More air available to pump into the engine is more air--pretty simple actually, MAF or not.
And there in lies your lack of understanding of how a turbo diesel engine operates or for that matter functions.
You do realize tha the MAF sensor is the PRIMARY source of control for fuel injected to the motor? You do realize that more air in the cylinder WILL NOT RESULT IN MORE POWER FOR A DIESEL ENGINE since ALL DIESEL ENGINES ALREADY HAVE EXCESS AIR DUE TO THEM BEING LEAN BURN COMBUSTION ENGINES...At idle they run as lean as 100:1 and at full load they are at 35:1 and NEVER approach 14.7:1 like gassers???
This is the same reason why you can crank your boost pressure to 100psi and the only thing that will happen is you drop in power due to backpressure. Combustion does not improve, power does not improve and effiency is unaffected.
Perfectly controlled? No system is perfect, especially one that has to meet such dynamic needs as this one. Since OEM filters have virtually no restriction, do you then retract your other statement in which you agreed that K&N filters flow better than paper (at the price of filtration)?
K&N vs OEM will NOT flow as well due to the OEM having nearly 15 times the surface area (Cold climate "A" filter). Due to the larger area this offsets the smaller media pores thus inreasing the overall flowability of the filter when compared to the K&N. OEM filters have over 12 square feet of area vs the K&N's 1 square foot... The key is that the pore size on the OEM filter is around 10-15 microns vs the K&N's 100-150 microns size. The MAF is affected by particles in the 15-20 micron range due to static attraction from airflow in the MAF sensor element channel.
Such hyperbole. You don't really believe the ECU and turbo could magically overcome the effects of TEN paper filters in a row, do you?
If you had any clue about how a "Forced induction motor worked" then you would understand this concept...this goes back to engines 101.
Turbo charger DETERMINES the volume of air at a "specified" pressure which is delivered to the engine in all regimes. The ECU reads the actual flow into the motor via the MAF sensor, corrections are applied to the detected airflow corrected for temperature and local pressure. If the ECU is not seeing the "Specified" flow for a given load (Pedal input) the ECU commands the VNT to increase boost pressure. Maps are built in to act as a check and balance to prevent overspeeding of the turbo or overboosting in the event of a sensor failure. The Maf sensor is capable of sampling at over 1000 times per second, in other words it can watch the flow reversals in the incoming airstream due to individual valves opening and closing...This ain't some Buick Bubba.
Actually, I've shared the carefully measured, very real FE gains experienced by myself and others I know. Power gains are harder to prove without a Dyno handy, so that is less reliable I'll grant you--I've made no attempt to measure that. Actually, I have a pretty good idea of how an engine works, just not much experience with turbos or diesels.
I can't tell you how many hours I have spent working with Dynos and TDI's. Just for grins one day, we removed the whole airbox and did a run. No gains whatsoever. Even with the fans pumping air into the inlet to simulate ram affect under driving conditions at 120 miles per hour, there were still no gains.
Since you so confidently told us all here just a week ago that there are cars out there drawing 400 Amps of battery current the second you put the key in, without even cranking the engine
eek: ), I would like to know where these numbers come from so I can verify them for myself. Besides that, even if the K&Ns did pass those tests (and I don't know if they can or not), the two reasons I've given are more than enough to keep them from EVER being considered for stock parts.
Feel free to hook up a load meter on a cold morning...Report back the load on the battery before and during cranking...
You could also just add up the "Powered consumers" that are activated when the ignition switch it turned on, Take some initative and knock yourself out.
Now you're just getting silly here. The occasional dirt road or dustup is one thing. Day after day on contruction sites in west Texas is quite another. I get parts sent to me from all over the Americas and Asia all the time. I know the difference. Oh, BTW, filtering efficiency goes up as a filter clogs, not down. That's true for any filter.
Report back when you understand "tracking" as it relates to "oiled filter elements". You realize that a single pass thru a dusty area is sufficient to affect an oilded filters efficiency at stopping dirt? Once the dirt absorbs oil in a specific area the airflow simply follows the path of least resistance and dirt along with the air flows thru this formed channels.
It's pretty easy to check the MAF. I'll probably look at it damn near every time I pop the hood. I didn't realize turbos were a prerequisite for "modern" race cars. I guess all the racing guys I've known running K&Ns were using antique FI setups.
Probably were, most racing fuel injection systems do NOT use a MAF sensor since the motors do not have to meet any emissions requirements. Audi in the R10 CHOSE to meet emissions standards they imposed on themselves to demonstrate a diesel can be raced without visible smoke.
Rally cars (WRC) do not use MAF sensors, instead the ECU's utilize MAP (Manifold Air Pressure) for the primary boost control to the ECU. This is a sloppy way of controlling boost but for the purpose of simplicity it works. Other corrections are used to dial in the motor such as TPI and IAT.
Here's the thing: you started this thread with photos from a car you worked on recently, the history of which you know absolutely nothing about. You've taken two dots and drawn a straight line between them and submitted that as proof that a certain filter type is totally without merit. If I tried to report like that in my capacity as a QA engineer I'd get my ass kicked up one side of the room and back down the other, and rightfully so. Your evidence here is bogus or at the very least woefully inadequate, period. At least two other veteran members of this forum have chimed in to say pretty much the same thing. You might be a decent mechanic. I'm sure you can change timing belts with the best of them, but between the utter falsehoods you put out there in that battery thread last week and this jive attempt at engineering or whatever you want to call it, I have a hard time putting much stock in anything you have to say.
As a newbie, you may want to spend 1000/th of the time I have learngin the systems in these cars. Once you have basic understanding and stop confusing gasoline engine concepts with diesels, take the time to undertand the controls of the motors then you will begin to see why I'm not blowing smoke...
As for that other thread, I'm still waiting on somebody to come back with the total wattage of the systems powered by the battery before starting the car...Then again you still seem to think this is a Buick with a simple condensor and points ignition system...