Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 46
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

never heard that... i also dont see how that is possible...

you can run your car without a filter at all and it makes mad induction noise (that WILL eventually blow your motor) so the only reason that it would blow the motor would be by lack of airflow... and i doubt Apexi would release a filter that didnt flow to the necessary standards... which would be kinda hard to make anyway...

whichever one of your dickhead friends told you that should get a kick in the shin... hes an idiot...

WTF? what retard told you that?

Regardless, the question should be 'why do you want to change the pod filter?' it's going to make stuff all performance difference.... save your money

+1

LOL...

how about keeping the original air flow meter, with a Apexi Pod Filter head?

does it do the same induction?

any performance drop or whatsoever? :sorcerer:

hrms the pod filter screws on at the air flow meter. irregardless of whether you use a panel filter or a pod i am pretty sure u have to have the afm (correct me if i am wrong!). with the pod, you do hear an induction noise. if sounds/noises is all you want then you could always take off the stock air box cover. that should give you some induction noise

hope that helps!

:(

Ok seriously, according to alot of information out there from the big brands the apexi ones flow the best and the K&N ones filter the best. Weather you'll actually notice a difference between the two I doubt it. People who say they can notice a 5kw difference in power are full of shit. I've seen many people on dynos going from the orginal box, to a modified box to a pod to nothing on consecutive runs and majority of the time on stockish cars the original box makes the most power....go figure??? As far as I am concerned, put a pretty on on there so it looks nice and be done with it :(

as to you last question, going to an open pod from a standard box you'll probably loose a bit of power cos pods suck in more hot air than the box. its obviously gonna effect you more in city driving where your car heats up as opposed to a track......

Alright.

My question now is

Is it possible to change the pod filter head from K&N to APexi one without changing the air flow meter?

or in the first place, can it be done like that? that means i'm keeping the K&N air flow meter.

will there be any difference in whatsoever?

you don't have a K+N airflow meter. you have a K+N pod filter, most likely mounted to an adapter which is then bolted to your factory nissan Air Flow meter. to fit your apexi pod you need to remove your K+N pod filter and remove the adapter too, now bolt your apexi pod directly to the nissan airflow meter.

if it was me, I would just leave the K+N filter on there. They are very good.

Apexi makes a 16hp gain (estimated from testing) also comes up better than HKS or K&N models in filtration and also still makes wicked sound ..

Hope that helps .. buy one!

Oh and for your info .. testing was done with 45psi which is heavy as .. the apexi showed almost no dust particles through and the items which got through would not effect the engine as the particles are small enough to not scratch or harm the pistons etc.. It sucked a little less .1 or somthing than the HKS model *retail $500* and made higher hp increase (Id say because apexi spins the air intake where as HKS just sucks huge amounts into a small hole

Edited by DECIM8

what are you asking? on what?? on a car I assume .. it was only .5hp higher than any other brand .. K&N was second.

it was tested on a vacume cleaner if you familar with the test .. so im assuming it was then tested on a car .. however not sure

I'm running an Apexi on my GTR. Box off - pod filter adaper (a 4 inch Ali pipe) bolts onto the AFM and the filters onto it. Easy to do. I get a decent amount of intake noise. Can't tell you I could feel any HP difference.

I kinds doubt switching from one brand to another makes much difference, unless one doesn't fliter very well and you don't want junk going into the intake. Sure wouldn't be the best bang for the buck performance wise.

There is an issue with sucking in hot air versus and airbox. Ironic to see most who are looking for perfromance to then add an air box of some sort.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • I know why it happened and I’m embarrassed to say but I was testing the polarity of one of the led bulb to see which side was positive with a 12v battery and that’s when it decided to fry hoping I didn’t damage anything else
    • I came here to note that is a zener diode too base on the info there. Based on that, I'd also be suspicious that replacing it, and it's likely to do the same. A lot of use cases will see it used as either voltage protection, or to create a cheap but relatively stable fixed voltage supply. That would mean it has seen more voltage than it should, and has gone into voltage melt down. If there is something else in the circuit dumping out higher than it should voltages, that needs to be found too. It's quite likely they're trying to use the Zener to limit the voltage that is hitting through to the transistor beside it, so what ever goes to the zener is likely a signal, and they're using the transistor in that circuit to amplify it. Especially as it seems they've also got a capacitor across the zener. Looks like there is meant to be something "noisy" to that zener, and what ever it was, had a melt down. Looking at that picture, it also looks like there's some solder joints that really need redoing, and it might be worth having the whole board properly inspected.  Unfortunately, without being able to stick a multimeter on it, and start tracing it all out, I'm pretty much at a loss now to help. I don't even believe I have a climate control board from an R33 around here to pull apart and see if any of the circuit appears similar to give some ideas.
    • Nah - but you won't find anything on dismantling the seats in any such thing anyway.
    • Could be. Could also be that they sit around broken more. To be fair, you almost never see one driving around. I see more R chassis GTRs than the Renault ones.
    • Yeah. Nah. This is why I said My bold for my double emphasis. We're not talking about cars tuned to the edge of det here. We're talking about normal cars. Flame propagation speed and the amount of energy required to ignite the fuel are not significant factors when running at 1500-4000 rpm, and medium to light loads, like nearly every car on the road (except twin cab utes which are driven at 6k and 100% load all the time). There is no shortage of ignition energy available in any petrol engine. If there was, we'd all be in deep shit. The calorific value, on a volume basis, is significantly different, between 98 and 91, and that turns up immediately in consumption numbers. You can see the signal easily if you control for the other variables well enough, and/or collect enough stats. As to not seeing any benefit - we had a couple of EF and EL Falcons in the company fleet back in the late 90s and early 2000s. The EEC IV ECU in those things was particularly good at adding in timing as soon as knock headroom improved, which typically came from putting in some 95 or 98. The responsiveness and power improved noticeably, and the fuel consumption dropped considerably, just from going to 95. Less delta from there to 98 - almost not noticeable, compared to the big differences seen between 91 and 95. Way back in the day, when supermarkets first started selling fuel from their own stations, I did thousands of km in FNQ in a small Toyota. I can't remember if it was a Starlet or an early Yaris. Anyway - the supermarket servos were bringing in cheap fuel from Indonesia, and the other servos were still using locally refined gear. The fuel consumption was typically at least 5%, often as much as 8% worse on the Indo shit, presumably because they had a lot more oxygenated component in the brew, and were probably barely meeting the octane spec. Around the same time or maybe a bit later (like 25 years ago), I could tell the difference between Shell 98 and BP 98, and typically preferred to only use Shell then because the Skyline ran so much better on it. Years later I found the realtionship between them had swapped, as a consequence of yet more refinery closures. So I've only used BP 98 since. Although, I must say that I could not fault the odd tank of United 98 that I've run. It's probably the same stuff. It is also very important to remember that these findings are often dependent on region. With most of the refineries in Oz now dead, there's less variability in local stuff, and he majority of our fuels are not even refined here any more anyway. It probably depends more on which SE Asian refinery is currently cheapest to operate.
×
×
  • Create New...