hey would this be better then a K&N?
http://www.apexi-usa.com/product_suc...=166&pageNum=1
[/img]

I wouldn't waste my time or money on it. Looks like a all show and no go ricer type product.

Ed

Yeah, thats bullshit. not worth it. the two dimensional diagram is also a little off because in a 3D actual product, it looks like it would actually be an air bottleneck at very high CFM applications. in something like a k&n cone, thats alot more filtered air inside than theirs.

maybe not, one would have to analyze one in person, but if it was so great all the biggest car enthusiasts wouldn't continue to recommend K&N.

I don't know if it'* sweet or not, but I'd be interested in seeing some unbiased testing of it. The concept is good in my opinion... Looking at it makes me think they should have had the "funnel" moved to the very edge of the filter though. They still have that "deadspot" by not moving it out to the edges.

looks pretty logically good..
it may prove not to be much more efficient in the end than a standard filter, but it looks like it might just work well

Its a shame that some people here automatically think that since its an Apexi product, means its a ricer product, means its garbage.

Apexi is actually a good company, along the lines of greddy, etc.

Not a bad idea, but the x-stream filter some of us run does the same thing due to the air inlet on the front.

I agree that the RX series with the built-in velocity stack in the connector, and the Xtream top would be more effective, and provide greater filter surface area.

Besides, I have a hard time taking a company seriously when they call the effect of induction "SUCTION", and don't know Turbocharger is a single word, not two different words. And then you find THIS on their site:

How important is a "velocity stack" at the end of something as long as a FWI?