View Single Post
Old 07-16-2008, 09:03 AM   #6
theholycow


 
theholycow's Avatar
 
Drives: '02 GMC Sierra, '80 Lesabre
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: RI
Posts: 1,804
If they drive at high RPM with wide-open throttle all the time, the K&N may be the cause of their extra 20 miles. If the car was designed by idiots who chose the wrong filter to specify, the K&N could have helped. If the car has been modified significantly, the K&N could have helped.

If it is stock and driven at less than full throttle, the K&N probably did not cause their increase.

They didn't even state any actual fuel economy increase, just that they went 20 miles more on the tank -- which is pretty easy to do just by waiting another 20 miles unless they always run it out of gas and carry a gas can to get them to the next gas station.

It's a 6% increase in miles per tank according to the numbers posted in that thread. You could probably get the same by increasing your tire pressure (if it doesn't make handling bad and if it doesn't exceed the tire's rated maximum). In your 1995 3.8L Camaro you can probably get the same increase by shifting earlier (if it's got a manual transmission); you're probably not using as much of the low-end torque as you should use for best fuel economy.
__________________
Removing weight has surprisingly little effect on fuel economy
Engine break-in procedure | Gear ratios
2002 GMC Sierra 4x4 5.3 (190,000 miles and going strong)
1980 Buick Lesabre family heirloom with 36,000 miles
2008 Volkswagen Rabbit 2 door I5-2.5 5spd DD lease
Quote:
Originally Posted by CamaroSpike23 View Post
she really underestimates the damage i would do to her reproductive organs
http://allOffTopic.com is the place for all the naughty stuff you can't get away with on this forum...
theholycow is offline   Reply With Quote