Installed BHAF today... very impressed (removed K&N)
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Rapid City, SD
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Installed BHAF today... very impressed (removed K&N)
Like the title says i removed my 8" long K&N cone filter from the truck today. I have deleted the factory baffles as well as the silencer ring some time ago but still retain the 2 pieces of flex pipe. I installed the BHAF filter in its place.. and man the name says it all... That thing is freakin HUGE (the filter i mean). It barely fit in the location of the old one, but fit it did. I tightened down the clamp on it and slapped the hood shut and went for a little drive.
My initial impressions are this: (all of the following with my Bank 6 gun/speed loader on level 6)
1. I saw an average of 80* of egt drop over what the K&N provided while under acceleration in 6 on ramp runs from rolling to 75 mph.
2. I saw an average drop of about 40* while cruising on the interstate and freeway.
3. It seems that the throttle response is improved over the K&N and that the turbo spools somewhat faster and sounds not only a little louder but also like it does not have to try as hard to draw in air.
4. Also of note: My freeway runs to work and back i show right at 5#s of boost while cruising 60 mph +/- about .5# for wind im pushing against. During the same runs today it stayed right at 3#s of boost and barely moved from it unless cruise demanded it on a steaper grade.
All in all i am thrilled about the purchase and highly recommend it. I also was developing a slight film inside the intake tube from the K&Ns oilable gauze. I have had the K&N for about 2.5 years and 25000 miles. I think just the increased draw of the large turbo pulls the oil from the gauze over time as i do not have that problem in either of my other vehicles which run lower boost (6#s) or none at all. Hope this feedback helps anyone trying to decide what avenue to take with a modified or cold air intake.
Lates,
BF
My initial impressions are this: (all of the following with my Bank 6 gun/speed loader on level 6)
1. I saw an average of 80* of egt drop over what the K&N provided while under acceleration in 6 on ramp runs from rolling to 75 mph.
2. I saw an average drop of about 40* while cruising on the interstate and freeway.
3. It seems that the throttle response is improved over the K&N and that the turbo spools somewhat faster and sounds not only a little louder but also like it does not have to try as hard to draw in air.
4. Also of note: My freeway runs to work and back i show right at 5#s of boost while cruising 60 mph +/- about .5# for wind im pushing against. During the same runs today it stayed right at 3#s of boost and barely moved from it unless cruise demanded it on a steaper grade.
All in all i am thrilled about the purchase and highly recommend it. I also was developing a slight film inside the intake tube from the K&Ns oilable gauze. I have had the K&N for about 2.5 years and 25000 miles. I think just the increased draw of the large turbo pulls the oil from the gauze over time as i do not have that problem in either of my other vehicles which run lower boost (6#s) or none at all. Hope this feedback helps anyone trying to decide what avenue to take with a modified or cold air intake.
Lates,
BF
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Franklin
3rd Gen High Performance and Accessories (5.9L Only)
1
05-07-2008 10:30 PM
MikeThomas
1st Gen. Ram - All Topics
24
03-31-2008 01:46 AM
Big Smoky
Performance and Accessories 2nd gen only
4
04-03-2006 11:55 PM