radarguy

I've got a stock filter replacement K&N on my 7.4 liter engine. 10 HP gains on this would be more believable primarily due to the % change in airflow vs. stock. That is 3.3% gain on 300 HP. A 5-8 % gain in HP (approx 10 HP in 200-240) due to the filter seems to suggest the manufacturer left too much on the table in their design. We all seem to agree that Mazda did not leave much low hanging fruit for the OEM market.

David_M

Didn't I say basically the same thing in my original post. Dyno numbers differ from car to car and from dyno to dyno. I don't doubt that K&N got a 9.5 HP gain with their car on their dyno. You can view the three days between charts as either them running the same product over and over again until they got a high number or, just maybe they spent those three days fine tuning the damn thing. Baseing an arguement on a sample of one is foolish whether it's your dyno pulls or K&Ns'. More than a few early projects got trashed because they didn't work with the newer flashes and even more got pushed back.

RB makes a quality product but to claim that no one else on the planet can penetrate the mysteries of the Renesis intake system is going a bit far. I don't feel any loyalty to RB theirs can be judged alongside everyone elses. Even good companies make bad products occasionally.

Fanman

It's really a case of "boy who cried wolf." K&N previously came out & claimed 9 whp gain with their product & numerous posters (not just one) got little/no/negative hp gains with their product. And by your example of them waiting on different days & tuning the hell out of an engine to get 9.5 hp, are you not pretty much saying that the 9.5 hp is BS ? In other words you might get that hp difference because it was 11 degrees cooler from one test to the other. Would this not mean that their advertising is deceptive & people on thsi board should be made aware of this ? Instead of sugar coating it like some of the posters want us to do. Your statements of every other intake producing about 9.5 hp is what everybody is taking you to task on. Even though you think this is minor gains, RX8 owners would be ecstatic if we could get a real 9-10 hp gain from a simple air intake swap.

The reason I used Racing Beat as an example is because they are claiming 2-3 hp gain, vs the other vendors that are saying 9-12 hp. I have always been more biased towards the vendors that are more conservative in their #'s because they are usually right. When RB removes the muffler & gets 4 hp gain, & others claim 12-15 hp with exhaust, how is that physically possible (no restriction vs. little restriction) ? I agree with radarguy in that there is very little left for this engine (in terms of hp gain) with basic bolt ons.

JeRKy 8 Owner

I find it disappointing thatthe owners of this sitewould actually condone this new ad from K&N and neglect the MOUNTAIN of evidence we (the members collectively) have proving that their horsepower claims on the ad are 100%bullshit.

I can understand supporting a horsepower ad from oneof the vendors turbo kits on here since itsbeen tested by several owners and claims are actually truthful - but this K&N crap is just blatant false advertising and everyone knows it.

A lotof new members onhere areunder the impression thatthis forum is the source for candid Rx8 information. Now you couplethat fact w/this scheming deceitful ad and youve just lost respect of a lot ofpeople. Andthen imagine the brandnew members who blindly buy the intake "since rx8club seems toback its claims" only tobe bitterly disappointed weeks later.

I think its a friggin shame. Iknow the staff here has to make money somehow but I seriously thinkthey should reevaulate what theyre doing supporting the horsepower portion of the K&N ad ontheir forum.

Reactionary

David seems to be talking on both sides of the issue in 2 posts. First, he suggested we not be disappointed because other intakes make more than 9.5 hp. LOL. Later, he says we shouldn't assume Racing Beat is the only expert (something that I suggested before) but in this case, Racing Beat has posted smaller numbers than 9.5 HP and virtually admitted it's a difficult car to crack.

Of course we shouldn't condone false advertising. We should boycott that A hole company and spread the word unless they prove or remove the advertisement.

bureau13

Its an ad, you have to recognize it for what it is. If you're watching 24, and there's a Sprite commercial, does that mean Kiefer Sutherland personally loves Sprite and thinks you should drink it? NO, it means Sprite is paying part of his salaray, allowing you to watch such fine programming. Same thing here.

jds

David_M

What I'm trying to explain is gain over peak HP Vs peak HP gain. RB quotes gain over peak ( 238 + 3 or 4 ) while K&N quotes peak HP gain ( +9.5 @ 6250rpm ). Both are true, both fail to tell the whole story and in that way it can be said that both are deceptive. THe k&N makes only 4-5 HP over peak. I haven't seen a dyno graph from RB on their intake but I'd be willing to say that it will probably show about 6-10 hp gain throughout the midrange. Both companies choose to present accurate data in a way that looks best to the consumer.

The SR intake and Canzoomer also had teething problems on some cars after the L flash. The difference is that SR and Canzoomer addressed the problem quicker than K&N. Remember that the K flash was much richer throughout the most of the powerband and the K flash RX8 is what the K&N was tested on.

Power under the curve is what anyone should really be looking for. Lets consider a hypothetical product. If you got zero gain over peak but saw 6-10 hp through the midrange would this be a good modification? The car would certainly be measurably faster even though you got "zero" HP gain. The thing to consider with any modification is what do you want to acheive. Do you want better drivability, just a bit more oomph, do you want a drag car, what about a track car or are you looking for bragging rights from putting down big HP numbers. Each goal will require a different upgade path, each goal will have more than one right way.

Numbers alone are useless a dyno graph to show where your getting the gains is a much better tool for judging a product if you understand what you're looking at. The problem is a lot of people can't make the jump from two lines on a piece of paper to a good enough estimate of what that means in the real world. Every company advertises the numbers that make them look the best. These same companies will often provide dyno graphs for the more discerning consumer. That many people fail to avail themselves of this useful information or don't understand it isn't the fault of the companies. So all too often were left with the claims of amateur mechanics about what their butt dynos say.

I'm not defending K&Ns first intake. It was subpar in that it only worked in a very narrow portion of the powerband and after the L flash it didn't work at all. However I'm glad to see that they are at least trying to make good. The guarantee is real, it has to be or the goverment will come down on them. They said that they will exchange the old for the new if you have a reciept. That people are already claiming, sight unseen, that the new intake is crap is just a sad side of human nature. So until any product is released released, I reserve judgement. It may be great, it may suck, It may work as advertised. If I choose to buy it and it doesn't work as advertised I'll take them up on their guarantee. No loss for me in any event, either I get what I paid for or I get my money back. simple.

Fanman

I understand what you are trying to tell us here.

I would love to see whaere you got these dynos showing the K&N products delivering any hp increases across the board. The dynos that I have seen from the posters showed before & after dynos that showed no/very very little hp gain acrosss the board. The lines were literally on top of each other. If K&N gave a peak hp gain of 9.5 hp at any point I don't think they would get flak like they do. I just have never seen any dyno outside of K&N that delivered anywhere close to 9.5 hp at any part of the dyno curve. I agree with you that if a product gave me 10 hp throughout the rev range, and only 2 hp at the peak, I would buy it. In this case though it delivered NO hp across the rev range (power under the curve), and very, very little at the top, many people actually lost hp across the board.

I am looking forward to see how this new product works, I just wish they wouldn't get into these hp guarantees again. It bit them in the *** the first time around. Apparently they did not learn from the first time. I hope their product works.

RochesterX8

maybe K&N will sendme one and I'll run it on my Dyna-pak, same day, same everything, video the whole thing, totally independent laboratory testing!!

Marty

www.fountianmotorsports.com

David_M

Huff from vivid ran a RX on the dyno when the K&N idle problems started, It looked like the K&N factory dyno. Not coincedently this was right after the L flash. The K&N doesn't work with the newer flashes because of the changes to the fuel maps. The tube on a stick idea isn't inherently flawed. Someone ( Charles Hill I think ) changed the filter to a blitz stainless mesh and said that the K&N worked fine after that. Go figure. the simple conclusion is that the filter was poorly matched to the engine. Probably creating to large large a plenum and slowing air velocity, ergo no or small gains and depending on other modifications maybe even a loss.

It worked at one point. Mazda changed the car in some way and it stopped working. K&N is changing the filter. Lets hope this doesn't become a vicious circle with all product development for the RX.

I've seen 3 or 4 dynos where the K&N barely does anything and I've only seen one where it actually lost power. That's how it always is the worst becomes the example. It's not happenstance that the new K&N has the same curve only higher than the 2-3 HP gains usually seen on the current K&N, that's where there is power to be had with an intake on the RX8. Look at the dynos for the SR intake, they're nearly what the new K&N dyno looks like.

I like the new design. An inverted cone filter with a much smaller plenum follwed by a velocity stack leading to what looks like a slightly longer tube. There is a large mesh screen before the tube to help reduce turbulance. All in all it looks well thought out. I'm not a person that assumes a company would lie to me if it wants my bussiness. Not because I'm trusting rather because I don't deal with companies unwilling to stand behind thier products. No one bats 1.000 but a good company will make good by either fixing the problem or refunding my money.

All this is history though. the new product is what it is. I just think that people should wait and see what's what.

bureau13

I don't think one example of a K&N working on an L flash car is enough data to say its flash-related. In fact, it seems very suspect to me. More likely IMO is that any examples of it working vs. not working are the result of the differences between various cars that we've seen elsewhere. It seems that the idle problems are probably due to it messing with the airflow to the MAF, and if it messes that up in the L its probably going to do it with the M as well.

As for the original K&N design, I disagree that its not "inherently flawed." Its sucking hot air, it doesn't meet the requirements of the stock MAF...there are two flaws right there.

It does seem that the newer design is an improvement, so good for them. I look forward to seeing some impartial tests.

jds

Fanman

Dude, saying the new K&N intake is like the SR intake is not a good thing. That unit has been shown to have little to no effect on hp, peak or otherwise.

I would love to see the new K&N unit make real hp, the question is who is gutsy/stupid enough to buy it & dyno it ?

auzoom

Fanman, were you saying that the SR Intake has been shown to have no effect, etc? or the K&N? If you are talking about the SR one, can you point me to where you got this info? I am looking at getting one.

Andrew

David_M

Fanman, people that have the SR seem to like it even though the gains are minimal. Maybe Its the lack of alternatives that spare the SR the wrath of RX8club.com. Certainly few people seem to take any and every opportunity to trash the SR intake.

I think a lot of people that aren't going FI are hoping for an intake that gives solid gains, regardless of the source. I'm sure some one will dyno both the new K&N and the RB. there are more than a few dyno junkies on this board. or maybe one of the vendors can be convinced to test the K&N.

Fanman

Andrew,

Here is a good thread about the SR Intake

https://www.rx8club.com/showthread.p...ghlight=Intake

Also just to let people know I have no bias for/against SR Motorsports. I have their aluminum flywheel, hi-flow cat (w/resonator), & pulley product. I really like the flywheel & hi-flow cat product. I absolutely hate their pulleis. It gives me CEL (which has been a bear to get rid of & the 20 tap, the 3X 20 tap thing works only sometimes), & didn't give me very much hp increase.

Mike Z

K&N Typhoon system is a good design and can work, but K&N put the wrong air filter on it.

S&B makes a 7" long cone filter with a 3 1/2 flange ID that can replace the current bubble filter(as I call it) and will let the RX-8 induction breath as it was designed too, from the front and also benefit from the rest of the induction design.

A lot of you forget, not all 8's have the same enrichment. Some run lean and don't benefit from any induction changes and a lot run rich to very rich(like mine)and will benefit from getting more air flow. So, results or pain really depend on your cars setting; lean-na rich-ya!!!!

K&N tested their Typhoon system orignally on a J flashing(ya J flashing) which was very rich and got good results. Since then, we have K, L, M, M-a b c d e etc. and even a N which will change enrichment and timing as well as Mazda's sensors are not consistent car to car. So, some of you maybe luckier than others on performance and gas mileage due to these little quricks!!!!!

Go to www.intenseperformance.com and check out their designs.

Common Sense :D

Preacher

All righty,then.
I see it's a clearly divided thread,I'll add my piece.
I have installed a K&N FIPK on my now-sold 4-Runner,and an AEM (K&N-based)short-pipe intake on my Tacoma pickup,and there have been extremely noticable,positive differences in pickup in both vehicles.
(Yes,they are also louder,and gas milage does suffer a bit,but the increse in power was worth the few bucks,imHo-)
I wouldn't expect any noticable difference installing a simple,oiled filter element,but an intake's a whole,other story,and the 8's stock setup isn't exactly what I'd call a free-breather.
Back along,I ordered K&N's initial Typhoon offering for my 8,but I didn't like what I saw,and returned it.
(The old model looked like it was quickly rushed into production,it didn't fit under-hood correctly,the filter looked restrictive,and I just 'had a feeling' about the design.I'm glad I held off-)
To finish up;I'm having the new,improved Typhoon installed Monday,look at the picture below,K&N retooled the whole shebang,and added a heat shield and a much larger filter with about 100% more surface area than the original issue Typhoon.
I'll let you know how it feels when I get back-I'm also having the Goodrige s/s brakelines installed in front at the same time.
The 8's out of storage and it's time to PLAY! :D