Truck Trend claims 10% more MPG with K&N in 2009 Ford F-150 after bogus road test

[Frank Lee]

They have done both on the dyno!

There, I fixed it again!

I believe they did do a complete dyno run but withheld the results cuz they conflicted with their deception.

[Christ]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

There, I fixed it again!

I believe they did do a complete dyno run but withheld the results cuz they conflicted with their deception.

What we believe, what others perceive, and what can be proven, are three different things.

I believe that they did the test on the dyno, as well.

I perceive, based on input from others and common problem solving skills, that they chose to deceive in favor of their wallets.

I can't prove any of that.

[Frank Lee]

Heh heh- a few more comments have arrived there...

just when I thought nobody but us was reading it.

[Frank Lee]

FrankLee (Today 12:43 AM)

:Edward A. Sanchez (10/12/09 01:03 PM)

@ Onebulldogs. In a perfect world, perhaps. However, K&N is one of the few facilities in Southern California that has a four-wheel dyno, which is required when testing all-wheel-drive vehicles. So even though on the surface it may seem like favoritism or impropriety, it's more often than not a matter of necessity.

:Four-wheel dyno. Right. Look at the picture and tell us where the front wheels are.

FrankLee (Today 12:59 AM)

Another thing I'm going to point out is the glaring discrepency between the dyno chart LINES and the dyno chart NUMBERS. The numbers for HP and Torque for "with K&N" have been inflated by 10 each, and the erroneous numbers were used in the calculations- for whatever they are worth, as every number in this piece is suspect. I'm actually surprised Mr. Williams... er, I mean, "By the author" didn't photoshop in his own new dyno lines- but that might have taken some effort.

...just in case it gets deleted there...

[Christ]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

...just in case it gets deleted there...

Heh. I'm wondering why you'd need a 4 wheel dyno for a 2wd optioned truck to begin with?

Must be that guy was day-dreaming about his K&N powered AWD (OVER NINE THOUSAND!!!1!!!) Whatchawanacallitmobile?

Oh yeah - that one is gone, of course. It was gone so fast, I didn't get to read it until you posted it here.

[Frank Lee]

Another lie! Every time I look at it, I find another.

From Truck Trend article:

More Power with an Intake Kit
Although exact pricing will vary and each installation kit is slightly different, expect to pay around $350 for a half-ton K&N Intake Kit, with the average install time (assuming you have all the needed tools) ranging from 15 to 45 minutes. Below are the K&N recorded results from their own horsepower before-and-after tests.

Ford F-150 5.4L V-8 -- +16 hp

From K&N site:

2009 FORD F150 5.4L V8 F/I - All Truck Aircharger 63-2575

+11.21 HP @ 4600 RPM

Looking at the dyno chart, it does seem possible that the +11.21HP figure could be true.

[Frank Lee]

This is what I get for completing the arduous process of filing a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission. FWIW.

Your complaint has been entered into Consumer Sentinel, a secure online database available to thousands of civil and criminal law enforcement agencies worldwide

My state Atty. General site had no category for such a matter.

Any other ideas who to complain to? BBB?

[mwebb]

..." It made a 1" difference in vacuum pressure. "...
hmm
what does this mean ? are you referring to intake manifold vacuum ?
if so what load , what condition s are you referring to ?
at idle ?
or at a certain load condition ?
at decel ?
at wide open throttle ?
on a carburated engine , restricted intake should increase intake vacuum AND suction throttling losses.

but
a 1600 cc beetle engine is not fuel injected and does not have a fuel control feed back system in it as i remember and as such ....

it out side of the the statements and test results that prove
restricted air filters have insignificant effect on fuel economy on systems that are in fuel control with provisions for mixture feedback .

they tested carburated systems too , test results are in the pdf


.................................................. ............

Originally Posted by dwtaylorpdx

.....
But on measuring flow,,, Yes I did. On my 1600 CC Bug motor switching to a top-hat K&N from the factory abomination, It made a 1" difference in vacuum pressure.

The car also got about a half a mile to the gallon better on the highway. It was a BAJA bug so used in really nasty dusty conditions. I also had a rally computer in it and was able to really track my mileage.
............................

Dave

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by tasdrouille

ThI actually have an SAE paper here where they tested various methods to clean and reuse OEM paper filters. The best way to do it is to tap it a couple times on a flat surface, then blow it from the clean side with compressed air.

So then you need to buy an air compressor, no?

[mwebb]

or
borrow the vacuum cleaner , suck from the dirty side , same difference