Air filter cleaning

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by spudboy

Can't see how you can improve performance by 16% by just changing your air filter, unless the old one was unbelievably shagged.

You might have got 15% improvement just by putting on a new Ryco.....

---

You won't get much improvement on any less restrictive element unless you have the vehicle retuned to make the most of the extra air capacity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JDNSW

See the discussion on K&E filters elsewhere in this forum.

I was interested reading recently some background to the first Landrovers, there was discussion on the role of aircleaners. It was pointed out that in the UK, with a generally damp and largely dust free atmosphere and with almost all roads sealed, the main function of an aircleaner in the 1940s was as an intake silencer. In contrast, for export, particularly to places like Australia with (then as now) many unsealed roads, and a largely dry climate, and with not infrequent dust storms even in the major cities (e.g. Brisbane yesterday), the major use of aircleaners became one of supplying clean air. For this reason, the first Landrovers were fitted with an aircleaner which was specified by its UK manufacturer for use only in tractors. Clean air has remained a priority in Australia, where in the UK it is not a problem - It can be argued that as Landrovers have become less export oriented and more home market oriented, the suitability of the aircleaners has decreased. Compare for example the aircleaner on the Australian designed Isuzu installation with that on the latest Defender. The available surface area is much smaller, and no guard element.

John

---

Lots of good points here, there is little dust here in the UK, I have K&N's in my V8 Discovery and BMW735, both been in a couple of years and not cleaned yet, the intake after the air cleaner on both vehicles is spotless so they are doing a good job.
In Australia I used to have a Finer Filter (oiled foam) on my RRC and it was fine, I generally did not go to dusty areas on my trips but did go to the NT and back and other long trips.
If I did live in a dusty area I would seriously consider some sort of precleaner such as a Donaldson type, engines are expensive, so they are cheap insurance, and I have always preferred reusable filters.
I would agree with Land Rovers being less export orientated (in this particular area) but also defend Land Rover for going down that route, as usual its all about cost, why fit an extravagant air cleaner system to a car that is only going to the shops etc, You could argue that all Land Rovers going to Australia should have Bullbars fitted, but that would be ridiculous, the people that want or need them fit them, if you need air filteration for very dusty areas it would need to be an aftermarket thing imo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crackerjack

......
I would agree with Land Rovers being less export orientated (in this particular area) but also defend Land Rover for going down that route, as usual its all about cost, why fit an extravagant air cleaner system to a car that is only going to the shops etc, You could argue that all Land Rovers going to Australia should have Bullbars fitted, but that would be ridiculous, the people that want or need them fit them, if you need air filteration for very dusty areas it would need to be an aftermarket thing imo.

---

Fitting good filtration to all vehicles sold in Australia would seem to be good insurance against warranty claims. As far as your comment goes on bullbars, from my observations I would suggest that at least 90% of Defenders in Australia have them - suggesting that their being standard equipment would be a reasonable move. Nowhere near as high a proportion for other Landrover models though, probably reflecting their largely urban use.

John

I have been using K & N air filters on my 4.6 litre engine that now powers my Rover P6B for the past two years. In that time the car has covered just under 31,000km.

The engine runs with twin SU carburettors, large diameter P6B aluminium alloy elbows and an air box with large 3" inlet to ensure adequate air delivery. Inside are two very large K & N cone shaped air filters.

Naturally I have been feeling rather concerned having read the posts within this thread and having viewed the post on the air filter test comparison.

So I removed the elbows and looked into the air box, seeing the engine side of the air filters, checked within the elbows and the throats of each carburettor. To say that I was relieved was an understatement.:D

I could see no evidence of dust at any point. Wiping with a clean white cloth on the engine side of the filters and in the carburettor throats resulted in no discolouration of the cloth. The inlet to the box and the surface of the filters displayed a layer of dust, but the inside surface of the filters appeared to be completely dust free.

The distance covered is a mixture of both urban and rural, with very little on unsealed roads.

From what I have been reading, I had contemplated having to replace them, but after a thorough inspection it would appear that they are doing their job quite well indeed, so they shall remain.

Ron.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JDNSW

I was interested reading recently some background to the first Landrovers, there was discussion on the role of aircleaners. It was pointed out that in the UK, with a generally damp and largely dust free atmosphere and with almost all roads sealed, the main function of an aircleaner in the 1940s was as an intake silencer. In contrast, for export, particularly to places like Australia with (then as now) many unsealed roads, and a largely dry climate, and with not infrequent dust storms...

---

Thats right - if you are really concerned about dust etc you need to make your car Aussie proof especialy if it comes from somewhere like Europe.

Get a snorkle - it the only way for dust and water. Once I fitted a snorkle I had alot less crap in my airfilter

i tried a new to me approach when I went on my 3 month Kimberley trip. I have a RRC 3.9 with cylinder filter and a snorkle. I went to see the Unifilter man at West Gosford and inquired about the filter socks he sells for Toyotas etc. I had to modify the top of the LRA snorkle by gluing 2 thickness of beer can inside, so the rim of the socks didn't fall in. I used them while on dirt roads as they cause a pressure drop and are not recommended for fast bitumin work. The amount of dust they caught was amaazing with NO evidence of dust on the engine side, and a clean main filter after 20KK of travel. BTW he told me that the Unifilter oil did not cause similar problems with MAFs as the K&Ns' as his oil is very sticky whereas the K&N oil is thin and can migrate much more easily. I still will not run a unifilter as the last filter before the MAF but this application seems terrific. Regards Philip A

pod filter works well for me ...a clean every 3 months and its fine. Also sounds awesome . I saw something on a cop show recently that leads me to believe pod filters are illegal. Can anyone confirm ??

depends on how the pod is fitted......

[QUOTE=isuzurover;1094001]

....The Australian 110 countys have an "off highway" spec intake filter system. This is the time of filter you would generally find on earthmoving equipment, mine vehicles, tractors, etc...

The Tdi 110s have a similar or slightly downgraded spec - they still have a cyclonic precleaner, but no safety element. The discos on the other hand (at least from the flat filter models-on) have what is basically a car-spec element/filter setup.

This seems to generally be the case - discos and rrcs have a car-spec element as they are expected to spend most of their life on the highway. The 90/110 gets a better spec as it is expected to spend most of its like in a dusty environment......
QUOTE]

So from what I read for a (110 TD5) the ideal filtering is a paper filter and a snorkel with a precleaner.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by scott oz

So from what I read for a (110 TD5) the ideal filtering is a paper filter and a snorkel with a precleaner.

---

"Ideal" is a bit difficult to quantify, because there is always something better if you have the money.

A cyclonic pre-cleaner (either integrated into the filter housing or as a snorkel head) will remove ~70-90% of the MASS of dust before it gets to your engine. These will likely be more efficient than any of the "sock" or stocking type things which have become popular, with the added benefit that they don't clog up and increase pressure drop over time. If you don't want to clean them you can use a Donaldson top-spin type which shoots the dust back out as it is collected.

That will improve the life of your filter element by almost the %age mentioned above. It will mean that your filter now only has to deal with the smaller particles.

In terms of the "ideal" filter, cellulose (paper) fibre filters have in general been proven to be significantly more efficient than foam or oiled cotton type filters. However for some applications, there are more efficient options again using synthetic media (polymer fibres) or nanofibre impregnated media. Both of these options are more efficient again - but more expensive.

Hope that helps???