bennybooster
Member
 
Bennybooster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Medford, Oregon.

Year: 1996
Make: Ford
Model: Ranger
Engine: 3.0
Class: 4x4 offroad
Used For: Driving over stuff

Posts: 3,117
Rep Power: 19
Bennybooster is a splendid one to beholdBennybooster is a splendid one to beholdBennybooster is a splendid one to beholdBennybooster is a splendid one to beholdBennybooster is a splendid one to beholdBennybooster is a splendid one to behold
iTrader: (1)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluebombersfan View Post
I truly believe that doing a dyno test on a 4.0L with or without a k&n would easily show a 3-10hp gain with it on, and probably no difference on a 2.3L since the filter is oversized for the 2.3l in the first place. You guys must agree on that right?
You believe wrong...
__________________
Built not bought
1 Ton, Caged Ranger build
Bennybooster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2012, 01:31 PM   #14
bluebombersfan
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008

Year: 2006
Make: Ford
Model: Ranger Sport
Engine: 3.0

Posts: 301
Rep Power: 10
bluebombersfan is on a distinguished road
iTrader: (0)
Default

fair enough
bluebombersfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2012, 01:35 PM   #15
bluebombersfan
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008

Year: 2006
Make: Ford
Model: Ranger Sport
Engine: 3.0

Posts: 301
Rep Power: 10
bluebombersfan is on a distinguished road
iTrader: (0)
Default

I still go with K&n, I have the cleaning kit from my last ranger already so I am content with just having something I can wash and reuse.
bluebombersfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-28-2012, 01:51 PM   #16
pillen140
Member
 
pillen140's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: winston-salem, NC

Year: 1995
Make: ford
Model: ranger
Engine: 3.0
Class: 4x4 off-road
Used For: dd, weekend off roader. and annoying my girlfriend

Posts: 3,254
Rep Power: 28
pillen140 has much to be proud ofpillen140 has much to be proud ofpillen140 has much to be proud ofpillen140 has much to be proud ofpillen140 has much to be proud ofpillen140 has much to be proud ofpillen140 has much to be proud ofpillen140 has much to be proud ofpillen140 has much to be proud of
iTrader: (1)
Default

I have one. I take it out and replace it with a paper filter when im not going offroad. They're definatly worth the $45 if you fill yours up with dust and mud/water more than 3times a year. I've cleaned mine about 10 times and is still good. I would just rather a good paper filter for on the road with salt, highway dust and every day crap that my engine inhales. A filter change alone, doesn't add any hp or fuel mileage.... at least in my 3.0L. We use k&n on our racecars as well, but only because you can clean the rubber tire remnants off of them and the huge bugs and crap that get jammed into the open airfilter of a modified race car. Those paper filters get expensive for 2 a week.
__________________
MAJORITY, THE NEW MINORITY
"Harry..... I TOOK CARE OF IT!!!"
1995 RANGER EXT CAB 4X4, 6" SUSPENSION, 3" BODY, 35X12.50R15
pillen140 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-29-2012, 10:57 PM   #17
bluebombersfan
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008

Year: 2006
Make: Ford
Model: Ranger Sport
Engine: 3.0

Posts: 301
Rep Power: 10
bluebombersfan is on a distinguished road
iTrader: (0)
Default

When i put my K&N in I noticed a suction sound when I punch the gas, this then is not evidence that it's sucking in air faster? because it doesn't happen with the paper filter.
bluebombersfan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-30-2012, 06:42 AM   #18
Rearanger
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008

Year: 2003
Make: Ford
Model: Ranger 3.0L

Posts: 745
Rep Power: 12
Rearanger is on a distinguished road
iTrader: (0)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluebombersfan View Post
When i put my K&N in I noticed a suction sound when I punch the gas, this then is not evidence that it's sucking in air faster? because it doesn't happen with the paper filter.
I can't find an engineering explanation but air noise is turbulent resonance creating vibrations. Reducing air speed will reduce the turbulent resonance but if the difference in noise equals the flow rate then I'd expect large gains in power from a K&N, which doesn't happen. I think the paper does a better job of noise muffling without reducing NEEDED flow.

To measure the difference in flow why don't you test the vacuum down stream of the throttle body with a clean stock paper filter and a K&N. If the paper filter is indeed restricting flow that much then you'll see a higher vacuum.
__________________
2003 3.0L Long Box, 5spd Manual, 2wd, 3.73 LS,
P235/70R-16, Synthetic fluids, Dual by-pass filter system, 60k
Rearanger is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:14 AM.


© 1999-2012 / 959 Media LLC / All Rights Reserved

The Ranger Station is in no way affiliated with the Ford Motor Company.

[Legal Notices]   [Advertising/Vendors]
 
Also check out SSP Central for Special Service & Non-Traditional Police & Fire Vehicles