 | Home > Puma (Tdci) > Air filter |
 
|
|
|
| Ianh Member Since: 17 Sep 2018 Location: Essex Posts: 1970  
|
If you are thinking of using an oiled air filter, just be aware they can potentially contaminate the MAF sensor.
Ps. IIRC Pete Bell of Bell auto services (BAS) did some tests and found the genuine LR air filter performed the best. |
||
9th Jul 2024 12:38pm |
|
| Chicken Drumstick Member Since: 17 Aug 2020 Location: Near MK Posts: 707
|
Generally higher air flow is achieved by less filtering. So it depends what you want to achieve really.
Paper elements tend to filter the best. The cotton weave of the K&N and the foam of the Pipercross both need oil to help them filter. One advantage is re-use. You can clean and re-oil the filters and keep using them. But do bear in mind the cleaning kits and oiling kits generally cost as much or more than a paper element. Plus the extra cost of the filter. Generally making them more pricey overall that you never recoup. It is also worth noting that a dirty K&N will generally flow less than a dirty paper element and that they get dirtier more quickly. So to maintain any flow increase you will need to clean more often than you would swap out a paper element. In terms of performance. For most vehicles it is normally the air box design and any baffles (to reduce intake noise) that restrict performance rather than the element material. I don’t know for sure with the Puma’s. But for pretty much any other vehicle I’ve owned or researched. Swapping just the element normally works out to something like 0.5bhp gain. Not enough to even notice from the drivers seat. Gains can normally be had by changing the induction system as a whole. I’m not against performance filters. I actually have a K&N replacement filter in my Camaro. But I did this because it has recently been difficult sourcing the paper ones in the U.K. But with the K&N I can at least clean it. However with a Puma Land Rover standard air filters are not hard to find, so you don’t get this benefit. There is an easy way to see if you’d get any gains. Simply take you air filter out and close the filter housing and run the vehicle down the road (not a dirty dusty road or all that far). If you can’t notice much difference with no filter (ie maximum air flow and no restriction). Then a freer flowing filter is also unlikely to offer much. Although on some cars the K&N’s do seem to produce a harmonic resonance which can produce slightly more power than no filter. David Vizard talks about this when building racing engines for Minis (classic proper ones). But outside the race track this is likely irrelevant. Summary: Personally I’d stick with the paper element or go for a full after market cold air induction kit removing factory restrictions. |
||
|
9th Jul 2024 12:42pm |
|
| custom90 Member Since: 21 Jan 2010 Location: South West, England. Posts: 20265
|
As the last statement mentioned above, regular changes of the factory fit and deregulate restriction.
I’ve often contemplated other options but they have drawbacks. |
||
|
9th Jul 2024 3:04pm |
|
| andy63 Member Since: 30 Jun 2023 Location: north east Posts: 492
|
I'm going to add my two penneth here..
I got a alisport air box and induction system.. I was running the standard set up but with a safari raised air intake.. I fitted the alisport system and straight away the maf readings dropped.. I checked this with a scope and that confirmed the maf readings.. Briefly.. I put an ITG foam filter in the Ali sport box and there was a marginal increase in maf readings... I fitted a centrifugal pre air cleaner and expected to see a slight reduction in air flow... But was surprised to find it didn't drop.. It did become a little more erratic but at times a bit higher than before it was fitted.. Strange but that's what happened.. In an effort to try and see why I couldn't get back to the original figures of mass air flow I disconnected the intake pipe from the air box to snorkel to see what that did.. It made no difference suggesting that the reduction in flow was air box related.. I briefly removed the filter from the box and again no noticeable difference, so that seems to indicate that the mass air flow is as good as it's going to get with that set up.. All these tests and figures I recorded were done at tick over, so that at least I was always comparing like with like.. Maybe the maf sensor position in the new air box is just a bit different.. And the engine is breathing like it always did🤔 I do intend Re fitting the standard LR air box and filter again, at some point, just to satisfy my curiosity.. On the air flow readings.. I'll point out that there has been no noticeable difference in feel and performance duting any of this work.. Still drive well👍 |
||
|
9th Jul 2024 3:08pm |
|
| jst Member Since: 14 Jan 2008 Location: Taunton Posts: 7979  
|
I fitted a k&n in my 2010 at 20miles..its been cleaned and reoiled regularly. Recently replaced with alisport air box set up which did give me an improvement being able to pull a higher gear from round abouts.
Fitted the k&n in another 2010 puma replacing std filter (2k miles on it) and it's felt to drive better. Also ran k&n panel filter in my 130 which improved initially pickup in my opinion for the 20k ish miles it was fitted prior to m57 going in. Cheers James 110 2012 XS Utility 130 2011 M57 bespoke Camper 90 2010 Hardtop 90 M57 1988 Hardtop |
||
|
9th Jul 2024 4:06pm |
|
|
|
| All times are GMT |
< Previous Topic | Next Topic > |
Posting Rules
|
Site Copyright © 2006-2024 Futuranet Ltd & Martin Lewis
