Honda Car Forum


 

Go Back   Honda Car Forum - Accord Parts Civic Tuning Acura Racing > Honda Acura > Honda 2

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 08 Apr 2006, 02:32 pm
Charles Lasitter
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Lower restriction filter / cold air intake = better MPG?

(aside from the obvious tips on driving slower ...)

I've read a number of posts suggesting that a low restriction
cotton-gauze filter can marginally increase fuel economy and power.
I've heard other speak in favor of mods like cold air intake, headers,
cat-back exhaust providing marginal benefit.

Assuming that the maintenance is all kosher and the proper driving
techniques are in place, what mods (in the few hundred dollar range)
would hold some promise of delivering improved fuel economy for an '05
Accord LX i4 M5?
+-----------------------------------------+
| Charles Lasitter | Mailing/Shipping |
| 401/728-1987 | 14 Cooke St |
| cl+at+ncdm+dot+com | Pawtucket RI 02860 |
+-----------------------------------------+
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 08 Apr 2006, 05:23 pm
Eric
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Lower restriction filter / cold air intake = better MPG?

Charles Lasitter wrote:

> Lower restriction filter / cold air intake = better MPG?


Perhaps, but then you might shorten the engine's life span since you could
be reducing the filtering capacity of the intake system. If I remember
correctly, there have been some posts on this newsgroup of people stating
that their engines have starting to burn oil after driving around with these
"low restriction" intake systems for a while.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 08 Apr 2006, 05:59 pm
Brian Smith
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Lower restriction filter / cold air intake = better MPG?


"Eric" <say.no@spam.now> wrote in message news:443837E9.8E40DDC5@spam.now...
>
> Perhaps, but then you might shorten the engine's life span since you could
> be reducing the filtering capacity of the intake system. If I remember
> correctly, there have been some posts on this newsgroup of people stating
> that their engines have starting to burn oil after driving around with
> these
> "low restriction" intake systems for a while.


That could be one of the reasons every time I am behind one of the garbage
can muffler equipped cars, that I either smell the odour of burning oil or
am at a loss as to where the road is due to the cloud of oil smoke in front
of me.


Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 08 Apr 2006, 08:20 pm
Charles Lasitter
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Lower restriction filter / cold air intake = better MPG?

On Sat, 08 Apr 2006 15:23:37 -0700, Eric <say.no@spam.now> wrote:

> Perhaps, but then you might shorten the engine's life span since you could
> be reducing the filtering capacity of the intake system.


I'm not having that much luck finding empiracle data on this topic,
but this test of K&N filters was a start:

http://tinyurl.com/2jucn

The subject is not without controversy, but I'd love to see more
references to careful testing of the filtration and performance gains.
+-----------------------------------------+
| Charles Lasitter | Mailing/Shipping |
| 401/728-1987 | 14 Cooke St |
| cl+at+ncdm+dot+com | Pawtucket RI 02860 |
+-----------------------------------------+
Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 09 Apr 2006, 08:49 am
L Alpert
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Lower restriction filter / cold air intake = better MPG?


"Brian Smith" <Halifax@NovaScotia.Canada> wrote in message
news:HfXZf.35135$K11.1881@clgrps12...
>
> "Eric" <say.no@spam.now> wrote in message
> news:443837E9.8E40DDC5@spam.now...
>>
>> Perhaps, but then you might shorten the engine's life span since you
>> could
>> be reducing the filtering capacity of the intake system. If I remember
>> correctly, there have been some posts on this newsgroup of people stating
>> that their engines have starting to burn oil after driving around with
>> these
>> "low restriction" intake systems for a while.

>
> That could be one of the reasons every time I am behind one of the garbage
> can muffler equipped cars, that I either smell the odour of burning oil or
> am at a loss as to where the road is due to the cloud of oil smoke in
> front of me.
>


We use the endearing term "Honda Turds"....


Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 09 Apr 2006, 09:21 am
doug
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Lower restriction filter / cold air intake = better MPG?


"Charles Lasitter" <spoof@address.com> wrote in message
newsi3g329asb4l0qnjqe5hnoemk3klvro7q6@4ax.com...
> (aside from the obvious tips on driving slower ...)
>
> I've read a number of posts suggesting that a low restriction
> cotton-gauze filter can marginally increase fuel economy and power.
> I've heard other speak in favor of mods like cold air intake, headers,
> cat-back exhaust providing marginal benefit.
>
> Assuming that the maintenance is all kosher and the proper driving
> techniques are in place, what mods (in the few hundred dollar range)
> would hold some promise of delivering improved fuel economy for an '05
> Accord LX i4 M5?
> +-----------------------------------------+
> | Charles Lasitter | Mailing/Shipping |
> | 401/728-1987 | 14 Cooke St |
> | cl+at+ncdm+dot+com | Pawtucket RI 02860 |
> +-----------------------------------------+


Cold air intake can help increase HP - but also uses more fuel to do it.
Unless the efficiency of the engine has magically improved, you need to put
more energy (gasoline) in to get more energy (HP) out. When you consider
that the engine in your '05 has been finely tuned to give you the best
balance of power, economy and driveability, it's hard to imagine that any
aftermarket bolt-on can do it better. My 2 cents worth.

Doug


Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 09 Apr 2006, 09:36 am
Brian Smith
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Lower restriction filter / cold air intake = better MPG?


"L Alpert" <alpertl@xxsbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:Wh8_f.9270$%m4.7732@newssvr33.news.prodigy.co m...
>
> We use the endearing term "Honda Turds"....


Fortunately, it's not only Honda products that have this problem.


Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 09 Apr 2006, 03:47 pm
Charles Lasitter
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Lower restriction filter / cold air intake = better MPG?

On Sun, 9 Apr 2006 10:21:37 -0400, "doug" <NOSPAM@SPAMFREE.com> wrote:

> When you consider that the engine in your '05 has been finely
> tuned to give you the best balance of power, economy and
> driveability, it's hard to imagine that any aftermarket bolt-on
> can do it better. My 2 cents worth.


I think you're largely correct, but it's worth bearing in mind that they
are engineering the car for the needs of a mass audience and doing so at
the lowest possible cost.

So in theory, at least, if you were willing to spend hundreds more on
the exhause system, or the air intake system, or another wad on the
suspension system, you might get a car more to your liking in terms of
specific aspects of performance or handling.

If a selective investment gives me a little better fuel economy, or a
little better performance at the same MPG, I'll take that as a win. At
least until I win the lottery, and then I'll forget about all the
tweaking, and just pop for a Beemer 550i.
+-----------------------------------------+
| Charles Lasitter | Mailing/Shipping |
| 401/728-1987 | 14 Cooke St |
| cl+at+ncdm+dot+com | Pawtucket RI 02860 |
+-----------------------------------------+
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 09 Apr 2006, 06:00 pm
Jim Yanik
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Lower restriction filter / cold air intake = better MPG?

Charles Lasitter <spoof@address.com> wrote in
news:flgi32lqfse3dui4t8bmuqleocoes3meo9@4ax.com:

> On Sun, 9 Apr 2006 10:21:37 -0400, "doug" <NOSPAM@SPAMFREE.com> wrote:
>
>> When you consider that the engine in your '05 has been finely
>> tuned to give you the best balance of power, economy and
>> driveability, it's hard to imagine that any aftermarket bolt-on
>> can do it better. My 2 cents worth.

>
> I think you're largely correct, but it's worth bearing in mind that they
> are engineering the car for the needs of a mass audience and doing so at
> the lowest possible cost.
>




WRT cold air intakes,they generate a lot more noise,and auto engineers are
designing for a larger market that would not tolerate the extra noise.
The same goes for low restriction exhaust systems.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 10 Apr 2006, 11:12 am
TeGGeR®
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Lower restriction filter / cold air intake = better MPG?

Charles Lasitter <spoof@address.com> wrote in
news4og32t1c7p4t16sh0qmcptcpe9qfjjpoo@4ax.com:

> On Sat, 08 Apr 2006 15:23:37 -0700, Eric <say.no@spam.now> wrote:
>
>> Perhaps, but then you might shorten the engine's life span since you
>> could be reducing the filtering capacity of the intake system.

>
> I'm not having that much luck finding empiracle data on this topic,
> but this test of K&N filters was a start:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/2jucn




Here's a better one.
http://home.usadatanet.net/%7Ejbploc...011/SPICER.htm

A K&N filter will allow lots more dirt into your engine, grinding your
rings, bores and bearings much more quickly. It will increase the amount of
abrasive silica in your oil. It will gum up the IAC/EACV much more quickly.

Any performance gains on a road-going Honda are likely to be measurable
only with a dynamometer. Hondas, like most small-capacity 4-cylinder
engines, do not have excessive intake restriction to begin with.


>
> The subject is not without controversy, but I'd love to see more
> references to careful testing of the filtration and performance gains.




See my link above. I would NEVER use a K&N on ANY Honda that I intended to
make last for a long time.


--
TeGGeR®

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
COLD AIR INTAKE 02civic Honda 2 2 14 Jul 2007 07:52 am
Re: cold air intake mrcheapyasui@gmail.com Honda 3 0 09 Jan 2005 01:23 am
Cold Air Intake James Honda 2 11 10 Jun 2004 05:04 pm
RSX cold air intake for $30? Natty_Dread Acura 19 11 Dec 2003 12:58 pm
Re: Cold Air Intake for '97 3.0 CL Jim Yanik Acura 1 24 Jul 2003 04:59 pm


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:04 pm.


Attribution:
Honda News | Autoblog
Powered by Yahoo Answers




Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2 © 2011, Crawlability, Inc.
HondaCarForum.com is not affiliated with Honda Motor Company in any way. Honda Motor Company does not sponsor, support, or endorse HondaCarForum.com in any way. Copyright/trademark/sales mark infringements are not intended or implied.