If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Daniel J. Stern wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Jan 2005, N8N wrote: > > >>Well, in my experience, I've never had a truly *BAD* German-made >>product, which sadly, I can't say for domestic products. So buying >>German does seem to give some amount of assurance that you are getting >>at least an acceptable quality product. > > > My experience differs. Everyone makes crap, all over the world. Some > countries, to varying degrees, also make good stuff. > > My experience with German cars has been awful. > > DS We're just going to have to agree to disagree on that one. I know where you're coming from, but IME I've driven German cars that were well past their "best before" date and had only what I consider to be a very reasonable amount of problems. nate -- replace "fly" with "com" to reply. http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel |
Ads |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Huw wrote:
> >>I think people that make a big deal out of feeding an engine ultra-clean >>air are chasing the wrong red herring. Dirt in the intake air is rarely >>the life-limiting factor for any internal combustion engine other than an >>off-road diesel earthmover. >> > > > A road engine on a damp day will injest clean air regardless. However, > following a lorry carrying sand without an element could well cause damage > within a few minutes. IF the intake path actually allowed sand-sized grains in, yeah I could see that. But really, what is the difference between 96% filtration and 99% in terms of ultimate engine life, and given that you stop the boulders in any case? > As far as ultimate cleanliness is concerned, I would tend to agree with you. > But I was roundly condemned when I suggested that it is perfectly > permissible to wash and reuse elements by people who suggested that some > dust would somehow get past the pores after this and get through to damage > the engine. Like you, I am pragmatic and realistic about what it takes to > make a lump of metal continue to tick, because I own and run very many of > them. Given the choice however, I would use elements with the best > filtration efficiency or at least use the original equipment element model. > However, any element is better than none. > Absolutely agreed. My comments are geared more toward people who seem to have a terror of talc-sized dust getting past a filter and want semiconductor fab-room clean air for an engine that makes carbon grit as a NORMAL PART of its operating process. |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Huw wrote:
> >>I think people that make a big deal out of feeding an engine ultra-clean >>air are chasing the wrong red herring. Dirt in the intake air is rarely >>the life-limiting factor for any internal combustion engine other than an >>off-road diesel earthmover. >> > > > A road engine on a damp day will injest clean air regardless. However, > following a lorry carrying sand without an element could well cause damage > within a few minutes. IF the intake path actually allowed sand-sized grains in, yeah I could see that. But really, what is the difference between 96% filtration and 99% in terms of ultimate engine life, and given that you stop the boulders in any case? > As far as ultimate cleanliness is concerned, I would tend to agree with you. > But I was roundly condemned when I suggested that it is perfectly > permissible to wash and reuse elements by people who suggested that some > dust would somehow get past the pores after this and get through to damage > the engine. Like you, I am pragmatic and realistic about what it takes to > make a lump of metal continue to tick, because I own and run very many of > them. Given the choice however, I would use elements with the best > filtration efficiency or at least use the original equipment element model. > However, any element is better than none. > Absolutely agreed. My comments are geared more toward people who seem to have a terror of talc-sized dust getting past a filter and want semiconductor fab-room clean air for an engine that makes carbon grit as a NORMAL PART of its operating process. |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
< When you see all the other poor results you'd be nuts to
> use a K&N - but I"m sure that this study won't slow their sales down > one bit. It's like the morons who pay several hundreds of dollars for speaker wire; there's one born every minute. |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
< When you see all the other poor results you'd be nuts to
> use a K&N - but I"m sure that this study won't slow their sales down > one bit. It's like the morons who pay several hundreds of dollars for speaker wire; there's one born every minute. |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
"Steve" > wrote in message ... > Huw wrote: > >> >>>I think people that make a big deal out of feeding an engine ultra-clean >>>air are chasing the wrong red herring. Dirt in the intake air is rarely >>>the life-limiting factor for any internal combustion engine other than an >>>off-road diesel earthmover. >>> >> >> >> A road engine on a damp day will injest clean air regardless. However, >> following a lorry carrying sand without an element could well cause >> damage within a few minutes. > > IF the intake path actually allowed sand-sized grains in, yeah I could see > that. > > But really, what is the difference between 96% filtration and 99% in terms > of ultimate engine life, and given that you stop the boulders in any case? > >> As far as ultimate cleanliness is concerned, I would tend to agree with >> you. But I was roundly condemned when I suggested that it is perfectly >> permissible to wash and reuse elements by people who suggested that some >> dust would somehow get past the pores after this and get through to >> damage the engine. Like you, I am pragmatic and realistic about what it >> takes to make a lump of metal continue to tick, because I own and run >> very many of them. Given the choice however, I would use elements with >> the best filtration efficiency or at least use the original equipment >> element model. However, any element is better than none. >> > > Absolutely agreed. My comments are geared more toward people who seem to > have a terror of talc-sized dust getting past a filter and want > semiconductor fab-room clean air for an engine that makes carbon grit as a > NORMAL PART of its operating process. > Not only that but modern diesels push a proportion of that hard carbon grit back into the clean air inlet system. It's called EGR or exhaust gas recirculation. Huw |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
"Steve" > wrote in message ... > Huw wrote: > >> >>>I think people that make a big deal out of feeding an engine ultra-clean >>>air are chasing the wrong red herring. Dirt in the intake air is rarely >>>the life-limiting factor for any internal combustion engine other than an >>>off-road diesel earthmover. >>> >> >> >> A road engine on a damp day will injest clean air regardless. However, >> following a lorry carrying sand without an element could well cause >> damage within a few minutes. > > IF the intake path actually allowed sand-sized grains in, yeah I could see > that. > > But really, what is the difference between 96% filtration and 99% in terms > of ultimate engine life, and given that you stop the boulders in any case? > >> As far as ultimate cleanliness is concerned, I would tend to agree with >> you. But I was roundly condemned when I suggested that it is perfectly >> permissible to wash and reuse elements by people who suggested that some >> dust would somehow get past the pores after this and get through to >> damage the engine. Like you, I am pragmatic and realistic about what it >> takes to make a lump of metal continue to tick, because I own and run >> very many of them. Given the choice however, I would use elements with >> the best filtration efficiency or at least use the original equipment >> element model. However, any element is better than none. >> > > Absolutely agreed. My comments are geared more toward people who seem to > have a terror of talc-sized dust getting past a filter and want > semiconductor fab-room clean air for an engine that makes carbon grit as a > NORMAL PART of its operating process. > Not only that but modern diesels push a proportion of that hard carbon grit back into the clean air inlet system. It's called EGR or exhaust gas recirculation. Huw |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
"Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in message n.umich.edu... > On Tue, 4 Jan 2005, N8N wrote: > >> Well, in my experience, I've never had a truly *BAD* German-made >> product, which sadly, I can't say for domestic products. So buying >> German does seem to give some amount of assurance that you are getting >> at least an acceptable quality product. > > My experience differs. Everyone makes crap, all over the world. Some > countries, to varying degrees, also make good stuff. > > My experience with German cars has been awful. Late 80's and early 90's vw & Audi cars had some issues, but for the most part, for decades, German cars are pretty good designs, I have a 928 with over 200,000 miles, and it still does what it should (well, it's getting new driveline bearings now, but c'mon, its got a ****load of miles on it.) and I have a Mercedes 300sd with 236,000 miles, and it drives like it had a tenth as many on it. You just have to pick the right ones, just like anything, go price a carburetor for a 80's Honda, and talk about design. Bernard |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
"Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in message n.umich.edu... > On Tue, 4 Jan 2005, N8N wrote: > >> Well, in my experience, I've never had a truly *BAD* German-made >> product, which sadly, I can't say for domestic products. So buying >> German does seem to give some amount of assurance that you are getting >> at least an acceptable quality product. > > My experience differs. Everyone makes crap, all over the world. Some > countries, to varying degrees, also make good stuff. > > My experience with German cars has been awful. Late 80's and early 90's vw & Audi cars had some issues, but for the most part, for decades, German cars are pretty good designs, I have a 928 with over 200,000 miles, and it still does what it should (well, it's getting new driveline bearings now, but c'mon, its got a ****load of miles on it.) and I have a Mercedes 300sd with 236,000 miles, and it drives like it had a tenth as many on it. You just have to pick the right ones, just like anything, go price a carburetor for a 80's Honda, and talk about design. Bernard |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
"Bernard Farquart" > wrote in message news:RZ1Dd.26135$_62.16730@trnddc01... > > "Daniel J. Stern" > wrote in message > n.umich.edu... >> On Tue, 4 Jan 2005, N8N wrote: >> >>> Well, in my experience, I've never had a truly *BAD* German-made >>> product, which sadly, I can't say for domestic products. So buying >>> German does seem to give some amount of assurance that you are getting >>> at least an acceptable quality product. >> >> My experience differs. Everyone makes crap, all over the world. Some >> countries, to varying degrees, also make good stuff. >> >> My experience with German cars has been awful. > > Late 80's and early 90's vw & Audi cars had some issues, > but for the most part, for decades, German cars are pretty > good designs, I have a 928 with over 200,000 miles, and it > still does what it should (well, it's getting new driveline bearings > now, but c'mon, its got a ****load of miles on it.) and I have a > Mercedes 300sd with 236,000 miles, and it drives like it > had a tenth as many on it. > > You just have to pick the right ones, just like anything, > go price a carburetor for a 80's Honda, and talk about > design. > > Bernard > I too have had nothing but good luck with VW.... an early 90's VW with 280,000km of relatively troublefree driving and now a 2002 VW. The 2002 TDI has done 80,000 km with only a single lightbulb burning out!!!!! |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
REAL air filter testing. More proof that K&N is junk. | Steve W. | Dodge | 48 | January 12th 05 01:22 PM |
REAL air filter testing. More proof that K&N is junk. | Steve W. | 4x4 | 25 | January 12th 05 01:22 PM |
old oil filter question | Nate Nagel | Antique cars | 8 | October 12th 04 01:18 AM |
Alfa 166 Air Filter - same as GTV 3,0 or 156 2.5 ??? | jenks80085 | Alfa Romeo | 0 | June 11th 04 12:25 PM |