GM Forum - Buick, Cadillac, Olds, GMC & Pontiac chat

GM Forum - Buick, Cadillac, Olds, GMC & Pontiac chat (https://www.gmforum.com/)
-   Performance, Brainstorming & Tuning (https://www.gmforum.com/performance-brainstorming-tuning-96/)
-   -   Air Filters (https://www.gmforum.com/performance-brainstorming-tuning-96/air-filters-196746/)

SSEi Jan 24, 2004 12:23 AM

Air Filters
 
Is there a big differance between the xstream filters and a regular lets say 6 or 9 inch filter. And between the 6 and 9, which one is better?

BonneMeMN Jan 24, 2004 03:28 AM

Talking to a big GP guy online, who does P&P manifolds, and builds MP112 powered GPs and knows EVERYTHING about them, he said he couldn't outflow a 7" K&N on his ride. I'm sticking with X-Stream anyways.

Sol Jan 24, 2004 10:44 AM

I guess all the high-flow filters out there perform generally the same. You don't need to go to large with the cone though.

DeathRat Jan 24, 2004 11:58 AM

Re: Air Filters
 

Originally Posted by SSEi
Is there a big differance between the xstream filters and a regular lets say 6 or 9 inch filter. And between the 6 and 9, which one is better?

Anything larger than a 6" Closed-Ended, Cone is a waste. As the the Air rushing in will have to slow down to gain access to the Throttle Body openning. Now if the TB openning was enlarged, then that would be a different story.

willwren Jan 24, 2004 11:58 AM

The larger filter may hold flow better as the filter starts to get dirty.

Glasuan Jan 24, 2004 02:04 PM

The larger filters will probably incur more heat soak, thereby heating up the air. Versus a smaller filter where the it is farther away from the engine, and the air flow through it a bit faster. But there is definetly a point to how small/large you go. I would say 5", or 6" is probably optimal.

con10der Jan 24, 2004 02:15 PM


Originally Posted by Glasuan
The larger filters will probably incur more heat soak, thereby heating up the air. Versus a smaller filter where the it is farther away from the engine, and the air flow through it a bit faster. But there is definetly a point to how small/large you go. I would say 5", or 6" is probably optimal.


As an Engineer...Your statement is incorrect...The larger the filter, the MORE material there is to heat. Therefore it will NOT get as hot as Quickly, and then transferring THAT heat to the incoming air...Heat tends to travel to surrounding COLDER media...AIR, Filter etc....

Glasuan Jan 24, 2004 02:17 PM

I know that more material incurs more heat soak. I was thinking that a smaller filter is farther away from the heat itself. Thus reducing the amount of heat near it. Also, the smaller filter has cold air going through the entire thing than the larger filter.

con10der Jan 24, 2004 02:50 PM


Originally Posted by Glasuan
I know that more material incurs more heat soak. I was thinking that a smaller filter is farther away from the heat itself. Thus reducing the amount of heat near it. Also, the smaller filter has cold air going through the entire thing than the larger filter.

A) The more media, the more there is to heat, the more to heat means more time before it will transfer THAT heat.

B) Yes..the farther away from heat source will be beneficial, ie..HEAT SHIELDING is always the way to go..

C) Smaller filter, in theory, has smaller surface area, therefore it would be hotter quicker, ie..quicker tranfser time to the air...and also LONGER time to cool. That's why the larger the radiator the quicker it will cool.

D) It is all gorvern by HEAT TRANSFER rules...everything heats to a specific temp prior to transferring THAT heat to a colder media..

Glasuan Jan 24, 2004 04:22 PM

You are right con10der, just looked it up in some physics books. Have not yet taken its school (computer engineering major).


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:49 AM.


© 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands