is there much difference in air intakes??? - 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 09-04-2013, 07:17 AM
Powerstroke.org Rookie
 

Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 15
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
is there much difference in air intakes???

I have found them anywhere from $70 for a kool vue to $300 for volant and some others? I would like to add one to my 03.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
  #2  
Old 09-04-2013, 09:03 AM
Compression Ignition Addict
 

Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Meridian, Idaho
Posts: 342
Thanks: 18
Thanked 7 Times in 7 Posts
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
There are a few options, but the best bang for your buck seems to be the 6637 filter. Search that on here and you can decide for yourself.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #3  
Old 09-04-2013, 04:30 PM
Compression Ignition Addict
 

Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: iowa
Posts: 394
Thanks: 1
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
IMO, go 6637 or AIS intake. As stated theres a lot of threads that cover the differences between manufactures
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #4  
Old 09-06-2013, 12:26 PM
Powerstroke Junkie


 

Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Mayberry, NC
Posts: 8,309
Thanks: 0
Thanked 38 Times in 9 Posts
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
What are your goals? 6637 is the cheapest and will flow the most air. AIS and the true TYMAR is the best filtering, and you have a whole bunch in between.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #5  
Old 09-06-2013, 08:32 PM
Powerstroke.org Fanatic
 

Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 110
Thanks: 1
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
is there much difference in air intakes???

looks and cost.....

from what I've read most all CAI setups flow plenty of air for a 7.3 needs, even heavily modified trucks. Some filter better than others. I personally don't like the open air filters like the 6637 or Tymar and I live in California where they would fail a smog check anyway. I went with the S&B, it flows and filters very well, it's CARB compliant and solidly built. Works very well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #6  
Old 09-19-2013, 05:42 PM
Powerstroke.org Rookie
 

Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 19
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
I live in CA as well. I went with Bills Custom Intake. It has a 4 inch aluminum tube with a s&b oiled and reusable filter. It is however a open filter but it was only 154 bucks shipped.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
  #7  
Old 09-20-2013, 06:42 AM
Compression Ignition Addict
 

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Wellington Nevada
Posts: 8,534
Thanks: 1
Thanked 27 Times in 27 Posts
Feedback Score: 5 reviews
Some info:



quote:
“have a used AIS…couldn’t find a filter for it…got a FIPKI K&N system cheap…should I put a tymar on or put the AIS back on??? I was thinking of mounting a tymar to the K&N tube…what do you guys think”

The K&N element should probably be avoided in turbo-charged applications. The initial filtration efficiency is not high enough to protect the compressor impeller.

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.


Filter Covers:


Total waste of money from a performance perspective. They do everything they are not supposed to do. They lower flow by causing additional restriction, have no surface area for high volume, and are unnecessary if you use the properly rated element for the application.

From a filtration view, they can increase filtration efficiency in applications where the filter used has very poor filtration efficiency (ie: reusable/cleanable elements, K&N, AFE, etc). However, they do it will a substantially smaller surface area that has basically no capacity to speak of. It will also measurably affect your flow rate negatively from the increase of the restriction, because you are, in affect, adding an additional layer of filtration with no surface area.

Think about these numbers:
Surface area of Donaldson I use on the Tymar Intake: 4,000 sq in
Surface area of a K&N conical style: 975 sq in
Surface area of a filter cover: 150 sq in

Donaldson has 4 times the surface compared to the K&N, which is significant in its own right, but 270 times the surface area compared to the filter cover, making a filter cover nothing but a hindrance. Filter covers originated from reusable elements inability to filter the air of a dusty environment. Using a proper filter with a proper filtration efficiency and you don't need to worry about it.

Same thing with the guys using them to protect an open element using an improper filter from experiencing water mist. If you use a proper filter for the application that uses a hydrophobic (water resistant) filter media you don't need additional layers adding restriction and lowering flow to gain protection. Again, use a proper filter you don't need to worry about it.
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:
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 05:05 PM.


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