Jump to content

Custom Search




Welcome to the C-MAX Hybrid Forum


Sign In  Log in with Facebook

Create Account
Welcome to the C-MAX Hybrid Forum. You must register to create topics or post in our community, but don't worry this is a simple free process that requires minimal information for you to signup. Here's some member benefits:
  • Start new topics and reply to others
  • Subscribe to topics and forums to get email updates
  • Get your own profile page and make new friends
  • Send personal messages to other members
  • Create photo albums and post images. . .more!
Click here to create an account now
 
Guest Message by DevFuse

Get you C-MAX Hybrid Registered in the official Ford Authorized Registry. More here.


Photo

K&N Performance Air Filter


  • Please log in to reply
76 replies to this topic

#21 OFFLINE   fbov

fbov

    C-Max Hybrid Member

  • C-MAX Hybrid Platinum Member
  • 1,312 posts
  • Region:U.S. Northeast
  • LocationRochester, NY
  • My C-MAX's Year:2013
  • Current Vehicle:C-Max Hybrid

Posted 08 November 2013 - 12:45 PM

Here's a link to some testing of pressure drops that may give you some guidance on your choices.

Frank









Lose this advertisement by becoming a member. Click here to create a free account.


#22 OFFLINE   ptjones

ptjones

    C-Max Hybrid Member

  • C-MAX Hybrid Platinum Member
  • 3,079 posts
  • Region:U.S. Southern Atlantic
  • LocationNewnan, GA
  • My C-MAX's Year:2013
  • Current Vehicle:2013 C-MAX SEL

Posted 08 November 2013 - 02:21 PM

I've ordered K&N filter and picked up CMAX filter at Ford at lunch time. I've come up simple way of testing only filter using shop vac so we will see how that works. Thanks Paul



#23 OFFLINE   ptjones

ptjones

    C-Max Hybrid Member

  • C-MAX Hybrid Platinum Member
  • 3,079 posts
  • Region:U.S. Southern Atlantic
  • LocationNewnan, GA
  • My C-MAX's Year:2013
  • Current Vehicle:2013 C-MAX SEL

Posted 13 November 2013 - 05:00 PM

Got my K&N air filter today and sure enough it has less back pressure than Ford air filter. I need to get ambitious to get the old one out, what a pain, so I can test it.

Paul 


  • obob likes this

#24 OFFLINE   BIG ROCCO

BIG ROCCO

    C-Max Hybrid Member

  • C-MAX Hybrid Member
  • 241 posts
  • Region:U.S. Mountain
  • LocationPHOENIX, AZ
  • Current Vehicle:2013 C-MAX

Posted 13 November 2013 - 09:15 PM

In the past, a restrictive air filter or air intake, could have resulted in the engine running "too rich" which had a negative impact on fuel economy. However, since modern fuel injection, and computer controlled engines have been developed, this is no longer the case.

Here is a very general overview of how modern engines deal with air flow:

-The computer measures the amount of air entering the engine, and the temperature of that air, and then predicts the precise amount of fuel needed to react with the oxygen in the air to make the most fuel efficient burn.
-Then as the exhausted gases are passing out of the engine they are measured again (sometimes twice) to determine if the fuel is all being burnt, or not
-Then the computer makes fine "trim" adjustments to the amount of fuel being injected until it is satisfied that all the fuel is being burnt, (also, the least amount of NOx and SOx are being produced)

As you put on a more restrictive, or less restrictive air filter or intake, nothing happens to your fuel economy, the computer accounts for the amount of air entering the engine regardless of any restrictions. HOWEVER, you can drastically reduce the amount of POWER the engine will produce by restricting the air intake, This happens because the computer cuts back the amount of fuel injected as the air is cut back. If you have a 200hp v8, but only allow enough oxygen into the engine to produce 100hp, then the computer will only inject enough fuel to make 100hp.

This is all assuming the engine computer is working properly, and there are no "check engine" lights, and the engine has warmed up already.

I agree with the above - maybe a less restrictive filter will yield a little more power...maybe...but along with that power will come more fuel burned.



#25 OFFLINE   11StiLimited

11StiLimited

    C-Max Hybrid Member

  • C-MAX Hybrid Member
  • 190 posts
  • Region:U.S. Northeast
  • LocationUnited States
  • My C-MAX's Year:Decline
  • Current Vehicle:2013 C-Max Hybrid

Posted 14 November 2013 - 08:11 AM

In my case, a shorter burn would be required to climb 3% inclines on my way home from work.  Even a little more tq would go a long way.  Only a side by side hill comparison with a double blind hyper-miler vs standard driver would really show the difference.



#26 OFFLINE   ptjones

ptjones

    C-Max Hybrid Member

  • C-MAX Hybrid Platinum Member
  • 3,079 posts
  • Region:U.S. Southern Atlantic
  • LocationNewnan, GA
  • My C-MAX's Year:2013
  • Current Vehicle:2013 C-MAX SEL

Posted 14 November 2013 - 09:13 AM

I agree with the above - maybe a less restrictive filter will yield a little more power...maybe...but along with that power will come more fuel burned.

What is important here is the ICE doesn't have to work as hard sucking air in so less gas is used.

 

Paul


Edited by ptjones, 14 November 2013 - 05:03 PM.


#27 OFFLINE   ptjones

ptjones

    C-Max Hybrid Member

  • C-MAX Hybrid Platinum Member
  • 3,079 posts
  • Region:U.S. Southern Atlantic
  • LocationNewnan, GA
  • My C-MAX's Year:2013
  • Current Vehicle:2013 C-MAX SEL

Posted 14 November 2013 - 05:34 PM

Attached File  C-Max Air Filter Test.JPG   120.95KB   1 downloads   Old filter is in box and new is sitting on the box.

 

Well I did it, Changed The CMAX AIR FILTER. What a pain in you know what! It can be done, but not without patience and blood. There are sharp things down there in the ICE compartment. FORD instructions are marginal at best, they don't want you doing this. You need to unplug Mass air flow sensor not in instructions and wire strap I broke around PCV tube. I think you can get this at AutoZone, but don't see why you need it. Wear good gloves to prevent from giving blood. LOL

 

I tested all three filters on my very simple (KIS) test. Here is how it works. You take a box and tape it up good. Then make holes for filter(tight fit) and shop vacuum. Then I setup Dial Indicator on side of box to measure compression of box. Only took a few minutes to setup. Here are the results.

 

1. No filter .000"

2. K&N filter .0005"

3. Ford new filter .0025"

4. Ford 42K old filter .005

 

I'm thinking that the difference is significant and maybe 1 mile per gal. We will see. I don't think there has been very many CMAX's air filters changed. I think you can guess what filter I'm using. :)

 

Paul


Edited by ptjones, 14 November 2013 - 05:48 PM.


#28 OFFLINE   marshtex2

marshtex2

    C-Max Hybrid Member

  • C-MAX Hybrid Member
  • 81 posts
  • Region:U.S. Pacific Coast
  • LocationPetaluma
  • My C-MAX's Year:2015
  • Current Vehicle:2015 C-Max SE, Kenworth T2000 motorhome

Posted 15 November 2013 - 03:06 AM

Driving to maximize fuel economy means minimize throttle opening which minimizes air flow needs.  High flow air filters will provide more air within a pressure drop range which will support higher throttle openings and more fuel flow which equals more power but less FE.  At modest throttle openings for best FE, OEM air filters likely are just fine and they've been researched and flow capabilities documented by the OEM.  Paying extra for a high flow air filter just to let air go through at rates needed for high FE?  Make sense?

 

Recalling my Mercedes Benz service manuals from the 1950's and '60's: Tap filter while blowing shop air through the filter in the reverse direction every 10,000 miles.  Doing this it seemed a filter would serve well forever when we are not needing a lot of wide open throttle, max power output (low FE).  Of course this works best with dry filters.



#29 OFFLINE   ptjones

ptjones

    C-Max Hybrid Member

  • C-MAX Hybrid Platinum Member
  • 3,079 posts
  • Region:U.S. Southern Atlantic
  • LocationNewnan, GA
  • My C-MAX's Year:2013
  • Current Vehicle:2013 C-MAX SEL

Posted 15 November 2013 - 09:40 AM

Driving to maximize fuel economy means minimize throttle opening which minimizes air flow needs.  High flow air filters will provide more air within a pressure drop range which will support higher throttle openings and more fuel flow which equals more power but less FE.  At modest throttle openings for best FE, OEM air filters likely are just fine and they've been researched and flow capabilities documented by the OEM.  Paying extra for a high flow air filter just to let air go through at rates needed for high FE?  Make sense?

 

Recalling my Mercedes Benz service manuals from the 1950's and '60's: Tap filter while blowing shop air through the filter in the reverse direction every 10,000 miles.  Doing this it seemed a filter would serve well forever when we are not needing a lot of wide open throttle, max power output (low FE).  Of course this works best with dry filters.

I had a 2007 Focus that I sold a year ago. I installed a Steeda filter system and gained at least 3mpg and what a difference in power. The Ford system was very restrictive and designed to muffle intake noises or make engine quieter.  Hybrid is not like regular car because you use significant throttle for short periods and then go back to EV. You need nonrestrictive air filter for this application. I'm expecting around 1MPG improvement which is only 2%. If you can make several 2% improvements all of a sudden you gained 5MPG or 60 more miles on a tank. :) 

 

Paul   


  • 11StiLimited likes this

#30 OFFLINE   fbov

fbov

    C-Max Hybrid Member

  • C-MAX Hybrid Platinum Member
  • 1,312 posts
  • Region:U.S. Northeast
  • LocationRochester, NY
  • My C-MAX's Year:2013
  • Current Vehicle:C-Max Hybrid

Posted 15 November 2013 - 12:22 PM

As the autospeed article I linked to earlier showed, there can be significant gains available on the intake side. Hwever, the author found the air filter was not a source of pressure drop, and so no gains were available.

 

I will also note that he found the Japanese hybrids to have benchmark intake restrictions, as I expect will Ford. But, it never hurts to test...

 

As to the MB advice, it's not as crazy at it seems. Paper air filters improve their filtration with use. The 10K service removes most of the big stuff that's restricting air flow, but can't dislodge the fine particles that increase fine particle efficiency. Eventually, the paper fails, but until then, you take one step closer to a HEPA filter every time you clean it.

 

Have fun,

Frank



#31 OFFLINE   ptjones

ptjones

    C-Max Hybrid Member

  • C-MAX Hybrid Platinum Member
  • 3,079 posts
  • Region:U.S. Southern Atlantic
  • LocationNewnan, GA
  • My C-MAX's Year:2013
  • Current Vehicle:2013 C-MAX SEL

Posted 16 November 2013 - 01:55 PM

As the autospeed article I linked to earlier showed, there can be significant gains available on the intake side. Hwever, the author found the air filter was not a source of pressure drop, and so no gains were available.

 

I will also note that he found the Japanese hybrids to have benchmark intake restrictions, as I expect will Ford. But, it never hurts to test...

 

As to the MB advice, it's not as crazy at it seems. Paper air filters improve their filtration with use. The 10K service removes most of the big stuff that's restricting air flow, but can't dislodge the fine particles that increase fine particle efficiency. Eventually, the paper fails, but until then, you take one step closer to a HEPA filter every time you clean it.

 

Have fun,

Frank

I tried the water test but It's not very sensitive. Got 3/8" for dirty filter, 1/4" for clean and would have got nothing for K&N. My test was a lot more sensitive. Paul



#32 OFFLINE   fbov

fbov

    C-Max Hybrid Member

  • C-MAX Hybrid Platinum Member
  • 1,312 posts
  • Region:U.S. Northeast
  • LocationRochester, NY
  • My C-MAX's Year:2013
  • Current Vehicle:C-Max Hybrid

Posted 17 November 2013 - 12:29 AM

Actually, engine vacuum is one place where the water manometer works fairly well, as engine vacuum can reach 30 in/water. Low numbers are sign of overall good flow.

 

Conversely, are you quoting manometer measurements from your test box? in that case, the CFM of your vacuum matters. The engine's pulling about 32 cu ft per 1000 revolutions....

 

Have fun,

Frank



#33 OFFLINE   ptjones

ptjones

    C-Max Hybrid Member

  • C-MAX Hybrid Platinum Member
  • 3,079 posts
  • Region:U.S. Southern Atlantic
  • LocationNewnan, GA
  • My C-MAX's Year:2013
  • Current Vehicle:2013 C-MAX SEL

Posted 17 November 2013 - 11:33 AM

Actually, engine vacuum is one place where the water manometer works fairly well, as engine vacuum can reach 30 in/water. Low numbers are sign of overall good flow.

 

Conversely, are you quoting manometer measurements from your test box? in that case, the CFM of your vacuum matters. The engine's pulling about 32 cu ft per 1000 revolutions....

 

Have fun,

Frank

The dial indicator test was very sensitive, but the two do correlate closely. Thinking about doing some tuff testing and adding chin spoiler.

 

Paul



#34 OFFLINE   Recumpence

Recumpence

    C-Max Hybrid Member

  • C-MAX Hybrid Member
  • 403 posts
  • Region:Decline
  • LocationNorthern Illinois
  • My C-MAX's Year:Decline
  • Current Vehicle:2013 SEL

Posted 17 November 2013 - 12:27 PM

The chin spoiler is something I am very interested in as well. Problem is, I would like to make a new totally flat belly pan from the new chin spoiler rearward. However, I do not want the dealer freaking out when I bring it in for oil changes. That being said, the solution seems to be to make the new pan easily removeable with the stock pan still above it. That way I can remove my simple flat pan when the car goes in for an oil change.

 

I have considered many designes for chin spoilers ranging from a simple flat panel running straight down to a nicely radiused edge like the stock spoiler has. As a general rule, to maximize drag, the leading edge of a moving object should be rounded (radiused) and the trailing edge should be sharp.

 

Matt


Edited by Recumpence, 17 November 2013 - 12:28 PM.

  • ptjones likes this

#35 OFFLINE   fbov

fbov

    C-Max Hybrid Member

  • C-MAX Hybrid Platinum Member
  • 1,312 posts
  • Region:U.S. Northeast
  • LocationRochester, NY
  • My C-MAX's Year:2013
  • Current Vehicle:C-Max Hybrid

Posted 17 November 2013 - 11:49 PM

I'm waiting for Spring to do anything close to the ground... but that doesn't mean I haven't thought about it! From what I've read, the pressure gradients along the centerline are very telling, and Autospeed's vacuum methods will work well here, albeit not with water; you need fractions of an inch. I've got 2 Magnehelic gauges.

 

I look forward to see what you come up with!

Frank


  • ptjones likes this

#36 OFFLINE   Alex Sams

Alex Sams

    New Member

  • C-MAX Hybrid Facebook
  • 49 posts

Posted 19 January 2014 - 10:30 AM

I haven't looked under my hood because I can't get my wife out of the car when I'm not working. We have opposite schedules. If anyone changes to a oil/cloth filter like the K&N- it's been my experience that the MAF needs to be cleaned regularly, and I would say weekly for a month until the excess oil stops getting collecting on the MAF. Excess oil reduces the amount of air sensed, and makes the engine run as rich as it can in most situations until the O2 catches up with it. It has always negatively affected fuel economy, but that was on Focus' (or Focis) which have HO2S but not WHO2S. I'm assuming the C-Max is wideband since that would be more fuel efficient. 

 

I recently tried some easy ICE FE trick, like the high flow filter, and it didn't work. I've always found that Lucas FI treatment gave me about 3 more MPG on average in all my vehicles. For this to be economical, I bought by the gallon, and a quart bottle for treatments because it was graduated. This brought the cost of a tank treatment down to about $1. I also found- but forgot- that their recommended dosage was too high. They recommend 1 oz per 2.5 gal. I found that my fuel economy dropped at that rate, but increased at 1oz per 5 gal. Now I remember why I quit messing with it, because the Focus has a 4 gallon reserve, and after 4 tanks or so I had to not treat a tank in order to maintain fuel economy. PITA. Now we own a hybrid..... 

 

I'll have to see how the K&N works as well. Hopefully before the spring comes so I'm not comparing oranges to apples. For now our first modification is side moldings. I may do it after that. We still have essentials- floor mats, and 2nd key to purchase. 



#37 OFFLINE   ptjones

ptjones

    C-Max Hybrid Member

  • C-MAX Hybrid Platinum Member
  • 3,079 posts
  • Region:U.S. Southern Atlantic
  • LocationNewnan, GA
  • My C-MAX's Year:2013
  • Current Vehicle:2013 C-MAX SEL

Posted 19 January 2014 - 11:28 AM

I haven't looked under my hood because I can't get my wife out of the car when I'm not working. We have opposite schedules. If anyone changes to a oil/cloth filter like the K&N- it's been my experience that the MAF needs to be cleaned regularly, and I would say weekly for a month until the excess oil stops getting collecting on the MAF. Excess oil reduces the amount of air sensed, and makes the engine run as rich as it can in most situations until the O2 catches up with it. It has always negatively affected fuel economy, but that was on Focus' (or Focis) which have HO2S but not WHO2S. I'm assuming the C-Max is wideband since that would be more fuel efficient. 

 

I recently tried some easy ICE FE trick, like the high flow filter, and it didn't work. I've always found that Lucas FI treatment gave me about 3 more MPG on average in all my vehicles. For this to be economical, I bought by the gallon, and a quart bottle for treatments because it was graduated. This brought the cost of a tank treatment down to about $1. I also found- but forgot- that their recommended dosage was too high. They recommend 1 oz per 2.5 gal. I found that my fuel economy dropped at that rate, but increased at 1oz per 5 gal. Now I remember why I quit messing with it, because the Focus has a 4 gallon reserve, and after 4 tanks or so I had to not treat a tank in order to maintain fuel economy. PITA. Now we own a hybrid..... 

 

I'll have to see how the K&N works as well. Hopefully before the spring comes so I'm not comparing oranges to apples. For now our first modification is side moldings. I may do it after that. We still have essentials- floor mats, and 2nd key to purchase. 

I never cleaned my 2007 Focus MAF after installing Steeda air filter system. I usually got between 40-45mpg on the HWY and it is the only car I've owned that had no carbon deposits in the exhaust pipe after 60k miles and it was a five speed manual. I can't say I have seen any noticeable improvement in mpg's from K&N filter change and it was a bear to change. I will say that with temps in the 30-50*F range I'm getting almost 50mpg on the Smart Gauge with over 425mi on this tank. :)

 

Paul



#38 OFFLINE   Alex Sams

Alex Sams

    New Member

  • C-MAX Hybrid Facebook
  • 49 posts

Posted 19 January 2014 - 12:11 PM

Well, we tend to only hear from people who had issues with fuel economy. Maybe your filter didn't have excess oil. I get 30 in my wagon, but that's mostly in-town driving. Highway is about 36 mpg. I was getting better than that until I changed the exhaust. I'll never do that again for fuel economy. Diesels see fuel economy benefit from less restrictive exhaust, but not gasoline engines! At least not until it's clogged up. There's a difference between 07 and 05's like the one I have- 07s have a second engine temp sensor on the thermostat, and have always gotten better averages than the 05. Thanks though- I wish I got 40 mpg in my wagon!



#39 OFFLINE   Joseph B Howle

Joseph B Howle

    New Member

  • C-MAX Hybrid Facebook
  • 17 posts

Posted 20 January 2014 - 08:25 PM

unfortunately I wouldn't believe the hype when it come to these filters. Not only are they expensive, but that have to be cleaner regularly to be effective. Another piece to consider is that how a modern cars engine works with the computer monitoring everything. Basically, every car has this thing called a mass air sensor. What this sensor does is read the air volume and temperature coming into the engine. The computer uses the data gathered by the mass air sensor to control the fuel burn. it also reads from the oxygen sensor. In normal operation, as stated the computer regulates the fuel mixture based on the sensor reading. If to much air is coming, more fuel is spent, if excess air is in the exhaust, more fuel is burnt.

 

The K&N filters are supposed to allow more free air flow which they do. The problem is that in a modern engine, the computer compensates for the increased air flow by increasing the amount of fuel and it does this to prevent a lean condition. Hence making them ineffective at saving fuel. Some may argue that they do but what likely happens is that people install these to save gas and use a lighter accelerator foot along with it.



#40 OFFLINE   ptjones

ptjones

    C-Max Hybrid Member

  • C-MAX Hybrid Platinum Member
  • 3,079 posts
  • Region:U.S. Southern Atlantic
  • LocationNewnan, GA
  • My C-MAX's Year:2013
  • Current Vehicle:2013 C-MAX SEL

Posted 21 January 2014 - 11:03 AM

unfortunately I wouldn't believe the hype when it come to these filters. Not only are they expensive, but that have to be cleaner regularly to be effective. Another piece to consider is that how a modern cars engine works with the computer monitoring everything. Basically, every car has this thing called a mass air sensor. What this sensor does is read the air volume and temperature coming into the engine. The computer uses the data gathered by the mass air sensor to control the fuel burn. it also reads from the oxygen sensor. In normal operation, as stated the computer regulates the fuel mixture based on the sensor reading. If to much air is coming, more fuel is spent, if excess air is in the exhaust, more fuel is burnt.

 

The K&N filters are supposed to allow more free air flow which they do. The problem is that in a modern engine, the computer compensates for the increased air flow by increasing the amount of fuel and it does this to prevent a lean condition. Hence making them ineffective at saving fuel. Some may argue that they do but what likely happens is that people install these to save gas and use a lighter accelerator foot along with it.

What you say is true, but you are missing one important fact that the ICE is an air pump. If you restrict the air flow it takes horse power(GAS/mpg) to over come the restriction. It would appear in the case of the CMAX the restriction is minor, but my test did show the K&N filter was the least restrictive. As I have mentioned before my 2007FOCUS/manual trans was a dramatic example of a very restrictive/noise suppressive air filtering system.  I went from 34mpg to 40-45mpg with Sneeda air intake filter system ScanGauge and GoodYear Gas Miser tires. :)

 

Paul








Custom Search




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Privacy Policy TERMS OF SERVICE ·