Do Charcoal Air Filters Rob Your Engine Of Horsepower?
Vložit
- čas přidán 21. 07. 2024
- Why Removing Charcoal Air Filters Is Generally A Bad Idea
Visit bit.ly/2GsierL to download the free RetailMeNot Genie browser extension (this video’s sponsor) today and start saving the easy way.
Will removing a charcoal air filter increase horsepower? Charcoal filters are designed to capture hydrocarbons that may escape out your intake when your car is shut off. They’re located after the air filter in your intake duct, and can restrict airflow. But how much effect do they really have on performance? I took two air filters, an OE filter and a performance filter, to the test, with and without the charcoal air filter. To measure the differences in horsepower and torque, each of the four filter options was put on a Mustang dynamometer, with multiple runs. A VBOX was used to measure real world acceleration differences. How much of a difference does a charcoal filter make? Check out the video to find out!
Related Videos:
Do Performance Air Filters Actually Work - • Do Performance Air Fil...
Don't forget to check out my other pages below!
Facebook: / engineeringex. .
Official Website: www.howdoesacarwork.com
Twitter: / jasonfenske13
Instagram: / engineeringe. .
Car Throttle: www.carthrottle.com/user/engi...
EE Extra: czcams.com/channels/srY.html...
NEW VIDEO EVERY WEDNESDAY! - Auta a dopravní prostředky
Removes charcoal filter "I'm something of a racecar builder myself"
Oh ya man, and these racing stickers gave me a solid 10hp+, definitely recommend!!
@@DeadlyNerotoxins Clearly a poser, I bet you used a K&N sticker with an Injen filter. Everyone knows they're not compatible and you'd actually gain 3hp if you just took the useless filter off.
Try foam filter
Would like to know if the mpg was changed in the testings.
@@starvalkyrie taking the filter off would probably give you a performance gain albeit at the cost of engine longevity.
i removed the charcoal filter from my car, it now breaks the barrier of sound at full throtle, major improvement thank you for the tip
Finally someone realistic about the performance gains.
This sent me🤣
Dean Testa ... Nobody else is laughing but you buddy
I have charcoal underwear wich also prevents the escape of gases to the atmosphere 😆.
@ wat?
@ "whomst"
@@ARentz07 "ass juice"
I think we all could have used a pair for our fathers for father's day presents, no?
First couple of minutes: Jason proves that removing the charcoal filter actually gives you some HP
The rest of the video: Jason tries to convince you that you shouldn't remove your charcoal filter
because the difference is miniscule, and if for some reason you get a VI it's possible you'd fail it
7hp is decent.
the car is just so heavy so it doesn't really benefit.
@@asjmpickle yes it's 7hp, but that's only a 3% increase in total engine power, and only at wide open throttle, which most people rarely use on public roads. If you did a blind ABX test, noone would be able to tell the difference
Getting a sport filter would make the biggest single difference.
The difference with and without the charcoal filter when he tested the K&N was minimal, while the stock filter suffered more from being combined with the charcoal filter.
and panders to the EPA gods
When people mention throttle response, I think most people are actually mistaking this for lower rpm hesitation under mild acceleration. Perhaps I'm incorrect, but moving to higher flower filters on smaller motors always seemed to help with low rpm hesitation.
Half the people that claim to feel major differences in filter changes (assuming a decent intake from the factory) feel it from changing out a dirty filter with a clean one.
That said, with those horsepower gains I'd still throw in the k&n and dump the charcoal filter because I'm a horrible person that likes to know it's making more power even if I can't feel it.
based
true and quite honestly I don’t even care that much about the horsepower. I’ll pollute the air a bit more if it means I hear my M3’s turbos spool 😂😂
What is low RPM hesitation?
@@louisthibault555 "What is removing resistance at low RPM" - It's giddyup!
Just finished watching this video...walking to my car with pliers now.
I came for the performance mod ideas for my crosstrek track monster, I stayed for the “Really Exciting Math”
Now we're talking! :)
@@EngineeringExplained The other forum rumor I hear about charcoal filters is that by removing them your engine runs more efficiently, so you make less emissions and it's ultimately greener to remove them. To me that sounds like BS as why else would they put them in to start with?, but proponents say it's just a by product of emissions regs and the specific tests emissions testers do, not real world driving. Could you show us the math on that one please & thanks :D
i only stayed for the pie
@@slingbart705 pi
James Oren the charcoal filter reduces the evaporative emissions Whatever hydrocarbons are captured by the filter are returned to the engine when you start the car.
I actually recently removed the charcoal filter in my E60 550i in the pursuit of better throttle response. Interesting to see how much power removing it actually freed up. I did notice slightly improved fuel economy as well, big shocker.
wow I have an f80 i’m gonna try this. it seems to have a bit of lag at low rpm
@@Unabonerhow did it go for you bro? I have an f82 been thinking about doing the same. Hence why I’m watching this now haha
@@Unaboner the s55 isnt designed to make power at low rpm.
I took my manifold and throttle body off. The power gains of absolutely no restriction is amazing!!!
Thats what Freevalve does :)
@@ThePentosin well it leaves the manifold.. Fuel Injectors gotta sit somewhere.
Don't need a manifold for that.
@@ThePentosin Well the current freevalve prototypes use port injection. And you may as well have something to stick a filter to.
Yeah shure, but neither needs a manifold.
The reason I chose the K&N panel filter was actually not the performance gain, but the longevity of the filter, as it can simply be cleaned and used again and again.
I used to think the same until the K&N filter oil gummed up my throttle body after 185,000 km and I had to spend a bunch to get it cleaned - couldn't do it myself since drive by wire throttle bodies have to be opened and closed with a computer (forcing it open by hand can ruin the electric motor).
@@Wallstreetavarice yeah, my 1987 Opel does not have that problem.
@@Wallstreetavarice Washing and reusing does not work well with condoms either.
Charcoal air filters do indeed rob your engine of horsepower. Or do they?
_plays VSauce music_
But what is charcoal? *frame freezes*
You always seem to make the same VSauce comment in every channel.
Does coal char?
And what would happen to the planet if every charcoal filter just...disappeared? *raises eyebrow*
rob ... robot ... neural nets ...
Some say that the K&N type air filters don't filter the air as well as the replaceable O.E filters do. By removing the charcoal filter, you can gain 4.11 h.p and 4.4 pound feet of torque for free according to the test dyno, a.k.a, just throw your charcoal filter in the trash can and move on. You might even improve your mpgs along the way as well.
What about gas millage. Will the improvement in MPG (or for the rest of the world, almost) litres per 100 Kilometers be worth it, even with stop/start?
I love the tests you do along with the data to help back your claims. It is obvious that less restriction will lead to higher performance in the short term, but you have not yet tested the long term results.
The KNN filter will coat your intake with oil and some small amount of dirt over time which can reduce the sensitivity of your Mass Airflow Sensor requiring cleaning or may even kill it entirely. This definitely results in lower HP over time. I have seen this in multiple vehicles I've worked on and even a couple that I owned. A friend or customer will complain of poor performance or rough idling and even stalling in one case. Inspecting the MAF sensor results in sometimes visual confirmation of the residue or discoloration due to the oil presence. Cleaning it thoroughly results in it functioning like new. Checking the air filter... it's a KNN. Could it be misuse or poor cleaning and oiling of the KNN? Absolutely. Is it always misuse of the KNN? Untested, but likely no.
Also, reducing filter media will always reduce filter efficacy allowing more dirt into the intake. If you live in a humid area with little dust you might see less of this than you might in the desert or near the ocean.
Run 10k with a KNN and then run 10k with a high flow or even regular paper filter and measure your results in performance, residue inside intake, and mass airflow sensor function.
A charcoal filter may actually reduce the amount of oil entry from a KNN (based solely on theoretical and anecdotal evidence) so a KNN with a charcoal filter might be a great setup for slightly higher performance with mininal sacrifice in engine protection.
Still, the best way to improve performance with an intake mod without losing protection is to increase the surface area of the filter and shorten the distance to the throttle body. A larger surface area means that more air can be drawn in with less restriction. Air velocity is also key so too large of a filter might hurt performance. Most modern cars will adjust to the extra air with time by injecting more fuel, but air velocity can hurt.
The short answer is that every model is different and will handle changes to components differently. There will always be an equal and opposite reaction for any action which sometimes means compromises in performance for longevity and vice versa.
Dreams crushed...
I'm glad you've added the math. It's crazy when people say _they can feel the difference_ on the most miniscule mods.
The placebo effect is very real! :)
But, it is still faster regardless if you can feel it or not.
@@pichum4st3r by noting of significance. Its better if the driver loses a few lbs. which is better for all involved.
Not Jason 😉
I feel like outright speed doesn't even matter when you feel like you're going fast. A hotted up 1.3l Toyota with sidedraft carbs etc sure is slow but the noise it makes feels like +100hp worth of fun
A 2.5% difference in a 160hp car is not significant. A 2.5% difference in a 500hp car is.
I'm always impressed by the breadth and variety of content on this channel. I've seen unrelated mods to car reviews that continuously bring up this channel! Congrats good Sir!
placebo effects on drivers are very real
Yes indeed haha.
But, if someone does feel a difference there is an actual difference when you remove the charcoal filter.
Engineering Explained could you try this with a turbo car? Would be interesting to see the extra stress on the filters
How do you placebo a dyno, unless he has telekinesis and used his mind to control a machine I don't see a placebo effect
@@joesmith201212 It adds soo few extra horsepowers that a human being wouldn't be able to feel the difference, that's why its a placebo effect. You think your car is faster but in reality, it's not. You need at LEAST a 5% difference in power to feel anything happening. In other words, this mod is not worth the hassle, especially since you are going to have problems with the DNV
You should do a test to see if there is any difference in fuel consumption with and without the charcoal filter. There would obviously be a huge amount of variables, but it might be worth doing.
Emissions from the intake? That's some straight up California level insanity...
@@rejzor i was thinking that too, it probably lasts at most 4-5 years. to save .00001 percent of the cars emissions. but than go to some place like the Philippines where u have 2 stroke motorcycles putting out 500% more emissions than that car. funny
Oh it’s emissions equipment gotta hate it
Bob Edwards 1. for most of an engine’s running time, the largest obstruction is the throttle.
2. How many HVAC systems need to filter gasoline vapors? Under hood air temperatures are probably going to bring the charcoal to the temperature where it will reject what it’s already collected, similar to charcoal deodorizers that you can just leave in the sun.
The intake sucks up crankcase gases and valve cover gases from oil vaporization, and also has some fuel left in the intake if MPI.
Plus charcoal systems that suck fuel vapors from the gas tank.
The intake, shortly after shutdown, can spit emissions. While I question how much this really does, it is *something*
Granted, it used to be that the air box was considered *enough* for this so idk...
@@Phos9 oh it's emissions equipment gota love it even if it is actually bad for the environment over all.
Let's be real, emissions control is great, so is using actual science to determine what is effective which is the part frequently failed.
Thank you for posting this. I was considering removing the charcoal filter myself to try to improve the Trek's sluggish nature. I was waiting for this video after you mentioned doing this in a prior one.
wow... best comparison video on the earth. how come I found this channel now? I subscribed. this channel deserves 10M subs.
I'd like to see a video on your fuel economy between all of this. Try performance filter, stock filter, and with and without the charcoal filter
Really Exciting Math is why I'm subscribed to this channel :D
TMW normal Exciting Math isn't enough.
Imagine if these tests represented your annual return on investment?
Stumbled across this by accident, but absolutely fascinated by it! Well explained, thank you!!
Never heard of a charcoal filter being used in the air intake. Yes in the CABIN
They're certainly interesting! Not something I'd heard much about either.
My 2009 Hyundai Genesis Sedan has one installed. They're not very common equipment so I can't imagine it makes much of a difference emissions wise.
Same, here.....
Its because you are poor and dont have a newer car peasant
I clicked on the video convinced its about cabin filters and title is a joke. Even those air filters look very similar to my cabin filters, while intake air filter has much denser paper folding and its a lot bigger
So you have a Crosstrek, S2k and a Tesla? *channels Aquaman* "My man!"
Three of my favorite vehicles!! All wildly different. :)
His garage looks like a playskool set with all the primary colors haha
So an okay car, an excellent car and a totally gay car.
I'll let you decide if that's in order or not..
"Do not tamper with emissions equipment." Challenge accepted. EGR removed, down pipe installed, ECU mapped for performance.
I just don't have vehicles with emissions equipment, all of my diesels are pretty 2003
@@jaydunbar7538 probably still has egr at least
Yeah, should have bloody EGR. Mine is 2004 that bugger was there. Chopped him off with axe.
*Fails Smog Test*
Daniel done that without downpipep cuz diesel
We appreciate all you do. *Request: the performance difference between stock and then the edition of a Big 3 or Big 4 ground wire kit.*
When I had my Crosstrek, I took out the charcoal filter with the K&N air filter. I could replace the charcoal filter as I only clipped the heads off of the holding pins for smog testing. I did notice a difference in bottom end, but nowhere else. Installed a axel back Borla muffler. Again a slightly better bottom end. I got tired of the low horse power (148 hp in the 14 XTrek) of the Crosstrek. Traded it in on a 17(new)WRX Base.much happier now....
looking forward to the trackday video with the new added power
Great explanation! Thanks for your always-thorough videos!
Awesome, video, love the testing and numbers backing it up. The only thing I wonder from those that did remove the charcoal filter, is if removing the charcoal filter may get rid of the "bog" that I sometimes experience when going from say 0 - 45 mph. When making a right hand turn for example, and having to romp on it to quickly get up to speed before someone rams me from behind, the engine has a pretty big flat spot (most of the time) and just bogs down before picking up. I am curious from those that removed it if they noticed a more even acceleration curve?
I got so excited about the math 😍 In all seriousness I would’ve mentioned that intake manifold designs (runner length and diameter, single vs itb) would have more impact on throttle response from a mechanical perspective.
You should make a video to test the differences between OEM air filter and a Cold Air Intake system
@@1Slamalama1 I think he means aftermarket vs OEM
It's going to be so different from car to car.
He did.
All factory air boxes have a CAI... It's just restrictive
@@MaFTB bad designs true small cars are probably the worst I can imagine 😂 they're still called the same thing and suck in cold air from outside of the bay. Mk3 ford Mondeo has it low in the wheel arch wtf is that a water Hoover 😂😂😂
Now do one with a clogged charcoal filter, because they do get clogged and you absolutely would feel that difference removing a clogged filter for sure.
Been there, done that. Used K&N filters before, sure they work, I don’t like the labour time and difficulty getting the bugs out (I’ve tried soaking, hose, degreased etc etc) they get stuck in the pleats and are frustrating to try and clean, so I went back to the disposable factory air filter. I got a remap, exhaust mods and better tyres. That improved the performance to a high amount. The Audi Q7 already had two large area sized air filters, so the design is excellent. K&N was not worth the hassle. Just my experience so save your dough and put it towards an aggressive remap. It will put a smile on your dial.
Jason man I love the videos, you seem to know it all about internal combustion engines haha, I wanted to see if you could do a video on what happens when you destroke an engine. Like how compression and displacement changes. Love the vids man, keep it up
So their thinking is "how can we stop the little bit of gas from evaporating into atmosphere when you stop the car top save enviroment" "lets put another restriction into the intake system so the car uses more fuel when driving!" aka in the end harm the enviroment more that without this thing. Great idea!!!
it uses less fuel because its getting less air what are you saying?
@@Okami400 no, more pumping resistance means more energy loss, so higher fuel consumption. It's probably negligible, but still.
When putting in this sort of emissions equipment do they factor in the extra fuel used compared to the emissions saved? Or is this more about particulates than carbon in general?
Great video, thanks for putting it together. Is there any change in fuel economy when removing the charcoal air filter?
I have a ford 500, factory air filter I was getting 27 mpg, with k&n I got 29. Bought it in 2009, still have the filter!! That’s a lot of savings!!
Would love to do the same test with my 165,000 mile charcoal filter. I think it just might be a little more restrictive, but would like to know for sure.
Please do a video on if K&N Air filters flow more dirt than paper filters.
You mean hot air intakes? ;)
They do. Plenty of videos out there.
Nice video! You should do a review on the Audi's 2.5 TFSI 5cyl engine. As it keeps on winning in the International Engine of the Year competition
Re warmup on the dyno. When we did lab experiments we would run a calibration check, then the samples, and then a calibration check again. In your case you should run condition #1, then condition #2, then condition #1 (or part thereof) again. This helps to get rid of systematic error due to factors that may change during the tests.
Wonder how restricted the coal filter is after 200k since it is never replaced... Yes it is after the regular filter but still, nothing's perfect,
My 06 Avalon has 200,000 miles that filters never been replaced I took it off put a k&n filter on it but didn't remove the factory ram Air piping and I can notice low in torque improvement when you're just coasting 60 and you press the gas about 25% picks up quicker without as much throttle
didnt even think about this, you are right. old cars go fast as new when you take these restrictive things off
Jason I know is a silly question, but removing the charcoal filter and having more free horses isn't gonna improve mpg? Would be funny to see a comparison in real world filling up the car, driving it for for something like 100 miles and the fill up again and compare the results. Love your vids mate!
That's a good idea! It'd need to be done on a dyno though to control variables. Far too many for real world testing.
I think restricting the air intake just make the ECU injects less fuel since less air goes pass the MAF sensor. Less power but same mileage.
Anecdotal info from another poster said blind test in his wife's car over 5000 miles went from 26mpg to 28mpg for what its worth
Raven Starver the engine gets more efficient/powerful because removing the filter lowers pumping losses to get air into the engine at lower (any) throttle angles. It’s the restrictiveness of an intake that makes less power and lower efficiency. Julian Edgar has a great video about it on his channel.
For what it's worth, i was thinking about the same thing. If it really helps MPG's, i may try this in the Prime..
I have watched many of your videos on a variety of different cars engines and topics. They are all helpful. I am also a 2018 manual crosstrek owner and I am wondering if you have made any performance mods to your crosstrek at all?
I would have like to see the 0 to 20 mph test. The Crosstrek is slow vehicle. But the worst part of that is the 0 to 20 off the line start. I did change out the stock filter for a K&N and removed the charcoal filter. Then I went a step further and reset the ECU to allow the fuel mapping to start from scratch. For the first tank of gas I put my foot to the floor at every opportunity and walked out the gears for as long as I could. My mileage after that tank has improved over stock and the performance. Well it sure does feel a lot more responsive. The 0 to 20 take off now actually feels like it wants to put me back in my seat. So for me it was a win.
What about fuel economy? That’s one of the most important IMO.
Turned it into a Subaru CrossTrack
Makes all the kids on the autoX course jealous when they see my 8 minute parking lot lap times.
CrossHawk
HellCrosstrackTrek
@@EngineeringExplained hahahahaha
very interesting ...this was a very insightful explanation of the topic and helpful. Thank you.
Late reply but i removed this charcoal filter from my daily 2007 corolla 1.8l which already has aem in-box filter and i can feel the throttle response is more responsive and the cars Topend is improved on wot.the induction noise is also a bit louder now.for a daily drive and good power especially on low rpm the car drives way better.i like it
Ok so . 0065g would be hard to perceive, but in a "get in front of traffic" green light start, how many feet in front of the unmodified version would it be?
Also, on a 300 mile drive, how much extra fuel is needed to "fight" the restriction of the charcoal filter and how does that compare to the extra hydrocarbon escaping when the engine is shut off?
Lastly, if 1 billion cars removed this filter, my guess is the effect on the planet is ZERO.
Thumbs up for cool video.
I do like the discussion involving how much extra fuel is required to fight the restriction, certainly an interesting thing to ponder! There's probably a break even distance somewhere in there, but not sure what it would be. Might mean the filter is useful for short/medium trips, but perhaps not for long trips. Great question! (I don't know the answer haha)
The effect on the planet will never be zero :P.
@@GoldSrc_ Nah but if we asked every driver to hold their breath for two minutes we'd probably compensate for it ;)
Subaru could probably answer that.
@@thefinalroman
It takes mechanical work to pass air through a material that has restriction on flow. The work can only come from fuel.
Your just too Damm smart !
Lol , seriously , love ya video's
Joe...
another mustang owner stopped me and said i should get an kn air filter for my car so i did and oh my lord it works so good for my car its not the biggest results in the world but it gave me a nice gain it omost feels like my car is in sport mode in drive now i can only imagine if i get a bigger throttle body and a mustang gt 350 intake good vid tho man
Very nice video , it will be nice to make a video about how air temperature/density affects acceleration - fuel economy - or power.
Something like comparison between a stock intake and wrapped stock intake or compare acceleration times between very early in the morning and midday ( I know February its not the best time for this test but I think it's a cool test for the spring-summer ).
Serious question. Does what the char filter do to help the environment, does the MPG and efficiency losses negate it?
Pulls hydrocarbons from evaporated fuel leaving the intake. The losses are so small it's hard to fault the manufacturer for including it.
My question would be how it effects fuel mileage in every day driving.
depends on numerous factors.
denser air will need more gas, but youll have more power, so youll cruise longer. it does not really affect mpg that much, but a restrictive airflow DOES limit your mpg because the engine is having hard time sucking air to breath.
learned a lot prof. Beto, continue sharing your knowledge.
Thanks for uploading this video...it was necessary to find out. Cheers!
EE, what effect does engine displacement have on this test? My hypothesis is that for a larger displacement NA engine, the difference may be slightly more pronounced, especially in the "butt dyno" portion. Curious to see what the "really exciting math" has to say. Would like to compare your existing 4cly results against something like a 3.0 6cyl and a 5.0 8cyl.
The more you have displacement, the more you're filter will have to let air get inside the engine. So yes, removing any restrictive layer in your intake will increase the results
I'm also kind of curious how all of this would affect your MPG.
Probably get better mpg to be honest better airflow so the fuel will mix better and burn more effectively..
@@mtbridingog9083 More so the engine will lose less energy pumping air without it then mixing fuel with air. Those OEM intake manifolds, intake ports, pistons crowns, etc are very efficient at mixing things. :)
Do the same tests with a clogged charcoal filter since it is not replaceable after 150000 miles! Robert
Next video which filter has the most effective filtration.
I would think it might have to controlled environment to eliminate the majority of variables. Perhaps, run them at a constant on a dyno or EPA mpg cycle then measure particulates after.
Excellent video by the way.
Yes, definitely want to get something up on filtration!
On its own the mod does very little but won't the effects become bigger when coupling with other mods like exhaust, tune, bigger turbo etc? As the demand for more air coming into the engine will increase
Of course
What if you take out the air filter and just leave the carbon filter?
What if you replace the air filter with a sheet of fabric softener?
What if you replace the charcoal filter with just a fabric sheet and put a k&n filter
I think out of the two, the air filter is probably the least restrictive for airflow. It is designed to be, just to get the bare minimal amount of particles from getting inside engine
Interesting about the charcoal filter
I will need to check it out coz i am driving the 2018 Crosstrek/XV 1.6
I would suggest the following comparative EXPERIMENT:
Smoke from a vape (e-cig) is completely filtered out by a HEPA respirator cartridge.
Therefore vape clouds could be used to simulate dust transmission through the filter.
By shining a bright light on the resultant filtered air flow stream you can visualize particle transmission rates.
How about doing one comparing economy with/without?
Your economy will improve more air better combustion better performance...BUT you will only see improvements that the manufacturer allows since the ECU is preprogrammed with set values to maintain. If you really want to see improvements you have to replace the ECU or program the ECU yourself. But overall you would see an improvement removing the filters from your car
It is interesting to see the difference in performance with the same engine map on the ECU, but what would happen if the map on the ECU were altered to better match the improved airflow?
It Will Make A Difference In Intake Sound Tho So It's Worth It. I Removed My Charcoal Filter And Using The Drop In KN Filter With A Throttle Body Spacer I Also Costumed My Air Box I Removed All Of The Pipes Leading To The Front Of The Hood So Basically I Costumed My Stock Air Box To A Ram Air Box Big Difference In Sound And Power
I can understand saying you wont notice the difference in Gs felt during acceleration, but your results also show 3\10 of a second improvement to 60mpg. That is a huge difference. Gs may not be felt, but time will certainly be noticed.
You should make a video of the HVAC system in our cars if you already haven't
Here's an overview: czcams.com/video/0b2bnvI9HWA/video.html
@@EngineeringExplained thanks!
Have you measure acceleration change when Vtec kick in (yo) with the GPS box,How much G is increase?
You will go from 0 G to 0.01 G
Still Render Production - yo it is not measurable because vtec breaks the box. Yo
So in first place, how do you get 160hp from the original 148hp on your stock 2.0 liters Crosstrek?
@@robertolouth7468 probably just the dyno inflating numbers.
Douglas Thompson thank you, things should be simple answered.
I've got a 2019 manual Crosstrek, you cant feel much power kick in unless your around 3000rpm, there is a flat scoop for the intake up by the grill, Its held on by two plastic tabs that can be carefully removed with a flathead, that alone constricted so much airflow and made all the difference. On most cars cold air intakes probably wouldn't do a hole lot but you could actually gain some serious horsepower with a Crosstrek this engine is being suffocated, especially if you were to get a professional ecu Flash. Could probably push close to 200hp without a turbo. Going to need to rip that PZEV badge off the back though
Throttle response is more than just the physical opening of the throttle plate, fuel enrichment and timing play a huge role. If you command a large TPS delta and the ECU calibration isn't standing by with fuel and timing changes its going to bog right down for a few seconds until everything catches up. Toss a Turbo in there and you have a whole new element to worry about. But I think that may be a but beyond the scope of the video.
All the cars i have owned are before someone got the idea of a charcoal filter in the intake. :D
All these fancy paper air filters. Back in my day we used oil baths.
Now get off my lawn!
Oil baths??!? You were lucky, we had to filter the air with our lungs and blow it into the engine. And if we were caught absorbing a few oxygen molecules for ourselves, we didn't get to eat that day!
@@rud you got to eat?
Timothy Ball yes but it was mostly bricks and gravel we ate. And you never heard anyone complain.
@@rud Luxury!
"You can see why people want to take these things on the track." Your 20-60 is almost twice as long as my 0-60... absolutely.
Keep in mind, the 20-60 isn’t idealized, since normally you’d be in first gear for 20 mph peak acceleration rather than second, but yeah, Crosstreks are crazy fast.
Whoosh
I mean, I've got more than twice as much WHP, so it makes sense... but still. XD
Feeling throttle reponse when removing the charcoal filter makes sense. Less restriction allows the air in the intake tube to accelerate faster, hence why some guys can feel it. One way to test that would be to test air velocity per millisecond inside the intake tube with and without the charcoal filter.
On the mpg note, if the stock air intake is slightly oversized and the engine is optimally tuned, mpg gains will be minimal. If it is undersized to what is optimal for that particular engine and not optimally tuned, mpg gains can be noticed as the engine will pull higher vacuum along with slightly cooler and denser air. All pointing to how volumetricly efficient that particular engine is at the engine rpm used.
Me and my 2018 Crosstrek thank you for your input/video! :)
What about potential effect on fuel economy?
I did this to my Tacoma. It's free and if it can make an improvement (even indiscernible), I say why not.
I love your videos including this one, but I'm honestly not sure how I feel about the conclusion here. I understand and would agree completely with the throttle response explanation, but while 0.006 may be small that's still 3% of 0.2. Noticing a 3% difference of something like zero acceleration vs full throttle doesn't seem like that wild of a claim. Also I'd like to see a comparison of the amount of emissions carbon intake filters capture relative to it's effect on the fuel efficiency of the engine. Probably pretty neglidgable, but I'd be surprised if it's emissions capture relative to the engines total emissions production weren't similarly neglidgable.
Hi,
just some friendly suggestions for future videos.
1) can you at some future point make a video about a comparison between AWD and 4WD systems offered by different car manufacturers (Mercedes 4matic v/s Audi Quattro v/s Tesla dual motor)
2) comparison between driver assistance packages between different manufacturers (Mercedes assistance package vs Tesla autopilot vs BMW system vs Cadillac supercruise.
I have no idea how you can measure efficiency or superiority of any system over another.
thank you !!
Love the way you conduct your experiments and they way you explain things! Can you get in trouble for broadcasting that you drove on a public road after modifying your emissions system though?
That was a closed course with stringent parental supervision.
Engineering Explained Your own private Idaho.
So I can't use the excuse when I lose a race out of a toll booth it's not because the other driver cheated by removing his charcoal filter? Good test. In real world driving it's pointless to remove the filter.
For some reason, people think manufacturers make things super restrictive and non efficient. FML. Just leave it in, I know I am.
Haha, I agree with ya!
brother. THIS VIDEO
all i can say is thank you
who’s doing a filter delete for the hp gains? it’s for that turbo sound baby
I love the "I'm sure this is a huge crowd" lol
Early gang 🔥🔥 also god damn I love the colour on the subie
Hyperblue!!
@@EngineeringExplained It's unreal
thank you for making this
would it be possible to make a video on doing dynos on a stock exhaust system/straight pipe/catback/muffler delete
Pedal commander + charcoal delete + performance air filter it is. Thank you sir.
so what your saying is...my butt can detect .0065 G's
Haha no, but your brain will make you believe you can. :)
@@EngineeringExplained is that called the pla-ce-butt effect ?
One of the most constipated puns I have ever read. Well done sir.
Drinking game: take a shot Everytime he says filter.
I think I got filter poisoning
I'd love to see a video on filter systems vs acceleration onset. After changing to a short, but wider intake tube, with a freer flowing filter, acceleration onset is so fast compared to when using the convoluted filter system with a narrower, but impedance matching intake tube with resonators and all. There's almost no delay from pressing the accelerator and getting a response. Makes it difficult for others who want to drive my car, though. I'm used to it now.
Good video thanks. You should rest mpg with and without the filter
The K&N air filters allow more dirt and air in believe it or not better for HP but not really clean
What leads you to believe this? Not saying you're right/wrong, but anyone can say anything haha.
@@EngineeringExplained well uh it's the truth
@@EngineeringExplained I have seen photos of torn-down Cummins B-series engines which were denied warranty due to having been dusted-out. In all instances the owner had installed a K&N *filther* photos don't lie.
@@NathanKirby2001 you are spot-on with photographic evidence to support your statement.
I have a carbureted 360ci with a K&N filter. I did noticed great increase in power with the new filter, however after approximately 10k miles I noticed dust type particles on the carburetor flange and choke tower. And I had to spray out my air bleeds a little more often to clear them of any dust to correct my idle air/fuel ratio. I didn't want to abandoned the K&N so I added a K&N precleaner. Basically a foam cover that pre cleans the air before it contacts the actual K&N filter. Made a world of difference in cleanliness on the carburetor side of the filter
A charcoal filter to remove infinitesimal amounts of intake blowback when the engine is off?!? This level of nonsense is staggering!
Sounds like you're better informed than the engineering team tasked with emmision control on this vehicle. Please share more of your wisdom.
@@BretBerger No just that he knows more than the politicians and beaurocrats that regulated this idiocy into existence.
@@sonictech1000 You oppose emissions regulations?
Yes. I'd be curious to compare it to the amount of emissions from your filler neck when you top up fuel at the bowser. My guess is that would be waaay more.
@@Jarrah_Kilgour Depending on where you are located when you fill up, the fuel hose may actually have a vapor recovery system installed to prevent this very situation.
Would you have a way to test the usefulness of the charcoal filter?
I'm wondering if the charcoal is unnecessary with the kn filter since the vapor will likely get trapped in the kn filter
Hello, really cool video, good measurememts. But there are two open questions, the first is, is there a fuel saving ? The second, the improved response could be from the ecu learning, cause it is controlling the response, or ?