Air filter CFM's - Ford Powerstroke Diesel Forum
Powerstroke.org is the premier Diesel Truck Forum on the internet. Registered Users do not see the above ads.
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-26-2012, 12:32 PM
Compression Ignition Addict
 

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Kunkletown PA
Posts: 317
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Air filter CFM's

I may be thinking to much here but, if my turbo is 1100 CFM and I put a NAPA 6637 air filter that is only 425 CFM the turbo will not get the CFM it needs?? now if I would put 2 6637's on it with a "Y" pipe I should have 850 CFM's but 2 times the dirt getting to the turbo?
what do you think?? how would you get a filtration system of 1100 CFM and still not hurt the turbo?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #2  
Old 11-26-2012, 10:52 PM
Compression Ignition Addict
 

Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Denton, tx
Posts: 1,364
Thanks: 0
Thanked 14 Times in 11 Posts
Feedback Score: 1 reviews
You're over thinking this... The 6637 is enough.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #3  
Old 11-27-2012, 05:37 AM
Compression Ignition Addict
 

Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 232
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
this is what I did to my 2000 ex...

1999.5-2003 7.3L Ford Powerstroke Severe Duty Air Intake System AIS FA1759

not sure what the cfm is, but I am certain that my 7.3 is getting plenty clean air.


SM
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #4  
Old 11-27-2012, 06:43 AM
Compression Ignition Addict
 

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Kunkletown PA
Posts: 317
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Thanks, I may be thinking too much into it but I tend to do that. I called "wix" technical support and he told me that putting 2X 425 CFM filters would double the dirt going in the turbo so it would go bad 2X faster. That got me thinking if that would be true. I am building a filter system for my truck and was just thinking would 2 filters be better for the turbo then just 1.
what do you think?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #5  
Old 11-27-2012, 05:01 PM
Member
 

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Pa
Posts: 56
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Sorry to hijack your thread, but please tell me that is a regular cab dually in your sig pic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #6  
Old 11-27-2012, 05:48 PM
Behavior Modificationist

 

Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Charlottesville, VA
Posts: 1,197
Thanks: 11
Thanked 21 Times in 20 Posts
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by docweld View Post
Thanks, I may be thinking too much into it but I tend to do that. I called "wix" technical support and he told me that putting 2X 425 CFM filters would double the dirt going in the turbo so it would go bad 2X faster. That got me thinking if that would be true. I am building a filter system for my truck and was just thinking would 2 filters be better for the turbo then just 1.
what do you think?
I think your Wix tech is exaggerating a little. I see that point of view, but I doubt the ill-effects will result in "2X faster" destruction. The 6637 is still filtering at the same level whether it's one or both filters.

Last edited by AgTires4295; 11-27-2012 at 05:57 PM.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #7  
Old 11-28-2012, 04:49 AM
Compression Ignition Addict
 

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Kunkletown PA
Posts: 317
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by 03machstock View Post
Sorry to hijack your thread, but please tell me that is a regular cab dually in your sig pic.
Yes it is, I ordered it late 99. I think it looks good, and yes it is a 8' bed, everyone tells me it looks like a short bed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AgTires4295 View Post
I think your Wix tech is exaggerating a little. I see that point of view, but I doubt the ill-effects will result in "2X faster" destruction. The 6637 is still filtering at the same level whether it's one or both filters.
That is my thought also, that is why I was asking of more input. do you think 2X air (850CFM) would be better for the turbo or the 425CFM is all it needs?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #8  
Old 11-28-2012, 05:10 AM
Powerstroke.org Fanatic
 

Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 90
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
It couldn't hurt either way, and you would have something that few others do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #9  
Old 11-28-2012, 05:49 AM
Compression Ignition Addict
 

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Kunkletown PA
Posts: 317
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Quote:
Originally Posted by a.alford View Post
It couldn't hurt either way, and you would have something that few others do.
I think it would make a difference
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #10  
Old 11-28-2012, 08:37 AM
Compression Ignition Addict
 

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Wellington Nevada
Posts: 8,409
Thanks: 1
Thanked 10 Times in 10 Posts
Feedback Score: 5 reviews
Posted this before but here is some info from dale:


The phrase “mounting a tymar” sounds kind of like Tymar is a filter. The filter we use is a Donaldson B085011 and Tymar is a company name. Tymar Performance makes all sorts of items, one of them being the open element intake kits.

That said, the element we use would not fit on the end of a K&N FIPK system. I guess you could technically modify things to get it in, but you wouldn’t have minimal radial clearance around the filter, which should be considered very important to providing low restriction air to the turbo. Without supplying minimal radial clearance, you won’t get the positive benefits the open element system should create.


You may want to consider replacing the PVC with 4" OD metal tube once the fit is figured out. The ID of the PVC can compromise volume and we found that it made a difference with the stock turbo, so I am sure it would make a difference with the H2. The other complication we ran into using PVC or ABS was that the connections had an ugly habit of popping off. Didn't happen too often, but once is all it would take in the right conditions.

The AIS will provide excellent filtration efficiency, but will not improve overall restriction or allow much additional air flow in the configuration that Ford uses. The Tymar Intake will provide excellent filtration efficiency as well as decrease restriction to the turbo and add significant air flow.

quote:
“Tymar is going to give you better flow but AIS is going to give you unmatched filtration…the AIS plus it will last a LONG time, like 60K miles…”

Although the AIS will give better filtration efficiency, you are only talking about 1/10 of a percent over the filter Tymar Performance Intakes use at initial filtration efficiencies. Not enough of a difference to really differentiate between the two.

For the longevity, you have to start talking about restriction ranges in both stock and aftermarket applications and how dirt will affect them. AIS has a larger capacity, but not across the restriction ranges once installed on the truck. Because of the configuration you are not lowering restriction significant over stock levels, but you are receiving better filtration compared to the stock intake.

The Tymar Intake will allow lower restriction levels and lasts approximately 15K miles in a restriction range LOWER than stock. If you want to go with longevity of filter, you can continue using the same filter and will simply not experience the positive benefits of lower than stock restriction levels.

We supplied the intake systems for Granite Construction and used them as a severe duty use test. They were rebuilding Power Stroke engines at approximately 60K miles because of the fine silt in the mining beds. After changing to our system they were using the same filters with 28K mile change out intervals and only experiencing 32”h2o of restriction (yellow on your stock restriction gauges) and they eliminated the necessity of engine rebuilds and were selling the used trucks with over 180K miles on them.

quote:
“I'm using a tymar because it's cheap to setup and offers good filtration.”

Although I agree with you, your listed intake is a DIY 6637, which is neither a Tymar nor a recommended system by us. The WIX/NAPA 6637 is not a hydrophobic (water resistant) element and using it as an open element should be avoided. There are other concerns such as providing minimal radial clearance, isolating engine vibration, positioning away from rain drip channel, etc. But, I just wanted to draw a clear difference between copies, DIY efforts, and our product.

quote:
“…be sure your Tymar-type filter includes the PowerCore filter media and not some lesser media material.”

Although the PowerCore media is far superior to most other media, there is not a PowerCore media filter available for use as an open element. They are inserts for intake boxes and are not configure for use as filter alone applications.

The filter media is not the main attraction, but the filter configuration. It is NOT true that you cannot get the same filtration efficiencies or flow rates from other Donaldson products. It will just simply have to be larger. The PowerCore configuration allows for compact applications that have flow rates and filtration efficiencies of filters much larger. So it is the compactness of the element and not that the media processes some magical qualities.

quote:
“IMO, the FIPK tube with the heat shield and the Donaldson (aka #6637) filter combination is hard to beat for the money.”


I would probably respectfully disagree. The problem is the thickness of the stacked gauze media will not allow for a high pleat count and severely restricts the available surface area. A typical RD-1460 that is used in a FIPK system only has about 44 pleats. The Donaldson we use is not only a larger filter overall, but the thinner media allows for 202 pleats, leaving us over 5 times the surface area to pull from. This is why we can outflow and out filter a re-usable element as long as minimum radial clearance is maintained.

The problem with heat shields and routing air through intake boxes is that whenever you direct air flow, you increase restriction. Low restriction is the goal, so using a filter that has the ability to flow large masses of air and then enclosing it in a box yields very poor results. Heat shields do literally nothing. Air flow under the hood is dynamic and not static. It is moving all the time. Hot air will move right around a heat shield at the same temperature and be ingested and the only thing you have caused is turbulence.

Aside from impeding minimal radial clearance and isolation of engine vibration, a serious cause for concern is placing the filter, especially a 6637 element, under a rain drip channel for the hood. Beyond the ambient moisture that will cause restriction as it is absorbed into the non-hydrophobic media, you will be directing water towards the filter anytime the rain drip channel flows more rain than it can hold or spills over the retainer during left turns.

I’ll try to check back in and address further comments in the days to come and can hopefully shed some light on why we do what we do using the configuration we did.

Peace to all, enjoy those rigs!
__________________
Hydroscopic means it absorbs water. Hydrophobic is water resistant. Easy to remember because "phobic" comes from phobia, meaning to be scared of or to repel.

Anyway, both of those filters are hydrophobic. The 085046 filter is for high humidity applications. This has little to do with the hydrophobic capabilities and deals with micro biotic growth since constant high humidity, think of boats that are always in the water moored to a dock, will have greater abilities for mold and such to develop on them.

It should be noted that the 085046 filter is a LOT more expensive and there is no air flow or hydrophobic benefit over the 085011.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Ford Powerstroke Diesel Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may 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



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:00 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1
Garage Plus, Vendor Tools vBulletin Plugins by Drive Thru Online, Inc.

vB.Sponsors