Intake question

[dlb]

I'm back. You all helped me out on the chip question now I have another. There are two different air intakes I've seen need to know wheich one is recommended by users ? The first is the one's I've seen here KKn I believe it just replaces the stock filter, the other is an aluminum tube plus K & N filter. Which one is better and why ?

Thanks Again,

1994 EXPLORER

 

[jimbo74]

well, since you are new, i am not going to bite your head off.... try the search function its been discussed..... just do the kkm.....

 

[DaHeinah]

dlb- I had a K&N air filter in my X for a while (stock air filter replacement) and it kinda sorta helped...not really. I chose the KKM True-Rev kit and have been very happy since. I would recommend this kit, I've heard that some of the metal tubes, namely chrome, can transfer heat into the induction system, thereby reducing performance...haven't tried one so I wouldn't know .
Anyway, the KKM is cheaper than the K&N and is excellent quality.
Have fun!
Greg
Oh yeah, here is a link: http://www.kustomz.com/contour.html
Take care.

 

[aldive]

I concur; you will be happy with a KKM.

Igot somepower improvement as well asgasmileageimprovement.

Goodluck.....

 

[dlb]

Thanks for the heads up. Sorry about not doing the search thing. I'll make sure in the future I don't ask any questions until all I've done the search thing.

 

[hrbib21]

I have the MAC Products intake and it DOES NOT take away from performance. My throttle response is WAY better than it was before so, therefore, it's better than stock. People always think that the chrome tube retains heat but mine doesn't seem to any warmer than the rubber junk that was in there before. That also got warm. Think of it this way: if cold air is coming in from the outside, wouldn't it also cool the chrome tube? Yes, of course it would.

It's a personal decision. The only difference between the KKM and the MAC Products filter is price (the KKM is about $90.00; the MAC I got for $130.00) and appearance (I like the look of the chrome tube).

 

[NOTAJP]

Originally posted by hrbib21
I have the MAC Products intake and it DOES NOT take away from performance. My throttle response is WAY better than it was before so, therefore, it's better than stock. People always think that the chrome tube retains heat but mine doesn't seem to any warmer than the rubber junk that was in there before. That also got warm. Think of it this way: if cold air is coming in from the outside, wouldn't it also cool the chrome tube? Yes, of course it would.

It's a personal decision. The only difference between the KKM and the MAC Products filter is price (the KKM is about $90.00; the MAC I got for $130.00) and appearance (I like the look of the chrome tube).

dlb has a '94 so the intakes are not the same. There is one company on eBay that makes intake tubes (finally) for the 91-94 but haven't heard anything about them. you best bet is to go with the KKM.

 

[dlb]

That's the one I was actually refferring to. The one on Ebay.

 

[JOHN V.]

Mac Intake Upgrade

It is true that the Mac does not has a system for the early V6 OHV. So your choices are limited. But they do offer one for the 97->OHV, as well as the V6 SOHC, V8 5.0 & 4.6. We also carry the chrome 75mm Pro-M Mass Air Sensor that goes nicely with the Mac. The 75mm MAF is also available in black.

John V @ Explorer Express

 

[94WhiteEB]

For a 94, you also have the option of purchasing the one sold on www.ifab.net. its what i have and works great, it replaces everything not just the filter housing. as for heat, aluminum is supposed to remain cool according to tests done on intake temperatures. i wraped mine up in insulation tape though, just for good measure.

 

[Nate1]

Originally posted by hrbib21
People always think that the chrome tube retains heat but mine doesn't seem to any warmer than the rubber junk that was in there before. That also got warm. Think of it this way: if cold air is coming in from the outside, wouldn't it also cool the chrome tube? Yes, of course it would.

Uhh...
when the air cools the pipe of engine heat, there is a transfer of random translational motion (heat). This is turn increases the volume (and therefore density) of the air (v1/t1=v2/t2) so you get a less efficient burn.
It may not be much of a loss, but mathmatically and scientifically speaking, it is there.

Metal has a low specific heat, where are plastics and such have high specific heats. That means that it takes less energy to heat metal than it does to heat plastic.
/me steps off physics soapbox
I would get the KKM if I were you.
-----Nate

 

[98svt]

hrbib21- do they make a mac product (tube and filter) for my 98 5.0???
and NWEIBLEY i live in tampa to....we should check out eachothers x's
thanks for help on the mac thing...

 

[JOHN V.]

Mac Products does make an intake for the 5.0 Explorer.
#3659 $134.95 and we have it in stock. Check out our web site.

www.explorerexpress.com

John V @ EE

 

[hrbib21]

Originally posted by 98svt
hrbib21- do they make a mac product (tube and filter) for my 98 5.0???
and NWEIBLEY i live in tampa to....we should check out eachothers x's
thanks for help on the mac thing...

I believe it's the same one I have, product# 3659. [edit]Duh, I just noticed John V already told you that. I love mine and I think the "metal retains heat" argument is negligible, so your choice. That pic he posted looks exactly the way mine looks in the engine except the hole for that vacuum hose is on the side just before the curve and the one in the pic is on top.

Uhh...
when the air cools the pipe of engine heat, there is a transfer of random translational motion (heat). This is turn increases the volume (and therefore density) of the air (v1/t1=v2/t2) so you get a less efficient burn.
It may not be much of a loss, but mathmatically and scientifically speaking, it is there.

Metal has a low specific heat, where are plastics and such have high specific heats. That means that it takes less energy to heat metal than it does to heat plastic.
/me steps off physics soapbox
I would get the KKM if I were you

No offense, BUT, since I have seen NO DEFINITIVE PROOF of this, only conjecture, that is all jibberish to me.

Until someone can provide ACTUAL STATISTICAL PROOF, then my statement still stands.

I wish you could feel the before and after in my X then you would see what I mean.

 

[94WhiteEB]

What about the % of warm air in which the aluminum absorbs? Would the fact the tube is much wider/smoother than the stock one make up for the fact its aluminum? The stock tube is thin and uneven internally. Why does anyone use aluminum if what you say is true? I have read in other threads that the properties of aluminum are suited to cool air flow, thus remaining void of increases in "random translational (sp?) motion" air. Yes, most people know metal is a conductor of heat, yet when applying its properties in air transfer through an engine bay causes us to question whether or not its absorption may be better for the air traveling though the intake tube. Plus, the tube must be wider to compensate for the increase in received air from the larger filter head, am I correct? Aluminum Thermal conductivity: 237.0 W / m / K

 

[Aaron 4.6]

OK, I want to step in here about this air temperature discussion. I am big into Mustangs and this same type of discussion erupts about every three or four months when some newbies join the forums and start asking questions. I'm a chemical engineer working for the Department of Energy, and I spent a couple of hours one day doing some basic heat transfer calculations to try to determine the effect of material of construction on intake temps when using CAIs.

I modeled a 3 inch section of pipe, 24" in length, and I varied the heat transfer coefficient based on literature I had available for some of the piping we use at my plant. Here is what I discovered. For a CAI type system used on engines, you can expect the temperature to rise in a metal tube by about 4* F, and about 3* F for a plastic tube. When you consider the accuracy of heat transfer coefficients is only within 10-25%, this tells you that neither is really any better than the other. Although the metal tubes may feel hotter to the touch, there is simply not enough residence time in the intake tract to make a difference. I did some variations at different engine speeds and different ambient and engine compartment temperatures, and am pretty much content that the change in barometric pressure on any given day will have a MUCH bigger impact on performance that the temperature variations between ABS plastic and steel.

[/soapbox]

 

[hrbib21]

There you go. I think when I say that the air coming in will cool the tube from the inside, I think that's kind of the same as when you say "residence temperature". The air is simply not in the tube long enough for it to matter.

Thanks for the scientific facts which you have presented.

 

[94WhiteEB]

...soooo... if u want to save $$, go KKM. If you want it to look nice, go for the aluminum ones.

 

[dlb]

I'm beginning to think jimabena74 should of bit my head off and ended this thread. I'm the newb who asked, I'm not going for looks just more performance. So I guess I did good by ordering the KKM. Thanks everyone for your input, I really didn't want people arguing for that I apoligize. I guess it comes down to there both great products and functionaly, just depends on your taste which one it is you choose.

Thanks Again

 

[hrbib21]

Nobody is arguing, just disagreeing and it has nothing to do with you. This discussion occurs every time there is a question about intakes. I personally don't like the KKM because the stock intake tube is too restrictive.

But that's just me.