Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Misc. > Air Intakes, Air Filters & Ram Air
Sign in using an external account
Register Forgot Password?


Welcome to Ford-Trucks Forums!
Welcome to Ford-Trucks.com.

You are currently viewing our forums as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Ford-Trucks Forums community today!





 
Reply
 
 
 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #16  
Old 06-07-2011, 02:49 PM
dmanlyr dmanlyr is offline
Posting Guru
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Puyallup, WA
Posts: 1,503
dmanlyr has a great reputation on FTE.dmanlyr has a great reputation on FTE.dmanlyr has a great reputation on FTE.dmanlyr has a great reputation on FTE.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RPelkey View Post

I have an 04 f150 with the 57-2556 intake system on it. My buddy has the same truck same year but his is 4 wheel drive. We both noticed the throttle response improvement and he notice the power increase when towing his trailer up the grape vine. His truck did not down shift as early and he was able to go up the grade 10mph faster. He also noticed a 2mpg increase with his I notice a 1 mpg with mine.
If his oem filter was not plugged, I have to call BS on a 2 mpg or 10 mph increase. If it was as easy as changing a pipe or filter, the factory would have already done it, if nothing more than to give them "faster" towing bragging rights over the competition, let alone that magical higher EPA fuel mileage rating, which right now is worth it weight in Gold, especialy considering the upcoming CAFE requirements.

Each to there own, but I have personaly seen many so called aftermarket CAI's with a big old cone K&N filter stuck on the end of it. Yes, so called CAI because ther are sucking in warm/hot underhood air which basic physics denotes has less density, hence less oxygen. So in reality, if you were to run these aftermarket CAI's (which are actually a HAI - HOT air intake) on a true dyno run with the hood SHUT and no fan blowing air across the top of the engine, all incoming air going thru the radiator, just like in the real world, you would see a drop in horsepower over the proper factory set up, a REAL CAI.

Not to say that a proper aftermarket CAI cannot be done, I have seen those as well. And I will be the first to admit the need for a improved system on a modded engine.

BUT, as I have said before, and I will say again, just because a engine makes more intake air or exhaust system noise, does not mean it is producing any additional horespower.

If it sounds throaty, it must be faster.... right !?! WRONG.

BTW - No offense, but I see NO real reason to run anything but a paper air filter for everything except desert conditions. There, I can see the real value of a reusable K&N (or a old school oil bath). That said - After all, if a poor little paperair filter can provide enough air for a 4400 hp diesel locomotive, it is probably just fine for mu little 200 hp engine.

Regards, David
__________________
90 F250 7.5L E4OD, 03 F350 SD auto with the infamous diesel 6.0 for work, 70 C600 330 MT40 auto dump truck O2 Oldsmobile Bravada, Kubota L3200, Hustler Super Z mower, all Hydrostatics, 85 Honda Elite 250 & 150 scooter CVT - Nary a manual in the fleet!
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 06-08-2011, 10:00 AM
RPelkey's Avatar
RPelkey RPelkey is offline
PREMIUM SPONSOR
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Corona California
Posts: 112
RPelkey is starting off with a positive reputation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beechkid View Post
Again...a falsified repeat of the most basic standard and formula...as stated even if we calculate at 90%+ (this is normal aspirated racing engine), the engine and cannot suck in more that the spec...sorry just basic physics here.

In regards to your dyno...again, dynos vary by 5% (or more) and when K&N does it comparison it is not in a wind tunnel testing center (as the oem's use to measure and determine the exact airflow that is actuall traveling through the system and into the engine) but at a conventional dyno. If a wind tunnel testing center was used the difference between the 2 (because of the oem "4-way valve design") would be negligible....just basic physics here. BTW, there is such a center in El Segundo California- that GM, Chrysler (use to) and Ford use.

Even HRM did a whole write-up & Tv show on the inaccuracies/variations of dynos....not just of the types and the operators, locations, etc- personally I was very surprised that they did it!

BTW, the HP increase you speak of...on a 5.4 300 hp, that's less than 5% increase.......Hmmmm, even less than the standard 5% variation.


all of this aside.....I built a true ram air intake (based upon the 1960's hemi style) and ran consecutive accel analysis comparions with side by side testing to a vehicle with a K&N system (new..out of the box) and the ford OEM...long story short........ depending on the actual vehicle speed (20 mph increments up to 85 mph) , both the OEM & ram air out performed the K&N in the majority of segments but........the difference was so slight in the side-by-side comparisions and was absolutlely speed/temp/humidity determinent....basically that 5% dyno variation factor......call it a wash.

$ for $...I can take the $200 for the K&N system (not pose potential documented damage and warranty issues to my vehicle), and produce real documentable performance gains in comparision.
Your makeing assumptions that we don't do back to back testing with the factory and our intake system. That is incorrect. I have explained this in other threads that you have been involved in. Our Dyno charts show the back to back comparisons therefore you are comparing apples to apples in the same conditions. This shoots holes in your 5% deviation. The 5% only applies from hook up to hook up,or from one persons dyno to another. We also take it a step further we test multiple vehicles again using back to back testing. After doing this we publish the average HP number seen from all vehicles. We could publish higher number but that would be misleading. Our goal is to give a consumer an honest expectation of the HP increase they can expect to see.

Regarding Dmanlyrs post

I know some people believe the factory air boxes and filter are adequate and that may be true for some people because they will never use the power their vehicle has to offer. Others want to do the best they can to improve the efficency of their engines by ruducing the restriction on the intake and exhaust. At the End of the day if you reduce the restrition and have the ablity to flow more air when you need it you will increase the efficency of your engine which could increase your fuel economy. One thing is for sure doing these things will increase your perfomance BOTTOM LINE. Again thats why the OEMS produce performance intake systems and some come with them from the factory.

OHH FYI we build filters for the locomotive, and Aircraft inustries too. Rememeber if our filter were less efficient than a paper, or were unable to provide the perfomance gains. We would not have made it in business for over 40 years.

If you don't believe you don't believe and thats Ok, You can keep buying paper filters and clogging up our landfills or you can try one of ours and you will never have to buy another filter again. The choice is yours.
__________________
Product Specialist
K&N Engineering Inc. - www.knfilters.com
1455 Citrus St., Riverside, CA 92507
800.858.3333
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 06-08-2011, 11:52 AM
Beechkid Beechkid is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 3,198
Beechkid is a splendid one to beholdBeechkid is a splendid one to beholdBeechkid is a splendid one to beholdBeechkid is a splendid one to beholdBeechkid is a splendid one to beholdBeechkid is a splendid one to behold
Quote:
Originally Posted by RPelkey View Post
Your makeing assumptions that we don't do back to back testing with the factory and our intake system. That is incorrect. I have explained this in other threads that you have been involved in. Our Dyno charts show the back to back comparisons therefore you are comparing apples to apples in the same conditions. This shoots holes in your 5% deviation. The 5% only applies from hook up to hook up,or from one persons dyno to another. We also take it a step further we test multiple vehicles again using back to back testing. After doing this we publish the average HP number seen from all vehicles. We could publish higher number but that would be misleading. Our goal is to give a consumer an honest expectation of the HP increase they can expect to see.

Regarding Dmanlyrs post

I know some people believe the factory air boxes and filter are adequate and that may be true for some people because they will never use the power their vehicle has to offer. Others want to do the best they can to improve the efficency of their engines by ruducing the restriction on the intake and exhaust. At the End of the day if you reduce the restrition and have the ablity to flow more air when you need it you will increase the efficency of your engine which could increase your fuel economy. One thing is for sure doing these things will increase your perfomance BOTTOM LINE. Again thats why the OEMS produce performance intake systems and some come with them from the factory.

OHH FYI we build filters for the locomotive, and Aircraft inustries too. Rememeber if our filter were less efficient than a paper, or were unable to provide the perfomance gains. We would not have made it in business for over 40 years.

If you don't believe you don't believe and thats Ok, You can keep buying paper filters and clogging up our landfills or you can try one of ours and you will never have to buy another filter again. The choice is yours.
I have used your products since 1974 (IIRR)...and still use them on the 1965 shebly mustang and until it was sold (in 2006), my 1990 F150.

So you are still applying the twist to even my current statements....
There are too many independent test and oem publications and doumentation that negets your statements.
__________________
Member: Never trust a person over 40 who drives a Chevy club
Flatheads ain't so bad!
Certified backyard mechanic I & II
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 07-17-2011, 08:28 PM
Freaksh0w's Avatar
Freaksh0w Freaksh0w is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: East Tennessee
Posts: 771
Freaksh0w is starting off with a positive reputation.
Do you have any before/after graphs for 5.0 EFI engines with the twin throttle body set up in something like my 86 f150?
__________________
1986 F-150 5.0 EFI XLT Lariat 4x4
NP435/NP208/9" 3.50
"Custom Exhaust" and leaf spring overloads
31x10.50 15" Nothing special, but it's a damn good truck.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 07-18-2011, 09:23 AM
RPelkey's Avatar
RPelkey RPelkey is offline
PREMIUM SPONSOR
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Corona California
Posts: 112
RPelkey is starting off with a positive reputation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freaksh0w View Post
Do you have any before/after graphs for 5.0 EFI engines with the twin throttle body set up in something like my 86 f150?
Unfortunately K&N doesn't offer an intake system for your 86 f150 so I won't be able to offer a dyno chart for you.
__________________
Product Specialist
K&N Engineering Inc. - www.knfilters.com
1455 Citrus St., Riverside, CA 92507
800.858.3333
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 07-19-2011, 10:30 PM
Freaksh0w's Avatar
Freaksh0w Freaksh0w is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: East Tennessee
Posts: 771
Freaksh0w is starting off with a positive reputation.
I've been wanting to rig one up. If not for better throttle response and possibly less restriction losing the air box, at least for that CAI sound.
__________________
1986 F-150 5.0 EFI XLT Lariat 4x4
NP435/NP208/9" 3.50
"Custom Exhaust" and leaf spring overloads
31x10.50 15" Nothing special, but it's a damn good truck.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 07-25-2011, 10:11 AM
RPelkey's Avatar
RPelkey RPelkey is offline
PREMIUM SPONSOR
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Corona California
Posts: 112
RPelkey is starting off with a positive reputation.
Once you have fabed on up let me know what the diameter of the tube is and we can find the correct filter for what your doing.

Thanks
__________________
Product Specialist
K&N Engineering Inc. - www.knfilters.com
1455 Citrus St., Riverside, CA 92507
800.858.3333
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 07-25-2011, 11:44 AM
SideWinder4.9l's Avatar
SideWinder4.9l SideWinder4.9l is offline
Skipper of the KY Chapter
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Eastern Ky
Posts: 8,463
SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.
Wesley R. Cole
If you guys will kindly look into my pictures....I have a hybrid...It uses the tubes for an I6, then uses the tubes and Y from a MAF 302....And then a cone filter....

Now, I have removed a LOT of restricive bends and turns in my intake..

And guess what...Can't see a mile to the gallon better on my fuel bill....And as far as response...Well, its a I6....Not a Ferrari....

More or less, mine was done for gets an shiggles and more engine bay space.....

Period....

And I agree with Beechkid...The engine will ONLY suck in a specified amount, @ a certain RPM....Doesn't matter if you have a K &N, a Spectre, or what have filter....Or for that matter, multiple ones...

IMHO real performance comes from a SMOOTH airflow...which automatically includes removing the stock airbox....
__________________
Wesley-KY Chapter Leader
1992 F-150 Michelle-300I6 w/ 5 Speed
Hurst Short Throw Shifter & Not enough gear!

19.31 E/T @ 68.78mph in a 1/4 mile
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 07-27-2011, 10:45 AM
Freaksh0w's Avatar
Freaksh0w Freaksh0w is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: East Tennessee
Posts: 771
Freaksh0w is starting off with a positive reputation.
Did you notice any difference at all? How about the engine sound? Sound any throatier? I know me and you have engines on opposite sides of the spectrum. Besides the number of cylinders, you have that long 4'' stroke and I have a short 3'' stroke. But what differences did you notice from it?
__________________
1986 F-150 5.0 EFI XLT Lariat 4x4
NP435/NP208/9" 3.50
"Custom Exhaust" and leaf spring overloads
31x10.50 15" Nothing special, but it's a damn good truck.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 07-28-2011, 06:57 AM
SideWinder4.9l's Avatar
SideWinder4.9l SideWinder4.9l is offline
Skipper of the KY Chapter
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Eastern Ky
Posts: 8,463
SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.SideWinder4.9l has a spectacular reputation.
Wesley R. Cole
I can't tell any difference at all to tell you the truth....Noticed like.00023847 of a difference more on MPG...THats it though....

No difference in sound....Besides...Intakes aren't a source for sound anyways, exhaust side of the engine takes care of that...
__________________
Wesley-KY Chapter Leader
1992 F-150 Michelle-300I6 w/ 5 Speed
Hurst Short Throw Shifter & Not enough gear!

19.31 E/T @ 68.78mph in a 1/4 mile
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 07-29-2011, 09:43 AM
Freaksh0w's Avatar
Freaksh0w Freaksh0w is offline
Elder User
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: East Tennessee
Posts: 771
Freaksh0w is starting off with a positive reputation.
CAI's have always given a throatier sound, especially at WOT, to any engine I've seen or installed one on. It must just be a 300 thing?
__________________
1986 F-150 5.0 EFI XLT Lariat 4x4
NP435/NP208/9" 3.50
"Custom Exhaust" and leaf spring overloads
31x10.50 15" Nothing special, but it's a damn good truck.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 08-13-2011, 01:31 AM
lariat97's Avatar
lariat97 lariat97 is offline
Post Fiend
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: North west La
Posts: 6,696
lariat97 has a spectacular reputation.lariat97 has a spectacular reputation.lariat97 has a spectacular reputation.lariat97 has a spectacular reputation.lariat97 has a spectacular reputation.lariat97 has a spectacular reputation.lariat97 has a spectacular reputation.lariat97 has a spectacular reputation.lariat97 has a spectacular reputation.lariat97 has a spectacular reputation.lariat97 has a spectacular reputation.
I threw my last K&N CAI away. All it did was make noise & fall off . K&N sent new hoses that were to stop the problem but about a year later they were hard & falling off. I put the stock one back on. I ran the exact same times with it as the K&N. No power just noise. On a performance motor maybe. A stock motor no way. Save your money & buy mods that work.
__________________
Howard Never Politically Correct
04 F250 Screw 6.0 Good stereo SCT tuning,4inch turbo back exhaust,Atlas 40 FICM tuning
NRA Benefactor Life member
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 12-04-2012, 01:48 AM
EwagonJeff EwagonJeff is offline
Freshman User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 44
EwagonJeff is starting off with a positive reputation.
Not to rekindle the fire BUT replacing factory intakes WORKS. Of course YMMV and which ones work better then others for YOUR application you have to try them for yourself of see what really works for others with the same set ups.
Years ago I had a '94 Caprice 9C1 (poor mans Impy SS) I was on forums for those and it was pretty clear ditching the factory system showed real gains. Of course everyone had there own pet systems from many companies, including K&N. Some one also discovered with the space and layout we had under our hoods it was easy to fab up a home made CAI which performed every bit as good as the best aftermarket overpriced tubes. It was nicknamed "Home Depot CAI", basically a 3" PVC tube, 3" rubber coupler and a Dremel to open up the stock air box..
Real world 10-20 hp gains with that alone, no other mods. In those cars the intake silencer baffles were pretty restrictive. It seemed filter choice didn't make a difference.
My own testing, back to back at the track proved what others have seen is fact. Absolutely bone stock with 100k it turned consistent 14.95s with abest of .94, I want to say (it's been almost 10 years) at 93.x mph. Each run was as consistent as possible with 10 minutes between runs. After the 4th run I swapped in the Home Depot set up, felt the difference right away, consistent 14.73 with a best of .72 and (again IIRC) 95 and change mph. Thats not just my experience but also average of hundreds if not thousands. My runs were all on a fresh NAPA (Wix I believe) paper filter, other that have use gauze or foam filters when they changed the intake were no better.
I know K&Ns flow great but for two reasons I won't ever use one, I don't trust the particulate stopping abilities of a ultra thin strip of gauze you can almost read a paper through, AND the work and mess cleaning and re-oiling them (I feel he risk of oil fouling intake sensors is more minor then most think and the result of over oiling the gauze). I will also not use oiled foam filters due to the work and mess, though I believe their if much better then thin gauze and their dirt holding (before flow restriction).
Obviously the manufactures spend a lot of money on R&D but too, everything going on the vehicles at the factore are a compromise, "cant have too much flow or it will be too loud, cant be too quiet or you'll kill performance".
Again, didn't intend to restart the fire but I've been reading through a lot of past threads looking for real world info on what works with our trucks before I do anything (make my own or even a revised factory intake from a later year????)

I feel there has to be something better as that almost flat opening followed by a tight 90°, then through a narrow area about the size of a small hand ball (reminds me of those tiny openings at the end of the snorkels on an old carb air cleaner). In other words I'm looking to flip the air cleaner lid.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 12-04-2012, 12:37 PM
Beechkid Beechkid is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 3,198
Beechkid is a splendid one to beholdBeechkid is a splendid one to beholdBeechkid is a splendid one to beholdBeechkid is a splendid one to beholdBeechkid is a splendid one to beholdBeechkid is a splendid one to behold
Quote:
Originally Posted by RPelkey View Post
Let me give you the facts less the opinions from company that does this every day. Every intake system K&N produces is tested for performance increase on multiple vehicles, Each of these vehicle is 100% stock. This does not been there is nothing to gain from changing the exhaust or adding a programmer.

The truth of the matter is that when you reduce the restriction on the intake side and allow the engine to breath more efficiently the net result is horsepower. Your MPG increase will vary because there are many factors that contribute to the overall outcome such as the how far off the factory program is, tire press, driving conditions, driving style, ect. Ultimately your mileage increase will depend on how inefficient your engine is running to begin with.



The first steps to getting your engine more efficient is to increase the intake efficiency then most people decrease the back pressure in their exhaust by installing a cat back system. These are typical done first to because when you get more air in you want to get more air out, Then you may want to consider putting programmer on. The reason I say this is because you want to make sure your fuel delivery is matched to your air flow. If you do it the other way around it hard to say what you’re going to get.

Again with a K&N system you will get a performance increase on a stock vehicle, your mileage is hard to say since there isn't a repeatble test platform. But more often then not you will see an increase. I personally picked up 1mpg.

What year is your excursion?

If you have further questions feel free to contact my customer support team 1800-858-3333 or send me a PM.
So much for the facts-

1. K&N DOES NOT HONOR ITS WARRANTY- dating back to 1997 I have (and own) a then new 1997 Cougar Sport...within the 1st week I installed a new, purchased directly from K&N and replacement filter....it (as stated in Ford Warranty documents) contaminated and permamnently damaged the intake sensors as a result of oil...not once, but twice within a 45 day (approximate) duration...on the 3rd replacement, Ford engineers were ivolved and recommended the K&N filter be removed....it was, the same sensors are still in the vehicle today. I personally handed my documentation & reciept to K&N to their reps....we spoke for about 20 minutes, included serveral staff members, and long story short.....refused a refund (even though the filter was less than 90 days old)

2. Intake sensor damage from oil contamination is well known within the industry- While they have their purpose in off-road applications, Ford/GM/Dodge all have “watch-out” bulletins where the oil has contaminated intake sensors. - they even have a training video for the techs on this (flatratetech.com)

3. Basic math & physics- The 5.4 V8 (for example) if close to stock can only suck in a maximum of 480 cfm and a flat panel filter will flow 500 cfm, there is simply no way any CAI on a relatively stock engine can increase the air flow....it is simply a fact of physics



4. let's look at an ISO certified test center results.....

Testand Corporation conducted an ISO standards test on automotive air filters which can be viewed at this link: http://www.dieselbombers.com/chevrol...r-testing.html. All I can say is this explains in detail the reason for

(Arlen) SPICER wrote,

“Now that I am not doing the tests and my objectivity is not necessary, let me explain my motivation. The reason I started this crusade was that I was seeing people spend a lot of money on aftermarket filters based on the word of a salesperson or based on the misleading, incomplete or outright deceiving information printed on boxes and in sales literature. Gentlemen and Ladies, Marketing and the lure of profit is VERY POWERFUL!"

This says it all.....and if as a retailer, you don't like ti, I would suggest you change your "false, misleading statements"- as quoted & defined by FTC.
__________________
Member: Never trust a person over 40 who drives a Chevy club
Flatheads ain't so bad!
Certified backyard mechanic I & II
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 12-11-2012, 09:38 PM
builtftough4.6 builtftough4.6 is offline
Freshman User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 27
builtftough4.6 is starting off with a positive reputation.
so now you're taking an 'arlen spicers' word over so called salespeople trying to sell filters to the public .

man beech kid I just read one of your responses in the computer tuner forum ,and ya sound like a crabby old guy that dislikes modifications of any kind.

The vehicle is designed from the factory by engineers that know what they're doing right. Alot of after market tuners allow you to adjust the parameters so that it is possible for engine damage sure. If you do it right , there is no 5% . with a turbo diesel you're looking at 20% power / tq gains...

As far as KN , I remember when I had a 1995 mitsubishi eclipse GS-T with a KN drop-in filter, oiled. I sent it in because I was to lazy to buy oil and clean it, they sent me a new one ,pre oiled free of charge. Good 50K on that filter.

The 5.4L flows that little ? What about with after market exhaust or headers ? tuned ? supercharged???

and oil contamination?? well... dont over oil your filters kids. or get a dry one... never seen a problem with any MAF Ive ever seen with an oiled drop-in or CAI in my career.
Hundreds of thousands of miles worth..

after all those years of bein a beechcrab , try a quality cold air intake beech kid , you'll feel the make-believe horsepower and torque..promise
Reply With Quote
Old 12-11-2012, 09:38 PM
 
 
 
Reply

Go Back   Ford Truck Enthusiasts Forums > Misc. > Air Intakes, Air Filters & Ram Air

Tags
54l, 572556, air, back, cai, cold, custom, flow, ford, increasing, intake, kn, pressure, reduce, tune

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Cold Air Intake Nseal1996 1973 - 1979 F-100 & Larger F-Series Trucks 9 08-02-2014 08:33 PM
cold air intake trucker01 1980 - 1986 Bullnose F100, F150 & Larger F-Series Trucks 16 05-10-2014 09:23 PM
Who has a Cold Air in take to sell Canadianpowerstroke Manitoba / Saskatchewan Chapter 10 12-08-2013 05:25 PM
cold air intake mudlite 2004 - 2008 F150 24 09-20-2008 07:19 PM
Cold Air Intake nathan5603 Ranger & B-Series 22 12-07-2006 08:41 PM



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:40 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 AC1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Advertising - Terms of Use - Privacy Statement - Jobs
This forum is owned and operated by Internet Brands, Inc., a Delaware corporation. It is not authorized or endorsed by the Ford Motor Company and is not affiliated with the Ford Motor Company or its related companies in any way. Ford® is a registered trademark of the Ford Motor Company.

vbulletin Admin Backup