Flat versus cone.

[betomonroy]

All Points Question.
K&N Air Filter.
I totaly disregard the cone filter when installed INSIDE the engine bay.
I am TOTALY for the flat K&N replacement filter that goes inplace of the original for it is already in a Cold Air Intake system that comes from factory and that is more than capable of flowing as much air as needed by a 3.0
To me... THAT IS BETTER.
What is your standing on this?

 

[betomonroy]

And don't give me crap about the oiling of it because when its done according to the instructions... no oil goes into the engine or its components.

 

[bobbywalter]

i would not waste money on a k@n in a stock power application, especially with a stock intake applicaton.


its a piss waste of life

 

[bigcountry]

i would stay away from KN airfilters. my first was my last one id ever buy i do agree flat is better than cone i would not change a perfectly good air in take ford made them the way they are for a reason a good flat air filter should be the same as a cone air filter

 

[bobbywalter]

i would stay away from KN airfilters. my first was my last one id ever buy i do agree flat is better than cone i would not change a perfectly good air in take ford made them the way they are for a reason a good flat air filter should be the same as a cone air filter

i dont agree with any of that at all.


if its a truck that doesnt off road and is stock or near stock for powerlevels the stock shit is just fine...

if it is a wheeler then the stock ford shit is useless and horribly engineered for the adventure enthusiest.

so if your an off road enthusiest a cone k@n with proper box and routing even with stock engines is the shit....buy two. if your adding power then its really worth buying them.

 

[bigcountry]

i had a 1990 toyota 4x4 it pulled air from bhiend the driver side head light i kept a stock flat airfilter and i did no change to any of the stock box and i still did awesome offroad. and i went muddin whenever i could and where ever i could and i still didnt have any problems. there is nothin wrong with stock stuff unless you plan on water fording then you need a snorkle. yea my yota had the 3.0L v6 it was a dog and i still kept up with the v8s offroad

 

[bobbywalter]

i had a 1990 toyota 4x4 it pulled air from bhiend the driver side head light i kept a stock flat airfilter and i did no change to any of the stock box and i still did awesome offroad. and i went muddin whenever i could and where ever i could and i still didnt have any problems. there is nothin wrong with stock stuff unless you plan on water fording then you need a snorkle. yea my yota had the 3.0L v6 it was a dog and i still kept up with the v8s offroad

well, thats not a ranger. and wheelin with me may have let you down if your truck bounced out of the slide and dropped in the passenger side depending on lift and tire size. this happens to me in that particular section of trail often. the trail lays you over hard in this instance and is up to 3 feet of goo. my pcm and intake are usually on the passenger side so i tend to low side the drivers side of the truck. i hope to change that with the diesel though, its still all hacked in on the passenger side floor since the swap started last oct just need to figure out how i want to route it or install a non computer trans.

and a toy keeping up with v8's??



























:
f--k yeah they keep up with v8's...its why i put a v8 in my ranger....the damn things are like dirt bikes...and i was running with 4 cylinders most of the time...


one thing about the 3.0 i dont like is when you do lay over in the situation i am referring too they are real sensitive to oil soak...if you stall you have to get right after it and keep it running...if it starts smokin your best to quit trying to drive it out...

cause the water isnt the only problem there....i have seen quite a few 3.0 toys explode from oil trying to stay out of the water where the 4 cyl toys and my ford v8 and any ranger engine so far were fine waiting for help....i am not too sure about my diesel, but i will find out its limits pretty soon.


i would also like to add any stock ranger airbox ends up stalled or barely running from paper filter clogs too on that run in the spring uless its lifted over 4 inches and on 35's..


this is simply off camber and not over the hood water too...

but wheeling is different everywhere. i know that because i wheel everywhere.

 

[bigcountry]

i kept up with v8s in the mud i would have loved to have kept up with them on pavment the truck had a 3in body lift and a 4in suspension lift when i went muddin i put my 35s on and never had a problem i only went wheelin with my regular tires a couple of times and they sucked now with a diesel the one thing that is going to hurt you is the weight unless you have some little VW diesel you are going to sink like a chevy oops i mean a rock

 

[bobbywalter]

i kept up with v8s in the mud i would have loved to have kept up with them on pavment the truck had a 3in body lift and a 4in suspension lift when i went muddin i put my 35s on and never had a problem i only went wheelin with my regular tires a couple of times and they sucked now with a diesel the one thing that is going to hurt you is the weight unless you have some little VW diesel you are going to sink like a chevy oops i mean a rock

it dont do too bad in normal stuff so far with the diesel...but it has always sunk like a rock...its an ext cab.


but its got an even bigger chevy boulder under the hood so your saying is spot on....awwww ballls...what to do at least i can afford to drive the pos now..












and on pavement there werent any toys running with me, but they didnt have to stop every 15 minutes for gas either. always trade offs.

i like the idea of a 4.0 ford into a toy though. the 4.3 is really killer in them

 

[betomonroy]

For an RBV Technical advisor You are a real dissapointment Bobby.
The only reason a Four cylinder is more capable of keeping up with a V8 is very simple... WEIGHT DISTRIBUTION VS. TORQUE. My first Ranger was a four cylinder 2.3 with a Pinto two barrel head (wich has the big ports in it) with a Crower Hi lift Hyd. cam. Dual springs. Triple angle valve job toped with a Garret Turbo charger. No V8 was able to keep up with me and this was my daily driver.
My Second ranger had a 2.9 with no other mod than the air filter being a cone type and didn't help at all until I got the original set up with a K&n flat replacement. Now THAT WORKED.
Now look at my Ranger... It comes with a 3.0 with 1.7 rockers. Throttle body from a 3.0 Duratech. 5R55RE Transmission and 4.56 diff gears.
I think the 3.0 is the best engine Lbs of weigh to HP to economy I've had in a long time (and I had a '68 Charger with a 440).
I think that for a RBV Technical advisor... You just have a heavy foot. Learn to drive or You will always end like You deserve. On a side in three feet of mud.
By the way... I also ran the Score Baja 1000 on November 1994 (among other off road and drag races) I may be no champion but I do have experience.
Man... so much for a technical advisor.
The question was about K&N Flat replacement filter against K&N Cone Filter.

 

[bigcountry]

just because its an ext cab dont mean thats the reason why it sank your just talking about an extra 300 to 700 pounds if that from a regular cab truck that really wont make much a difference offroad. now what you call normal stuff is different where ever you go around here its red clay im not to sure if yall have that where you are but the stuff is nasty. so you are putting a diesel motor in just to change which side your intake is on????

 

[bobbywalter]

aye. i can see that. and see where this thread wandered off the path.



i have also been to the desert quite a bit, though i dont compete in high speed stuff yet, i do wheel.

outside of washington and the ne states i have wheeled some crazy places and use that experience just a wee a little bit.



the reference to the toys was in stockish(mild lift and 33-35 in tire) applications and offroad capacity, compared to a stock 2.9 powertrain 31-33 in tire ext cab with mild lift, i didnt have a chance in that particular terrain which was different then the "puts you on your side" in the areas discussed here. it was also in the early 90's and late 80's. THE REASON THOSE TRUCKS DID AND DO SO WELL wheelin is gearing and wt distribution and balance of build. on the road my 2.9 would destroy them, so off road its embarrasing to be left behind on obstacles.

so in with the crate engine. this put me out front all the way around, but the toys still hold thier own. a turbo 2.3 4 cylinder at that point would have accomplished the same thing with better economy then the v8 for damn sure, till i went a lil bigger to do the next step in wheeling....



i think you misunderstand some things here. the 3 foot sideways thing IS THE TRAIL. YOU HAVE TO LAY IT OVER TO GET THRU THERE.

now.


think about that






and i am a heavy footed idiot, or rather was.... and i am quite a bit calmer now. drive alot easier.




i did answer the question. dont waste money on a k&n in a stock application thats 2wd period.

i DO LIKE THE STOCK REPLACEMENT K&N over the cones in the situation you stated if you just have to have one for a stocker and maybe i should have stated that..

but why would you want one?? i imagine most guys with stock situations.... if you want to have a k&n it must be for more flow right?


if your saying the stock box and snorkeling is as good as it gets and only needs a k&n to be the cats ass then your killing me.... most model years intake flow can be greatly improved going custom build.


which is what i mentoned for the off roaders.


this is a mod site for guys that want more. it seems to me apparently your pissed because your stating the big difference you got was with a stock box and intake and panel k&n and i say its a waste. in these trucks the stock intake is not forthe very max efficiency, power and flo. its close but still comprimised.

to get the most out of the K&n you would have to build a system for that and it would add a shit ton of nvh to your truck most buyers do not want. doing this can also increase mpg even...it can also decrease it if you make it incorrectly.


looking at the responses i thought it was clear. thank you for pointing out my inadequacies, i am obviously a clueless assclown of epic proportions.

best bet is to report me to a mod to have me reviewed and possibly removed as i may be a little to old school to be useful around here.

 

[bobbywalter]

just because its an ext cab dont mean thats the reason why it sank your just talking about an extra 300 to 700 pounds if that from a regular cab truck that really wont make much a difference offroad. now what you call normal stuff is different where ever you go around here its red clay im not to sure if yall have that where you are but the stuff is nasty. so you are putting a diesel motor in just to change which side your intake is on????

no....its in there cause i get 20 plus mpg and run it on mixed fuels.

 

[bobbywalter]

i dunno....maybe a 3.0 would do better...or a 2.3 turbo with a flat panel and stock air box and snorkel..


with the gasser small block it weighed over 5400....its right at 6 k now...

 

[betomonroy]

My Hero...
You are the reason I love Testosterone pissing contests...
Keep up the High Blood Pressure for anyones entertainment...