Better MPG and Better Performance

[Redtruck-VA]

So the premise is that using warm less oxygenated air with a greater throttle opening reduces engine pumping losses and increases mileage? Of course at the loss of overall engine power. I'll agree that certain tires cause greater rolling resistance than others and I'm a small tire fan. But purposely reducing engine power requiring more throttle opening hopefully to reduce engine pumping restriction is dubious at best IMO. I'm calling BS.

 

[plus4]

warm air and warm fuel is for top efficiency so it atomizes. the microfiber doesn't reduce performance, normal oem air boxes are made to be restricted. it takes less throttle not more throttle, the point isn't warm air intake its a less restrictive air intake with a good filtering process.

 

[Redtruck-VA]

warm air and warm fuel is for top efficiency so it atomizes. the microfiber doesn't reduce performance, normal oem air boxes are made to be restricted. it takes less throttle not more throttle, the point isn't warm air intake its a less restrictive air intake with a good filtering process.

You are contradicting your source.
This is the source you quoted from:
All warm air intakes operate on the principle of decreasing the amount of oxygen available for combustion with fuel. Warm air from inside the engine bay is used opposed to air taken from the generally more restrictive stock intake. Warmer air is less dense, and thus contains less oxygen to burn fuel in. The car's ECU compensates by opening the throttle wider to admit more air. This, in turn, decreases the resistance the engine must overcome to suck air in. The net effect is for the engine to intake the same amount of oxygen (and thus burn the same amount of fuel, producing the same power) but with less pumping losses, allowing for a gain in fuel economy, at the expense of top-end power

Many of us use CAI systems on our trucks and can assure you they are less restrictive than the OEM air boxes. However the air box isn't that restrictive with a good replacement filter, but the Hat or noise suppressor is. You are still using the most restrictive part of the intake system.

 

[plus4]

i concur with CAI system not disputing the fact that they are less restrictive than the OEM air boxes.

 

[Gfsuperman]

What about a series of microfiber cloths running though a tube. I'm thinking of taking everything off. Air box, resonator. Flex. And replacing with some tubing and maybe two microfibers in diff locations. Maybe have a hose long enough to bring air in from right in behind the grill? Maybe even installing a mini vacuum fan to suck in air right at the tubing entrance? Totally and completely diy cai. Did this make any sense? Lol

 

[Redtruck-VA]

What about a series of microfiber cloths running though a tube. I'm thinking of taking everything off. Air box, resonator. Flex. And replacing with some tubing and maybe two microfibers in diff locations. Maybe have a hose long enough to bring air in from right in behind the grill? Maybe even installing a mini vacuum fan to suck in air right at the tubing entrance? Totally and completely diy cai. Did this make any sense? Lol

I certainly encourage out of the box thinking and this is certainly a different concept and IMO should NOT be considered in anyway a performance mod. But before jumping into this I would recommend doing some research on "Engine Pumping Losses" to better understand what is happening. First off, you will lose top end power. 2nd the PCM most likely will throw codes and there may even be overheated cats to contend with. Third I'd be concerned about fire using cloth for a filter and would only use approved filters. The residue you see in your TB/intake will also be absorbed by the cloth and sucking a rag into the intake makes for a bad afternoon. Removing the resonator would be good in my book and fabricating a air inlet tube will if nothing else will give you experience in building a CAI when the time comes. Bottom line IMO this isn't going to work simply because of the PCM design doesn't allow it to regulate fuel to the same degree as a TB can regulate air. And if it is done only to a very limited degree to keep the PCM happy then it is not really doing enough to make a difference. Plus who wants to drive a doped down truck?

 

[plus4]

all filters including normal Paper (cellulose) and Oiled Cotton - K&N and others. burn the same way microfiber does. residue let by the microfiber is bare minimal. feel free to use a OEM or KN filter and put a microfiber in the same system. its a SAFE way to test this works with any fears or worries. ECU adjusts the air to fuel ratio it does it all the time. i ran a 2007 chevy hhr with a microfiber filter AND a oem filter. the microfiber is before the oem, nothing ever hit that filter period. microfiber is the best for absorb dirt and residue. feel free to read up on microfiber

Benefits of Microfiber Towels & Microfiber Mops from ERC Wiping Products, Inc.
Microfiber - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Redtruck-VA]

I don't consider this a viable mod, but others might. So if any one who is so inclined to try this, I hope you post your findings.
As for the OP I wish you well in promoting your towels.

 

[plus4]

LMAO my towels funny i didn't create or invest these "towels". i will help anyone with any brand car,truck or van to try this out.

 

[plus4]

the main reason why the major air filter brands don't use microfiber is because they would be out of business.

 

[plus4]

the shell oil engineers took a 1947 studebaker after modification got 149.95miles per gal and posting there findings in the book of "Fuel Economy of the Galsoline Engine" it weight 200 or 300lbs heavier then a hummer h3.why do we not get these kind of miles per gallon today? simple answer money. feel free to research this


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eco-marathon
http://www.59fiattestcar.com/shellmileagemarathons.htm

 

[BoldAdventure]

the shell oil engineers took a 1947 studebaker after modification got 149.95miles per gal and posting there findings in the book of "Fuel Economy of the Galsoline Engine" it weight 200 or 300lbs heavier then a hummer h3.why do we not get these kind of miles per gallon today? simple answer money. feel free to research this

I have, and it did not weight the same as a Hummer H3. It was a very stripped down vehicle. Think souped up smart car.

http://blog.hemmings.com/index.php/2007/05/01/big-oil-conspiracy-376-mpg-opel-uncovered/


http://www.treehugger.com/cars/souped-down-1959-opel-t-1-gets-37659-mpg.html

 

[plus4]

they did different cars

149.95 MPG with 1947 Studebaker in 1949
244.35 MPG with a 1959 Fiat 600 in 1968
376.59 MPG with a 1959 Opel in 1973.

 

[usaf2006]

they did different cars

149.95 MPG with 1947 Studebaker in 1949
244.35 MPG with a 1959 Fiat 600 in 1968
376.59 MPG with a 1959 Opel in 1973.

You forgot about the 06 ram they did this year...
12.3 GPM with a 2006 ram 1500















Yes.. GPM was intended as a joke.

 

[Gfsuperman]

Lmao!!

 

[rabbie303]

You forgot about the 06 ram they did this year...
12.3 GPM with a 2006 ram 1500















Yes.. GPM was intended as a joke.

You aint kidding man!!!

I've actually been testing this mod and still trying different setups...Once I have some hard numbers I will post them up.

 

[dodge dude94]

Very interesting. I hope this stays logical and reasonable and doesn't turn to ****, boys!

 

[hemihustlin]

 

[usaf2006]

You aint kidding man!!!

I've actually been testing this mod and still trying different setups...Once I have some hard numbers I will post them up.

Right behind you man. Just gotta swing by oriellys after work to grab a cloth or two. My truck currently and consistently gets 14.4 to 14.7. Depending on if I make trips on the weekends downtown. Ill have a cloth ready for my next fill up on this coming sunday.