Power Gains

[Gotta_gofast]

money. 5 bucks saved in materials on a million trucks in 5 million bucks they never spent. it wouldnt be cheaper to make a cone filter assembly when there is A LOT more surface area (meaning more material) on a cone filter vs the standard filter.

i will agree that 400 bucks for a supposed 10 horse increase is absolutely rediculous. IMHO, where ford went wrong with their intake design was they didnt put a supercharger on ever ranger stock

Bob Ayers did a comparison of K&N vs stock filter media...
http://www.therangerstation.com/forums/showthread.php?t=42634

There may be more surface area on a cone filter than a flat filter, but I once again go back to an original point that the 70ish square inches of factory filter is more than adaquete to feed the 207hp an SOHC 4.0L puts out. In fact, the same sized filter (9" X 7 3/4") is used on the 5.0L explorer. But I do believe its cheaper to use a cone filter on the end of the MAF than it would cost to mold an airbox and use a high quality filter element.

On top of this, I highly suggest against using cheap filters (like spectr) because of the poor ability to filter the air. If you can see rays of light through it, dust will get through. At least you'll have to clean your MAF more, and at most it will scratch at your valve seats causing poor sealing and tear up your cylinder walls causing low compression and oil consumption!


Any REAL intake has a compressor in series with it between the filter and the throttlebody that requires exhaust flow to operate! haha

 

[Dirmaid]

Any REAL intake has a compressor in series with it between the filter and the throttlebody that requires exhaust flow to operate! haha

Well said sir, well said

 

[Gotta_gofast]

Well said sir, well said

With Ford's move to using turbochargers more often (the small ecoboost engines in the explorer, the 3.5 EB in the taurus, flex, F150, ect...) kind of makes me wonder what would have been in store for the Ranger if it had been updated.

 

[Dirmaid]

it would have been nice to see an ecoboost ranger, although it would have most likely been the 4 banger since the ranger was never really designed to be a performance vehicle. But yeah it does make you wonder. I'm just glad that they didn't go the route that all of the other companies went and moved the ranger's size closer to a full-sized truck. Its called a compact truck for a reason, cause its a whole bunch of awesome that was squeezed into a truck mold

 

[Tulsa Time]

Horsepower is one of the selling points of a vehicle, why would Ford choose to choke down an engine when it would be cheaper and produce more horsepower to design a simple adapter and cone vs a molded box with specific openings to the outside world?

The answer to that question is simple. The same reason they invest so much effort into making an automatic transmission shift softly/smoothly (even though a soft shift wears clutches faster than a firm shift). Customer comfort.
Adding baffles to the air intake system serves to reduce the noise level in the passenger compartment. The extra noise would be more noticeable (to the vast majority of the general public) than the loss of a few peak horsepower.

 

[Gotta_gofast]

The answer to that question is simple. The same reason they invest so much effort into making an automatic transmission shift softly/smoothly (even though a soft shift wears clutches faster than a firm shift). Customer comfort.
Adding baffles to the air intake system serves to reduce the noise level in the passenger compartment. The extra noise would be more noticeable (to the vast majority of the general public) than the loss of a few peak horsepower.

You are assuming that the baffle limits horsepower. I really doubt this.

 

[Tulsa Time]

You are assuming that the baffle limits horsepower. I really doubt this.

Yes, I am. After all that was the premise of your question.

 

[Gotta_gofast]

Where would this be the premise of my question? Anyway, I don't care. If you guys want to waste your money on intakes go ahead. Don't be surprised if you run neck with a stock ranger.

My main point (which was lost long ago) was that the money for a cold air intake should be put in parts that are proven to perform (not assumed because it looks like it might). And if you're just going to bolt a cone filter on the end of a stock intake tube you will most definately see worse performance, so take that $40 and treat your wife to dinner.

 

[Gatorjoe]

The simple facts are this...
The inlet tube to the airbox measures 1.5" across, the hose from the airbox to the manifold is a 3" system. If you think that pulling air through that 1.5" is enough to feed your motor, good for you, but its not. The space that the air is pulled from with the stock box is right behind the headlight, which is a very restricted space already. You will see increased temperature at idle, and very low speeds, but moving air is cooler, once again, a fact, otherwise we wouldn't have fans in our houses, cars, etc. And like I said, I'll bet that I pull in cooler air than your stock airbox does, say at 35mph+.

You never answered my questions about your vacuum gauge reading 0 at WOT. And this still isn't the best measure for true flow efficiency because of a large number of other variables.

My filter setup as is, added 2.5 mpg under normal driving conditions and increased throttle response and power. I average ~22 mpg on the highway in my FX4 with 4.10 gears and tires that have a true running diameter of around 29.5 inches. My 95 ford escort saw a 4mpg improvement under mixed driving conditions with the same setup and there was a huge increase, as there is with the ranger, in passing/merging power.
Obviously, if engines came from the factory at full performance potential, like you seem to think, there would be no need for an aftermarket, and of course the auto aftermarket is huge, so, there must be a reason. There are plenty of third party tests that confirm that high flow intakes add power, even without adding a tune. These gains are seen where the motors already flow the best, no matter what engine the intake is put on.

I have been building and racing cars since I was 13 years old, and I know what works at this point and what doesn't. So believe what you want to believe. I'll continue building cars that work and work better than factory. I'll put my ranger to the test, on the dyno, on the track, wherever you need to see the data from, against the stock setup.

For the money, with the cost of what it takes to make HP anymore, its not the best upgrade, and I fully admit that. But it does add power, and overall performance. Decades of hotrodders have proven that factory motors are not made to their full potential, so why would you think the Ford Ranger is any different? Companies make cars for everyone's comfort, not full performance. The make products with planned obsolescence so they can sell you a better product down the line.
This exact same motor produced 210 HP in the mustang and 216 in the Land Rover LR3. Working in the auto industry for a long time, these kinds of differences are made from better flow, not engine tunes. The power differential on a Challenger vs a Charger for example, are a result of different exhaust tuning, otherwise the engines are completely interchangeable.

So, do what you want to do, I'll enjoy my extra power and fuel economy, but most importantly, my throttle response. But please, understand that the MAJORITY of people who have problems with high flow intakes are changing the volume of the the intake tube and not compensating for it. These companies knkow what they are doing, and don't believe for second that they stay in business by selling lies and snake oil K&N has been in business since 1969, companies that don't have a good product don't stick around that long, especially in the economy of today.

 

[Tulsa Time]

Where would this be the premise of my question?

My apologies. I must have misinterpreted you question. When you asked

...why would Ford choose to choke down an engine ...?

I interpreted that as you asking what Ford’s motivation would be if they choked down the intake. If the intake was choked down, then I am going to assume some horsepower loss.

My main point (which was lost long ago) was that the money for a cold air intake should be put in parts that are proven to perform

This was my main point as well.

These days the dollar per horsepower value just isn't there in my opinion. If it were my truck, I’d spend the money on gears. You won't gain "horsepower" but the performance improvement will be much more noticeable than with intake, exhaust and a tune.

I find humor in the discussions I see on forums (I’ll admit I got caught up in this one as well) when “opposite” sides of the topic are both trying to make the same point.

 

[Gotta_gofast]

I did some tests for you (real numbers).

To start with, as mentioned before I'm in the process of gathering parts to supercharge my truck. I was able to snag a Volant intake for very cheap. It is the ONLY aftermarket intake for the Ford Ranger that still encloses and separates the filter from the rest of the engine compartment (which I like). And the upgraded intake gives me more flow potential so when I spin this M90 at 12000rpm producing 8psi, according to Eaton this supercharger is drawing 525cfm of are (200cfm more than a stock 4.0L SOHC). You see, I don't think Ford built every engine to its 100% potential (but I DO believe you need a balanced system for changing one part will not net you any real world gains). This intake gives me the ability to run a closed box that ducts into the fenderwell and behind the headlight (both areas that are separated from the engine bay) and since my 05 has an integrated MAF sensor within the intake tube I can remove the lid of the box, or remove the box entirely to expose the filter to the engine bay (it sits in the same location as stock).

Keep reading, if you think your intake pulls in cooler air than an airbox ducting outside the engine bay read closely...

I set a few parameters on my scangauge. First was obviously fAI (air intake temp). Second was ADV (timing advance) third was %EL (engine load in percentage based on available power at given rpm) fourth was fWT (engine temp). The first is obvious, the other three were to keep me consistant as to ensure a fair test.

I did three tests. With engine at operating temp 1st was a 2 minute idle. Second was 30mph for one mile, and last test was 55mph for one mile. Each test included an enclosed filter, lid of air box removed (but box still protecting from radiator fan blowing across it), and absolutely no airbox, just a filter on the end of a tube.

While the truck was still cold, key on engine off, it recorded an intake temp of 31f degrees. This is now our base. Let the truck warm up to 195 degrees then proceeded.

2 minute idle test:
Airbox-32f
no lid-49f
no box-62f
timing at 22 degrees advance during all three tests

30mph test:
airbox-31f
no lid-41f
no box-45f
timing at 29 degrees advance during all three tests

55mph test:
airbox-31f
no lid-39f
no box-41f
timing at 27 degrees advance with airbox and no lid, timing at 26 degrees with no box.

So this tells me that under load in od a 10 degree difference is enough to set my program into retarding the timing 1 degree. I have a performance 93 octane tune, so to give benefit of doubt my timing curve tables might be more aggressive with intake air temp.

It also tells me that with an airbox ducting into the outside world I see within 1 or 2 degrees of ambient temp. If you think you are getting "colder" air with your setup, then you need to be injecting water/methanol into your intake.

The silencer in the intake port is not an "obstruction", it is a venturi. Venturis are very efficient at increasing velocity of a fluid while the fluid's mass is remained close to constant.

Enjoy the "extra power" your autozone intake gives you, I'll stick to proven performance. I race and build my own engines also. I port cylinder heads with excellent results (partly due to having credits in fluid technology classes) and that machine you see in my avatar I hand built to race in the midwest! 3 times the rear wheel power of stock with a 35% wider torque curve. (see, I can swing my dick too)

There IS a place for aftermarket parts. But not every company is "legit". Tornado turbonator for instance. How about all the companies that charge $80 for a simple machined aluminum piece called "throttle body spacer". Those bottles of fuel injection cleaner? Hell, stay up late and order anything off of the infomercials. Thats all crap!

Once again, I close stating your intake is adequately designed for your stock motor (therefor I agree with you if you increase the engine's horsepower you now have an intake restriction). I don't care to argue about it anymore. I'll still recommend guys to an SCT X3 and custom tune ($380) or numerically higher gears or forced induction. Even changing all of your fluids (especially in an auto) to high quality synthetics will yield measurable results cheaper than an intake. The volant intake vs. stock still gave me the same miles per tank (but it sounds mean).

 

[holyford86]

I did some tests for you (real numbers).

To start with, as mentioned before I'm in the process of gathering parts to supercharge my truck. I was able to snag a Volant intake for very cheap. It is the ONLY aftermarket intake for the Ford Ranger that still encloses and separates the filter from the rest of the engine compartment (which I like). And the upgraded intake gives me more flow potential so when I spin this M90 at 12000rpm producing 8psi, according to Eaton this supercharger is drawing 525cfm of are (200cfm more than a stock 4.0L SOHC). You see, I don't think Ford built every engine to its 100% potential (but I DO believe you need a balanced system for changing one part will not net you any real world gains). This intake gives me the ability to run a closed box that ducts into the fenderwell and behind the headlight (both areas that are separated from the engine bay) and since my 05 has an integrated MAF sensor within the intake tube I can remove the lid of the box, or remove the box entirely to expose the filter to the engine bay (it sits in the same location as stock).

Keep reading, if you think your intake pulls in cooler air than an airbox ducting outside the engine bay read closely...

I set a few parameters on my scangauge. First was obviously fAI (air intake temp). Second was ADV (timing advance) third was %EL (engine load in percentage based on available power at given rpm) fourth was fWT (engine temp). The first is obvious, the other three were to keep me consistant as to ensure a fair test.

I did three tests. With engine at operating temp 1st was a 2 minute idle. Second was 30mph for one mile, and last test was 55mph for one mile. Each test included an enclosed filter, lid of air box removed (but box still protecting from radiator fan blowing across it), and absolutely no airbox, just a filter on the end of a tube.

While the truck was still cold, key on engine off, it recorded an intake temp of 31f degrees. This is now our base. Let the truck warm up to 195 degrees then proceeded.

2 minute idle test:
Airbox-32f
no lid-49f
no box-62f
timing at 22 degrees advance during all three tests

30mph test:
airbox-31f
no lid-41f
no box-45f
timing at 29 degrees advance during all three tests

55mph test:
airbox-31f
no lid-39f
no box-41f
timing at 27 degrees advance with airbox and no lid, timing at 26 degrees with no box.

So this tells me that under load in od a 10 degree difference is enough to set my program into retarding the timing 1 degree. I have a performance 93 octane tune, so to give benefit of doubt my timing curve tables might be more aggressive with intake air temp.

It also tells me that with an airbox ducting into the outside world I see within 1 or 2 degrees of ambient temp. If you think you are getting "colder" air with your setup, then you need to be injecting water/methanol into your intake.

The silencer in the intake port is not an "obstruction", it is a venturi. Venturis are very efficient at increasing velocity of a fluid while the fluid's mass is remained close to constant.

I like this test sequence, very well done and does prove a point

Enjoy the "extra power" your autozone intake gives you, I'll stick to proven performance. I race and build my own engines also. I port cylinder heads with excellent results (partly due to having credits in fluid technology classes) and that machine you see in my avatar I hand built to race in the midwest! 3 times the rear wheel power of stock with a 35% wider torque curve. (see, I can swing my dick too)

The cheap filters there scare me, when you can literally see through a filter without shining a light through it you might as well not have one. I've used them before (back when I knew little) and thought they were great. Running an AEM Brute Force filter now (no oil required and washable synthetic media which is very thick and traps fine particulates well), in the area where the stock airbox was, need to build some ducting around it to bring the air temp down though (its on the list) Reason I'm not using a stock box? I swapped in a 4.0 and with all of the stuff I've added to the engine compartment there simply isn't room to fit one.

There IS a place for aftermarket parts. But not every company is "legit". Tornado turbonator for instance. How about all the companies that charge $80 for a simple machined aluminum piece called "throttle body spacer". Those bottles of fuel injection cleaner? Hell, stay up late and order anything off of the infomercials. Thats all crap!

many "Reputable" companies promote their products through marketing to people who don't know better. To me, throttle body spacers are a joke, they increase the volume of air inside the intake, making it slightly more difficult for the engine to draw it in.

Once again, I close stating your intake is adequately designed for your stock motor (therefor I agree with you if you increase the engine's horsepower you now have an intake restriction). I don't care to argue about it anymore. I'll still recommend guys to an SCT X3 and custom tune ($380) or numerically higher gears or forced induction. Even changing all of your fluids (especially in an auto) to high quality synthetics will yield measurable results cheaper than an intake. The volant intake vs. stock still gave me the same miles per tank (but it sounds mean).

Gears were the best investment I ever made, I'm pulling 17ish MPG in combined driving with the truck in my sig, I couldn't imagine driving it with taller (numerically lower) gears. My speedometer is dead on (verified with gps) meaning that my effective gear ratio is the same as stock. I think you've brought many good points to the table both here and in your previous posts. I've watched dozens of these pissing matches unfold in my nearly 8 years as a TRS member (there was a site changeover in there so it doesn't show the real date), it's entertaining.

 

[Gotta_gofast]

I like this test sequence, very well done and does prove a point


The cheap filters there scare me, when you can literally see through a filter without shining a light through it you might as well not have one. I've used them before (back when I knew little) and thought they were great. Running an AEM Brute Force filter now (no oil required and washable synthetic media which is very thick and traps fine particulates well), in the area where the stock airbox was, need to build some ducting around it to bring the air temp down though (its on the list) Reason I'm not using a stock box? I swapped in a 4.0 and with all of the stuff I've added to the engine compartment there simply isn't room to fit one.

many "Reputable" companies promote their products through marketing to people who don't know better. To me, throttle body spacers are a joke, they increase the volume of air inside the intake, making it slightly more difficult for the engine to draw it in.

Gears were the best investment I ever made, I'm pulling 17ish MPG in combined driving with the truck in my sig, I couldn't imagine driving it with taller (numerically lower) gears. My speedometer is dead on (verified with gps) meaning that my effective gear ratio is the same as stock. I think you've brought many good points to the table both here and in your previous posts. I've watched dozens of these pissing matches unfold in my nearly 8 years as a TRS member (there was a site changeover in there so it doesn't show the real date), it's entertaining.

In powersports, you only see K&N filters on wannabe bikes/atvs. You know, uys with a bolt on exhaust, filter, and tons of monster graphics. When you have 4K into a small engine that turns 13000rpm with two 35mm keihin carbs that are finicky enough when spotless clean, you generally run a larger foam filter with a prefilter.

It is REALLY hard to catagorize companies. An electrician by trade, I frequently see "base model" panels installed because of their economy price. Eaton-Cutler Hammer is a large company who I HATE. In one of my old classes, we tested a few brands of 15 ampere OCPDs. Obviously the fuses opened instantanious at 15 amps. Of the circuit breakers the best was Square D QO series which opened at 17 amps. The worst was the Eaton Cutler Hammer which took 40 amps! Yes, 40. Another test was how fast an OCPD would respond to a short circuit (two normally current carrying conducters contacting) or ground fault (current carrying conductor contacting a normally non-carrying conductor). Fuse opened in half of a sine wave, QO at 6 sine waves, and ECH took 30 sine waves. Had you been the cause of the ground fault, you would have had an unlimited potential of current through your body for a half of a second before that ECH opened. Here is an example of a "large, well known" company who makes crap for products yet rakes in millions of dollars. Now, look at small shops like Fred Sittman's Rogue Performance. He does quality work, and very knowledgable. But he's small and most have never heard of him.

Throttle body spacers are for the most part a joke. If you needed a place to drill and tap for water/meth injection or nitrous oxide then one of these would work well since you aren't drilling into factory parts. Otherwise, its extra weight, pushes your intake even farther into your radiator, and adds one extra gasket to leak. You need to change the intake runner volume/length to tune the engine.

I too like a LOT of gear! I probably shouldn't have gotten involved in this thread as much as I did. So as far as "intakes" I'm done debating that. (hence why I pulled my whip-stick out on Eaton Cutler Hammer instead of K&N). Maybe we should debate the benefits of an electric fan and underdrive pullies! hahaha!

 

[holyford86]

In powersports, you only see K&N filters on wannabe bikes/atvs. You know, uys with a bolt on exhaust, filter, and tons of monster graphics. When you have 4K into a small engine that turns 13000rpm with two 35mm keihin carbs that are finicky enough when spotless clean, you generally run a larger foam filter with a prefilter.

It goes for wannabe people on most motorsports I think. I work in fleet service and good air filters are something we want because it saves on maintenance costs, the extra dollars help the bottom line.

It is REALLY hard to catagorize companies. An electrician by trade, I frequently see "base model" panels installed because of their economy price. Eaton-Cutler Hammer is a large company who I HATE. In one of my old classes, we tested a few brands of 15 ampere OCPDs. Obviously the fuses opened instantanious at 15 amps. Of the circuit breakers the best was Square D QO series which opened at 17 amps. The worst was the Eaton Cutler Hammer which took 40 amps! Yes, 40. Another test was how fast an OCPD would respond to a short circuit (two normally current carrying conducters contacting) or ground fault (current carrying conductor contacting a normally non-carrying conductor). Fuse opened in half of a sine wave, QO at 6 sine waves, and ECH took 30 sine waves. Had you been the cause of the ground fault, you would have had an unlimited potential of current through your body for a half of a second before that ECH opened. Here is an example of a "large, well known" company who makes crap for products yet rakes in millions of dollars. Now, look at small shops like Fred Sittman's Rogue Performance. He does quality work, and very knowledgable. But he's small and most have never heard of him.

That is pretty damn scary, I do my best not to skimp on electrical parts in my truck or in my house, I honestly didn't know about those guys being that poor and will be staying away from them. All of the Square D stuff i've used has seemed like good quality stuff so I'm happy to hear that.

Throttle body spacers are for the most part a joke. If you needed a place to drill and tap for water/meth injection or nitrous oxide then one of these would work well since you aren't drilling into factory parts. Otherwise, its extra weight, pushes your intake even farther into your radiator, and adds one extra gasket to leak. You need to change the intake runner volume/length to tune the engine.

Couldn't agree more

I too like a LOT of gear! I probably shouldn't have gotten involved in this thread as much as I did. So as far as "intakes" I'm done debating that. (hence why I pulled my whip-stick out on Eaton Cutler Hammer instead of K&N). Maybe we should debate the benefits of an electric fan and underdrive pullies! hahaha!

And you sir have found two more volatile cans of worms.

 

[mobile madness]

All of this is quite funny. Going crazy about intake numbers. Someone should've told the guy to do a tune up. Plugs, wires, full and oil treatment, maybe flush the radiator and get a new thermostat, fuel filter hello. I personally hate e fans. Nothing wrong w a fan clutch, it can only wear out. it only ties up a lil bit of the engine. It may just be in my mind but runing ethenol free gas seeems to give me better mpg and it has to be better for your engine. I did all of this and I sure do notice a difference in how my engine behaves from when I first bought my ranger.

As for gears, I don't have much knowledge. I have 3.73 gears and was told that it was just fine. I doubt id change them even if I could benifit by changing them. I'm more of budget power gain guy.