Permanent Filters
Guest
Posts: n/a
Permanent Filters
I've read several times that dyno testing with the K&N caused a 3-4 HP loss on WRX. Has anyone seen Dyno results from K&N or Amsoil filter with a 2.5 N/A?
Those of you with K&N or Amsoil, do you feel a difference, better or worse?
Those of you with K&N or Amsoil, do you feel a difference, better or worse?
Registered User
iTrader: (12)
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 18,369
From: Reno, NV
Car Info: 1993/2000/2001 GF4 mostly red
When I put my K&N on, the only real difference I could say for sure was a little faster throttle response. It may give slightly more power, but my ***-dyno wasn't very well tuned at the time. I had only had my RS for about a month and my only other cars had been a '95 Ranger pickup and an '82 Buick Regal. Not exactly ready for USTCC.
). I wanted to finish the airbox b4 changing airfilters (you know, plastic shavings etc.....)
Registered User
iTrader: (12)
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 18,369
From: Reno, NV
Car Info: 1993/2000/2001 GF4 mostly red
Originally posted by imprezton
No one uses Amsoil?
No one uses Amsoil?
The cars making 20hp with a K&N usually make 250+ to begin with. It's more accurate to say 3-5%
Registered User
iTrader: (12)
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 18,369
From: Reno, NV
Car Info: 1993/2000/2001 GF4 mostly red
If Shiv says a drop-in permanent filter loses power, I'd be inclined to believe him. He knows what he's talking about when it comes to boosted engines and tuning.
