Is cone filter really bad for 3.1

[cstyle73]

Someone told me the other day that you will actually lose power with one on a 3.1 mpfi. I think they really said low end HP but I'm not sure. Now I'm really confused.

 

Come to think of it when I had the stock air box and K&N I could chirp the tires at any stop light, but with the Cone setup I can't unless I romp it with the tires turned.

 

I have already taken this motor out(3.8SC going in) but I am looking at buying another cutty and I want to build up the 3.1.

 

All you experts help me out.

[MotorCityMike]

Well from my experience I used a Pep Boys ricer-style cone filter. It really made a lot more noise, but in reality it made the car lose power by ingesting hot air from the manifold crossover pipe that was directly below it. If it were ingesting outside cold air then I think maybe it would have actually made an improvement, but since replacing the stock airbox and a paper filter I've noticed that the car seems to have more low and midrange power and its actually drawing cold air from behind the headlight area.

 

I would have to definitely say that a cone filter is not the way to go on these cars. There is however plenty of room up front behind the grill for a cold air setup if you wanted to get creative and make yourself one.

[Guest]

do not use any cone filter setup. You lose your low end torque with it. You might get a slight gain on the top end, but that is not enough for me to want it. With the stock airbox, I can spin the tires on my 1988 Cutlass with a 2.8L that has 311,000 miles on it, and al that I have done to the motor is put in a custom cam (keep in mind that I have the original pistons, piston rings and about 14 years of hard wear on it. The original cam was over 50% worn away when I took it out). I have tries the cone filter, the cold air intake, the cone filter with a heat shield, and I even put the cone filter with heat shield, and took out the headlight so that I could see if there was a gain. I have also tried it with the stock airbox with a K&N drop-in filter, and take the snorkel off of the box and the headlight out.

 

The best set-up for these cars is the STOCK ARIBOX WITH IT'S SNORKEL, AND AN AC DELCO AIRFILTER. Even the K&N filter caused a drop in performance (it's pleats go the wrong way causing turbulance I THINK).

 

Taylor

 

BEEN THERE, DONE THAT, DIDN'T WORK!!!!!

[GrandPrix34]

on my 3.4 i have since noticed more power since i put it on. ACutally, I can't really remember how my car drove wti the stock airbox cuz I changed it as soon as i could

[90lumina3.1]

i dunno... i have a cheap cone filter, and it seems to give me more power... the stock airbox really sucked in my opinion. im working on forming an intake to go to a fenderwell if i can possibly position it right... i personally hated the stock setup and took it out soon as i got the cone filter. it should give better power as long as its not hanging over the exhaust taking in hot air. my first attempt at making it better was to leave the bottom half of the airbox in, and put the filter over at it. it actually works pretty well. the cooler air gets pulled in next to the headlight, and the cone filter seems to flow nicer and make some decent noise.

[ismellrealbad]

me and lorenzo and a few others had a long debate on this. conclusion:stock airbox is best. u can see all 5 pages of it on the air intake post i think its stuffed down in the powertrain category

[BlueCutSupreme]

duno bout k&N making u lose power in the stock airbox, i don't know where you heard that but form my experience is false. I purchased a k&N drop in for my stock air box and experienced no decrease in torque, a slight increase in top end, but mostly just increased throttle response.

[Guest]

the pleats on the K%N are going in a way to causes the air to not flow correctly. Take a good look at how the pleats do on your K&N, then go to a parts store, and look at the pleats on a cheap one. If you want to do an experiment, then go to a dealership, and buy an AC DELCO filter for 7 dollers, then try it. You should notice a differance.

 

As to the intakes for the DOHC, I do not know how it responds to that motor. Even though the block is pretty much the same as the 2.8/3.1, That is about where the similarites end. I do not own a DOHC (and I never will. I do not care for that motor), so I can't really tell how it will respond to it. Some people say that they get better top end with the cone, but I honestly feel that it is a placebo. I felt a serious loss in power, and a VERY SLIGHT GAIN in top end, but I am not willing to sacrife my torque for something that will not make a differnace in the long run (or the 1/4 mile).

 

Taylor

[Guest RedCutlassSL]

is there a benefit with the 3100?

[Guest]

I don't know about that YET. I am still building my 3100, and I have about a month of testing to do before I try anything. I will try it sometime in late January.

 

Taylor

 

Unless, of course, somebody else has done it.

[god910]

I made my own intake with a K&N cone filter and left the bottom of the airbox in. I also moved my IAT sensor closer to the TB for a more acc. reading. I noticed an all around difference. I have had Kelley HP+ and currently have Toyo Proxes FZ4 (245/45/ZR17) and had no problem lighten' em up. (Before my ign. went on the fritz.) See rimz and tires @ http://www.picturetrail.com/66Cadrolet

[Vegeta]

This is great, everyone is using an ass dyno to critique a cone filter.

[MotorCityMike]

This is great, everyone is using an ass dyno to critique a cone filter.

 

You are absolutely correct. The only verifiable way to tell is on a dyno or back to back 1/4 mile passes, but the dyno is the only accurate way to tell.

 

Have any of you guys actually dyno'd your car? My IROC is due for dyno tuning in the spring after heads/cam upgrades, maybe I can get a 2 for 1 deal if I do an experiment with filters on the Lumina???

[eclipse5302]

I don't know, the cone filter on my Turbo 3.1 really helps out. I agree with Vegeta...you really need some dyno numbers. I don't understand how a cone filter can decrease HP.

 

Jason

[gpse3200]

Well I've went down the track about 4 or 5 years ago and for sure and it didn't work on the 2.8, time was lost. And I lost time with the 3.2, the numbers showed a difference favoring the box, even the "ass dyno test" on the way home felt good too. From what I can recall I lost .5 or more(not too sure) on my 1/4 mile with the 3.2 that was over a year ago.... With that 1/4 time that was alot of power lost to be sure.

 

With forced induction it doesn't really matter how the air is filtered just as long as you get your cold air(intercooler and or outside routing) to prevent some detonation. The computer is going make sure that the MAP doesn't get too high anyways.

 

With an engine that breaths much better on top end, I'd go as far as to say nothing, no filter, would be the best thing, so I've seen.

[Lee]

Window tint and fog lights don't add to HP either but it's a fashion thing if nothing else. I like mine.

[92Cutlass4Dr]

So the filter subject has been beaten to death without any real numbers to prove anything, but i'm gonna add a new element to the mix anyway. What about products that are supposed to spin the air on the way into the throttle body? I remember somebody saying a while back that the snorkel does the same thing. So is the aftermarket product a gimmick? I'm just curious if anyone has any respect for these things, they seem kinda lame to me.

[godofthunder]

If your talking about the 'Tornado', it wont help us. Its somewhere on the 60degreev6 site. Its like putting a brick in the air hose.

 

Jon

[gpse3200]

So the filter subject has been beaten to death without any real numbers to prove anything, but i'm gonna add a new element to the mix anyway. What about products that are supposed to spin the air on the way into the throttle body? I remember somebody saying a while back that the snorkel does the same thing. So is the aftermarket product a gimmick? I'm just curious if anyone has any respect for these things, they seem kinda lame to me.

 

Well I attempted to give at least a ball park figure. I have my timeslips around but I relly don't have the pateince to look for it. Eitherway I was absoultely astonished. The difference is that noticeable enough that you'd feel it to be sure. Whatever minute HP you'd gain, if gained at all on the 2.8/3.1 won't add up to the shear and just outright loss in overall response and overall engine torque. Like I've said before on another post...try it and compare. As for the snorkle, it doesn't spiral the air it just directes it and speeds it up. The cone is a fashion when it comes to these motors as it was stated earlier.

[Guest RedCutlassSL]

what i'd still like to know...is the cone filter losing power only related to the 3.1? I'm not sure if the fact that the 3100 is slightly different is going to have the same response. ie...losing power

[gpse3200]

me and lorenzo and a few others had a long debate on this. conclusion:stock airbox is best. u can see all 5 pages of it on the air intake post i think its stuffed down in the powertrain category

 

what i'd still like to know...is the cone filter losing power only related to the 3.1? I'm not sure if the fact that the 3100 is slightly different is going to have the same response. ie...losing power

 

Theres already a huge thread where I get into detail about it. I'd rather not retype it again. The loss is only related to engines that use a high speed intake setup(bias towards torque) which is long and rather thinner runners relative to the engine size(305 TPI ie) or small head ports, and valves, short runners (3800 ie). The 3100 hasn't been tested yet but in a month or so I plan to do it. The 3100 has a lean toward quantity but its still has the long runners. GM used a newer box that is more in promotion of HP than torque, maybe thats why it not as strong on the bottom as a healthy 2.8/3.1. I'm gonig to test all that out soon...

 

 

It's like nobody want to hear the truth or take the challenge on this, either that or this concept is just too hard to grasp..... Not everything works the same way for every motor.

[RedZMonte]

1/4 mile runs are not a accurate way to judge power gains. there are so many senarios that can effect the time. the ONLY way to get 100% accurate numbers is to strap it to a dyno... not an ass dyno.. a real dyno.

 

It is a simple consept. more air=more power.. same as Dencer air=more power. the only car i don't expect as much gains on potentially is 2.8L motors with a MAF sensor.. like the late 80's gp's, cutlass's ect.. because the inner diameter of the maf sensor is so small the airbox may be able to flow enough to feed the motor. but other then that most of the restiction on intakes is the stock airbox and the accordian pipe. the accordian pipe causes the air to slow down and you lose velocity of the air coming in. so a smooth pipe would definalty let in a large ammount of air in without slowing down the velocity of the air.

 

When you have the air flowing at a high velocity thats when you get better throttle responce. because the air is entering the motor faster and giving you power faster.

 

I can tell you EVERY single car i have installed an intake on has showed NOTICABLE gains in all rpm's. Intakes Mostly inprove the higher RPMs where the stock airbox choaks the motor. air is allways ciruculating in the engine bay when the car is moving so it is constantly getting cool air to the filter. the only time you may see less of a gain is on a hot day if the car is sitting at idle for a long period of time allowing the hot air to accumulate under the hood, but again once the car starts moving there is allways cool air circulating. only advantage of fenderwell intake over a standard intake is during thoes idle times, it is allways drawing in cold air even at idle.

 

turbo cars LOVE open cones.. turbos suck in a TREMENDUS ammount of air when fully spooled. my buddies GST eclipse would hit a spike of boost then in upper RPM's fall on its face and lose boost. doing nothing more then adding a "Injen" intake which placed the air filter in place of the stock airbox it held boost through the hole RPM range. with a efficent Intercooler the air being drawn in will be cooled more then enough to help prevent detination, but again the colder you get the air the better so a fenderwell intake would definatly help that extra little bit.

 

RedZ

[Guest]

I just want to point out that I have a 2.8 that originally had a WORKING MAF (It never got changed over to the speed density). I replaced my STOCK '88 setup with a STOCK '89 setup (square airbox insetad of round, replaced the MAF for an IAT).

 

After I did this is when I tried the cone filter. I am telling you that I FELT a DECREASE in power that was SO NOTICABLE, I pulled over in the middle of a busy highway to put the stock airbox back in.

 

WITH the airbox, I can spin my tires (plenty of LOW-END torque.

With the CONE, I can't spin the tires AT ALL.

 

I will admit that I probably get more horespower at WOT than with the stock airbox (seeing that I am going by an ASS-dyno), but the loss in torque (not to mention that this mostly counts on the track where a BIG drop in TQ, and a SLIGHT gain in HP will cause you to lose wheras a LOT of TQ, and slightly less HP can help you to win. There needs to be a balance)is not worth me putting in a cone that makes the car drive like shit in the low RPM range. Also keep in mind that most STREET racing is done from STOP LIGHT TO STOP LIGHT, and there, you need TORQUE to get you off the line faster.

 

Taylor

 

And I am Unanimous in that.

[Brian P]

"1/4 mile runs are not a accurate way to judge power gains. there are so many senarios that can effect the time. the ONLY way to get 100% accurate numbers is to strap it to a dyno... not an ass dyno.. a real dyno.

I can tell you EVERY single car i have installed an intake on has showed NOTICABLE gains in all rpm's."

 

And are these noticeable gains on the 3.1 documented from a real dyno, or an "ass" dyno? Because I would like to see them.

[Mike J.]

When I had my 3.4 dohc GP, it seemed to run out of steam on the high end too early. I put in a drop in k&n and when I looked at the very front snorkle piece, mine was scrunched or shrunk closed partially. I stretched it open as wide as possible and it then pulled strong to max. rpms. I also cut out the top half of the tube inside the stock air box which limits the surface area of the filter the air Wants To flow thru. This will increase the sound decibals though. Also as I remember the k&n filter (drop in) has the ribs in line with the direction of flow which should increase velocity of the air vs a decrease if the ribs are aligned cross grained to air flow.