Better Mileage with a TRD air filter
#11
08-13-2007, 03:29 AM
Ridiculously Active Enthusiast
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Southern New Mexico
Posts: 1,312
Re: Better Mileage with a TRD air filter
I once saw a cutaway view in a automotive magazine of the toyota air filter. It's a three stage filter for large, medium and extremely small particles of dirt.
It takes about 20 to 35 taxable horsepower move a car along at highway speeds. That may be on a level highway with little wind. It's been a long time that I saw a tv show about front wheel drive and taxable horsepower.
I figure the K&N filter people talk about is more for all out full horsepower. Something that I probably will ever need with this hybrid setup.
It takes about 20 to 35 taxable horsepower move a car along at highway speeds. That may be on a level highway with little wind. It's been a long time that I saw a tv show about front wheel drive and taxable horsepower.
I figure the K&N filter people talk about is more for all out full horsepower. Something that I probably will ever need with this hybrid setup.
#12
08-13-2007, 02:46 PM
Re: Better Mileage with a TRD air filter
[quote=Roy;138557]Not to get into a long debate with you but...
Don't you think that when building the Z06 GM was concerned about performance? Why didn't they use a K&N? Dodge does not have a K&N on the Charger SRT8. No factory hi performance car or truck has a K&N oiled filter on it from the factory that I'm aware of.
No factory performance car or truck is completely designed solely for performance.
When a carmaker makes a Z06 type car, or even a typical family car, there is always a cost benefit analysis that goes on. The design never squeezes out the best performance no matter what....car compaines aim for maximum profit and consumers care about a lot more than just simply performance, even in a Z06 there are always tradeoffs. The Z06 dosent come stock with a turbo either, even though that would be a small % increase in price for a big performance upgrade. Its too much of a pain for most drivers...GM iand the others are catering to more than just speed freakes...there are all sorts of consumers and true performance people/backyard mechanics are just a small group of even Z06 people. There are a lot more stock performance cars with superchargers or supercharger kits than turbos, does that mean superchargers are better? Nope. But they are cheaper, easier to install with minial design changes and are easier to maintain in some ways.
Car design is a composite of many concerns, the Camry HV design is concerned with more than just fuel economy and the Z06 and other performance car designs are concerned with more than just performance.
Most consumers dont want the bother of a turbo, even though its a big performance booster. There are about a million things you can do to a Z06 that improve performance (headers, camshaft, turbos, pulleys) some of which would be fairly cheap to do at the factory, but are expensve to do aftermarket. Sometimes carmakers intentionally derate engines so that they can post performance upgrades over the years without major redesigns. This allows them to spur demand amongst comsumers for next years version of a car. Its very unusual for a first year or even latter engine setups to be absolutely maxed out in terms of all of the tweaks a factory or aftermarket kit can do.
The Camry HV isnt all about fuel economy. If the Camry were just focused on fuel economy it would look and perform like a Prius. Instead on the Camry Toyota spent more on passenger and driver comforts, safety, and appearence of the car in general. That means that LESS money was spent on economical driving, because that is not the major focus of the car, it is NOT a Prius. There are probably a lot of tweaks that cost money that could be employed to improve the Camry HV mileage, Toyota decided that Camry consumers would not want to pay for them...they didnt decide that they didnt work. Im sure Toyota could have chosen from a million differnet engine control programs, and I am positive they didnt give the Camry HV maximum fuel economy at the cost of everything else, they probably reached a tradeoff MOST but not ALL consumers would be happy with between driveability, economy, and power. A single given consumer might want something different, like more power with less engine life or less engine life with greater economy. I wouldnt be surpirsed if a knoweledgeable person could reprogram the engine chip for greater economy with less power and then make up for the power derating with the TRD filter and some other mods for a net better economy with the same stock power.
Im sure if Toyota thought it could market a 500,000 dollar camry HV then it would have all sorts of additional measures that would make give the camry higher performance AND better fuel economy. Just because Toyota did not include all of those tweaks in the current model dosent mean the tweaks dont work. If you think that you are not seeing the big picture.
Ok well theres my 25 cents.....
Tom
Don't you think that when building the Z06 GM was concerned about performance? Why didn't they use a K&N? Dodge does not have a K&N on the Charger SRT8. No factory hi performance car or truck has a K&N oiled filter on it from the factory that I'm aware of.
No factory performance car or truck is completely designed solely for performance.
When a carmaker makes a Z06 type car, or even a typical family car, there is always a cost benefit analysis that goes on. The design never squeezes out the best performance no matter what....car compaines aim for maximum profit and consumers care about a lot more than just simply performance, even in a Z06 there are always tradeoffs. The Z06 dosent come stock with a turbo either, even though that would be a small % increase in price for a big performance upgrade. Its too much of a pain for most drivers...GM iand the others are catering to more than just speed freakes...there are all sorts of consumers and true performance people/backyard mechanics are just a small group of even Z06 people. There are a lot more stock performance cars with superchargers or supercharger kits than turbos, does that mean superchargers are better? Nope. But they are cheaper, easier to install with minial design changes and are easier to maintain in some ways.
Car design is a composite of many concerns, the Camry HV design is concerned with more than just fuel economy and the Z06 and other performance car designs are concerned with more than just performance.
Most consumers dont want the bother of a turbo, even though its a big performance booster. There are about a million things you can do to a Z06 that improve performance (headers, camshaft, turbos, pulleys) some of which would be fairly cheap to do at the factory, but are expensve to do aftermarket. Sometimes carmakers intentionally derate engines so that they can post performance upgrades over the years without major redesigns. This allows them to spur demand amongst comsumers for next years version of a car. Its very unusual for a first year or even latter engine setups to be absolutely maxed out in terms of all of the tweaks a factory or aftermarket kit can do.
The Camry HV isnt all about fuel economy. If the Camry were just focused on fuel economy it would look and perform like a Prius. Instead on the Camry Toyota spent more on passenger and driver comforts, safety, and appearence of the car in general. That means that LESS money was spent on economical driving, because that is not the major focus of the car, it is NOT a Prius. There are probably a lot of tweaks that cost money that could be employed to improve the Camry HV mileage, Toyota decided that Camry consumers would not want to pay for them...they didnt decide that they didnt work. Im sure Toyota could have chosen from a million differnet engine control programs, and I am positive they didnt give the Camry HV maximum fuel economy at the cost of everything else, they probably reached a tradeoff MOST but not ALL consumers would be happy with between driveability, economy, and power. A single given consumer might want something different, like more power with less engine life or less engine life with greater economy. I wouldnt be surpirsed if a knoweledgeable person could reprogram the engine chip for greater economy with less power and then make up for the power derating with the TRD filter and some other mods for a net better economy with the same stock power.
Im sure if Toyota thought it could market a 500,000 dollar camry HV then it would have all sorts of additional measures that would make give the camry higher performance AND better fuel economy. Just because Toyota did not include all of those tweaks in the current model dosent mean the tweaks dont work. If you think that you are not seeing the big picture.
Ok well theres my 25 cents.....
Tom
#13
08-13-2007, 05:26 PM
Re: Better Mileage with a TRD air filter
[quote=Ham;138740][quote=Roy;138557]Not to get into a long debate with you but...
Don't you think that when building the Z06 GM was concerned about performance? Why didn't they use a K&N? Dodge does not have a K&N on the Charger SRT8. No factory hi performance car or truck has a K&N oiled filter on it from the factory that I'm aware of.
No factory performance car or truck is completely designed solely for performance.
When a carmaker makes a Z06 type car, or even a typical family car, there is always a cost benefit analysis that goes on. The design never squeezes out the best performance no matter what....car compaines aim for maximum profit and consumers care about a lot more than just simply performance, even in a Z06 there are always tradeoffs. The Z06 dosent come stock with a turbo either, even though that would be a small % increase in price for a big performance upgrade. Its too much of a pain for most drivers...GM iand the others are catering to more than just speed freakes...there are all sorts of consumers and true performance people/backyard mechanics are just a small group of even Z06 people. There are a lot more stock performance cars with superchargers or supercharger kits than turbos, does that mean superchargers are better? Nope. But they are cheaper, easier to install with minial design changes and are easier to maintain in some ways.
Let's cut to the heart of the matter.
How about that the addition of a K&N would not make a noticable increase in HP over the stock filter in the Z06 or for that matter any other stock engine.
Don't you think that when building the Z06 GM was concerned about performance? Why didn't they use a K&N? Dodge does not have a K&N on the Charger SRT8. No factory hi performance car or truck has a K&N oiled filter on it from the factory that I'm aware of.
No factory performance car or truck is completely designed solely for performance.
When a carmaker makes a Z06 type car, or even a typical family car, there is always a cost benefit analysis that goes on. The design never squeezes out the best performance no matter what....car compaines aim for maximum profit and consumers care about a lot more than just simply performance, even in a Z06 there are always tradeoffs. The Z06 dosent come stock with a turbo either, even though that would be a small % increase in price for a big performance upgrade. Its too much of a pain for most drivers...GM iand the others are catering to more than just speed freakes...there are all sorts of consumers and true performance people/backyard mechanics are just a small group of even Z06 people. There are a lot more stock performance cars with superchargers or supercharger kits than turbos, does that mean superchargers are better? Nope. But they are cheaper, easier to install with minial design changes and are easier to maintain in some ways.
Let's cut to the heart of the matter.
How about that the addition of a K&N would not make a noticable increase in HP over the stock filter in the Z06 or for that matter any other stock engine.
#14
08-14-2007, 12:06 PM
Re: Better Mileage with a TRD air filter
Folks,
My buddy is a drag racing corvette owner, and all of those racing guys swear that the replaceable K&N style "oiled air filter" gets them something like 3-5% more power (verified on a dyno).
Well last time I went to toyota parts to buy a new air filter for the engine, I asked if TRD made an "oiled air filter" for the Camry Hybrid.....turns out they do.
An oiled air filter relies on oil on the filter to clean the air. They go three times as long between servicing as the standard filter, and then when they do need to be serviced you just spray them clean with a spray botle and re-oil them with a kit...you keep the same air filter forever. This combined with the fact that the TRD filter is supposed to get you better performance (better air flow) and that the TRD filter is only about $70 while a new standard filter is something like $20 and only lasts something like 17k miles, convinced me to get the TRD filter. The TRD cleaning kit is good for tens of cleanings and only costs $20.
Well I wasnt completely happy with how the TRD filter went into the box, but as far as I can tell, I am getting about 3 or 5 miles per gallon better mileage with the same driving as measured at the gas pump.
As an odd side effect, it seems like the "tank average" reading on the dash as well as the "mileage for this run" indicator for the driver are much less accurate and perhaps a little eratic now with the new filter.
I am interested in hearing from others who have put in the TRD engine air filter.
I am now going to post pictures of the TRD filter box and TRD filter cleaning kit.
Tom
My buddy is a drag racing corvette owner, and all of those racing guys swear that the replaceable K&N style "oiled air filter" gets them something like 3-5% more power (verified on a dyno).
Well last time I went to toyota parts to buy a new air filter for the engine, I asked if TRD made an "oiled air filter" for the Camry Hybrid.....turns out they do.
An oiled air filter relies on oil on the filter to clean the air. They go three times as long between servicing as the standard filter, and then when they do need to be serviced you just spray them clean with a spray botle and re-oil them with a kit...you keep the same air filter forever. This combined with the fact that the TRD filter is supposed to get you better performance (better air flow) and that the TRD filter is only about $70 while a new standard filter is something like $20 and only lasts something like 17k miles, convinced me to get the TRD filter. The TRD cleaning kit is good for tens of cleanings and only costs $20.
Well I wasnt completely happy with how the TRD filter went into the box, but as far as I can tell, I am getting about 3 or 5 miles per gallon better mileage with the same driving as measured at the gas pump.
As an odd side effect, it seems like the "tank average" reading on the dash as well as the "mileage for this run" indicator for the driver are much less accurate and perhaps a little eratic now with the new filter.
I am interested in hearing from others who have put in the TRD engine air filter.
I am now going to post pictures of the TRD filter box and TRD filter cleaning kit.
Tom
#15
08-14-2007, 12:11 PM
Re: Better Mileage with a TRD air filter
Paper filters get better at removing small particles as they get dirtier. Same with furnace filters which do a better job than electrostatic when they both get dirty electrostatic gets worse.
It gets harder to move air through the dirty paper filters but they still remove smaller particles as they get dirtier.
It gets harder to move air through the dirty paper filters but they still remove smaller particles as they get dirtier.
#16
08-14-2007, 12:12 PM
Re: Better Mileage with a TRD air filter
#17
08-14-2007, 12:41 PM
Re: Better Mileage with a TRD air filter
I once saw a cutaway view in a automotive magazine of the toyota air filter. It's a three stage filter for large, medium and extremely small particles of dirt.
It takes about 20 to 35 taxable horsepower move a car along at highway speeds. That may be on a level highway with little wind. It's been a long time that I saw a tv show about front wheel drive and taxable horsepower.
I figure the K&N filter people talk about is more for all out full horsepower. Something that I probably will ever need with this hybrid setup.
It takes about 20 to 35 taxable horsepower move a car along at highway speeds. That may be on a level highway with little wind. It's been a long time that I saw a tv show about front wheel drive and taxable horsepower.
I figure the K&N filter people talk about is more for all out full horsepower. Something that I probably will ever need with this hybrid setup.
I spent a number of years drag racin' and a whole ton of money. A change in air filter on a stock engine isn't going to buy anything but dirty hands in the case of a oiled filter and probably some messed up sensors if the oil gets to them. Some of these folks might be talking about a filter charger or a cai, they will work on a modified engine if speeds get over 80mph to take advantage of the forced air.
I've rarely hear of sombody spending a bunch of money on a filter for their car and saying it doesn't work. The K&N make a nice whooshing sound when you step on the gas that some relate to power, imo it is the sound of money being sucked out of your wallet.
Oh, whoever it was that said a car maker doesn't make a car for strictly performance. I wish he'd explain the purpose of the Z06, Charger SRT8 or the Viper. They aren't really a grocery getter. The Z06 I can speak to from first hand experience as well as the Charger SRT8 two cars that require a payment of 2K gas guzzler tax. They are performance cars and nothing else.
#18
08-15-2007, 12:35 PM
Re: Better Mileage with a TRD air filter
This is a fun thread... So I thought I'd add my 2C's about K&N also: Stricktly speaking in order to get more air flow through the filter, the holes in the filter media need to be large enough so as to not "upset & restrict" the flow path. This alone increases the flow of air between the two sides of the filter. Pretty simple right?
With K&N these holes are nice and square and pretty large when you compare to a paper element. This is where the claim of "more power" comes from. But of course if those big holes are letting in more air they are also letting in more fine particles of dust and debris.
Now most of the people on this board seem really smart about engines so it's safe to assume that no one has ever seen gigantic chunks of dirt floating in the air while you drive down the parkway, road or track, right? What we do see is dust and a lot of it. A paper filter stops this material from entering your I.C.E. where as a K&N will just let it pass through. And if you think the oil will catch dust - look at the previous posters comments, his throttle body would get coated with dust!
Overtime the passthrough of this dust will wearout seals, rings and valve seats. Not to mention "junk up" any and all sensors with slimy crud that requires seafoam to clean out. K&N is a horrible filter for the everyday car. Racecars or cars that have motors that are constantly being rebuilt is a different topic all together
Also, K&N can claim a 4hp increase in total power on the box, but how many people drive on the road with the engine at redline to observe that increased benefit of performance? And for what, the cost of your engine? Too many people buy into marketing of this filter.
Stick with a paper filter - your engine and wallet will thank you in a couple years.
To the Original Poster - sorry for the complete derailment of your thread....
With K&N these holes are nice and square and pretty large when you compare to a paper element. This is where the claim of "more power" comes from. But of course if those big holes are letting in more air they are also letting in more fine particles of dust and debris.
Now most of the people on this board seem really smart about engines so it's safe to assume that no one has ever seen gigantic chunks of dirt floating in the air while you drive down the parkway, road or track, right? What we do see is dust and a lot of it. A paper filter stops this material from entering your I.C.E. where as a K&N will just let it pass through. And if you think the oil will catch dust - look at the previous posters comments, his throttle body would get coated with dust!
Overtime the passthrough of this dust will wearout seals, rings and valve seats. Not to mention "junk up" any and all sensors with slimy crud that requires seafoam to clean out. K&N is a horrible filter for the everyday car. Racecars or cars that have motors that are constantly being rebuilt is a different topic all together
Also, K&N can claim a 4hp increase in total power on the box, but how many people drive on the road with the engine at redline to observe that increased benefit of performance? And for what, the cost of your engine? Too many people buy into marketing of this filter.
Stick with a paper filter - your engine and wallet will thank you in a couple years.
To the Original Poster - sorry for the complete derailment of your thread....
#19
08-15-2007, 12:42 PM
Re: Better Mileage with a TRD air filter
Back when I raced my own car on a drag strip we would remove the air cleaner/filter element totally and just leave the air cleaner housing as the flame arrestor.
This was a long time ago.
"Big Daddy" Don Garlits had just broken the 200 mph barrier for top fueled dragsters.
This was a long time ago.
"Big Daddy" Don Garlits had just broken the 200 mph barrier for top fueled dragsters.
#20
07-01-2010, 01:03 PM
Re: Better Mileage with a TRD air filter
I am with K&N since day one on my FEH already 125K km and no problems.
On my previous Mazda Protege5 was also K&N filter for about 100K km and no problems too. What kind of abrasive elements you expect from micro dust ?
More air flow no doubt better for engine. So far I will stay with K&N.
On my previous Mazda Protege5 was also K&N filter for about 100K km and no problems too. What kind of abrasive elements you expect from micro dust ?
More air flow no doubt better for engine. So far I will stay with K&N.
