I'm looking to replace the airbox with individual air filters. Any one running a K&N lunchbox, or individuals? I've heard that they lead to engine wear as they are dirty. Any other options besides K&N?
Thanks
I run K&N pods and they do get dirty but that's what they are suppose to do. The nice thing with K&N is that you can spray it down with water, dry and re-oil it. I have a used set for sale if your interested.
I have also heard that they are dirty, but do those people mean that it gets dirty on the out side or lets alot of sediments into the engine?
Also would anyone know what size the breather hose is for the crank case?
Check this out:
http://home.roadrunner.com/~jbplock/ISO5011/SPICER.htm
Granted, they are testing filters for a diesel truck, but K&N elements are basically the same for motorcycles.......
this is what i run , the filter on the left is a gs oem filter and the one on the right is a suzuki GSX 1400 filter ,if it will look after a 106 HP four it will certanly be large enough for a 500 and the beauty is it will fit straight into a standard airbox absolutly no modifications required.I like the standard airbox because it supports the carburettors best .Also i did vacuem tests on the airbox and found no vacuem issues with the standadr filter which proved the factory got it right.I only tried the GSX1400 filter because i was changing one.(http://i1186.photobucket.com/albums/z380/twinrat/IMG_0112.jpg)
AC Delco it is then!
Now I'm thinking twice about the K&N filter in my truck...
I could have told you that... It makes sense. A filter that captures more dirt is going to have more resistance to airflow, and a filter that captures less will have less resistance. Less resistance ~ better performance.
Quote from: comradeiggy on December 01, 2011, 01:48:16 AM
I could have told you that... It makes sense. A filter that captures more dirt is going to have more resistance to airflow, and a filter that captures less will have less resistance. Less resistance ~ better performance.
Right, like most things, there is a trade off.....you can't have it both ways. Here it is flow vs filtering.
But this begs the question; Which is more important? (Or does it even matter?)
Cookie
While we are on the subject- does anyone else find the airbox to be a total pain in the ass? I cannot seem to wiggle it back into place for the life of me. I have to unbolt the petcock to even get close.
The stock filter fitting is most of the reason why I got a lunchbox. I believe if you attach it to the carbs first, and then put the carbs on it will work better.
Quote from: seamax on November 30, 2011, 01:43:08 PM
I run K&N pods and they do get dirty but that's what they are suppose to do. The nice thing with K&N is that you can spray it down with water, dry and re-oil it. I have a used set for sale if your interested.
Do you have a convenient web reference for how to do this, how often to do this, and where to get the "re-oil" supplies cheaply?
Quote from: twocool on December 01, 2011, 06:32:25 AM
Quote from: comradeiggy on December 01, 2011, 01:48:16 AM
I could have told you that... It makes sense. A filter that captures more dirt is going to have more resistance to airflow, and a filter that captures less will have less resistance. Less resistance ~ better performance.
Right, like most things, there is a trade off.....you can't have it both ways. Here it is flow vs filtering.
Correction: you cant have it both ways, IF all you change is the filter material.
But, if you also change the aperture of the filtering mechanism, then you can have same(or greater) airflow, with increased filtering quality as well.
Which is why some people do that, I think.
Quote from: Phil B on December 01, 2011, 11:43:57 AM
Quote from: twocool on December 01, 2011, 06:32:25 AM
Quote from: comradeiggy on December 01, 2011, 01:48:16 AM
I could have told you that... It makes sense. A filter that captures more dirt is going to have more resistance to airflow, and a filter that captures less will have less resistance. Less resistance ~ better performance.
Right, like most things, there is a trade off.....you can't have it both ways. Here it is flow vs filtering.
Correction: you cant have it both ways, IF all you change is the filter material.
But, if you also change the aperture of the filtering mechanism, then you can have same(or greater) airflow, with increased filtering quality as well.
Which is why some people do that, I think.
???? ya lost me there.....
Cookie
To each his own opinion. I've always used K&N. I have them in my cars and bikes. They capture lots of dirt/debri and are easy to clean and reuse. If you want less or no resistance then get velocity stacks. :thumb:
But I think it also depends on the environment you ride in. My riding is mostly commute in non traffic, no highway or dirt roads. I clean and re-oil my filter twice a year. Which probably isn't necessary. It's mainly a hose spray from inside out and outside of the pods, if really dirty use the filter cleaner then hose, let dry and re-oil.
Here's what I use to clean my K&N pods also made by K&N.
http://www.motorcycle-superstore.com/1/4/72/7412/ITEM/K-N-Filter-Service-Kit.aspx?SiteID=CSE_Gbase_7412&WT.mc_ID=80003&zmam=88421133&zmas=1&zmac=45&zmap=7412
Quote from: twocool on December 01, 2011, 12:16:12 PM
Quote from: Phil B on December 01, 2011, 11:43:57 AM
Correction: you cant have it both ways, IF all you change is the filter material.
But, if you also change the aperture of the filtering mechanism, then you can have same(or greater) airflow, with increased filtering quality as well.
Which is why some people do that, I think.
???? ya lost me there.....
Picture an unrestricted, 1 inch diameter pipe. making up numbers, lets say it normally passes 5cfm worth of air.
Add in a regular filter, it has a penalty of 20% airflow, so 4cfm.
Add in a "high quality" filter, lets say that has a penalty of 40% airflow, so 3cfm.
BUT. change out the 1inch pipe, to 2inch diameter pipe. that can pass apprxomately 4 times the amount of air.
so, 20cfm.
A regular filter would still be able to pass 16cfm, and a high quality one, 12 cfm.
So, if you increase filtering quality, AND increase aperture of filter, you can "have it both ways".
cleaner air, *and* greater airflow.
You dont even have to replace the entire air intake system; just the bit around the filter.
(it will then be limited to the air flow rate of the original pipes without a filter, though)
Quote from: Phil B on December 01, 2011, 03:45:00 PM
Quote from: twocool on December 01, 2011, 12:16:12 PM
Quote from: Phil B on December 01, 2011, 11:43:57 AM
Correction: you cant have it both ways, IF all you change is the filter material.
But, if you also change the aperture of the filtering mechanism, then you can have same(or greater) airflow, with increased filtering quality as well.
Which is why some people do that, I think.
???? ya lost me there.....
Picture an unrestricted, 1 inch diameter pipe. making up numbers, lets say it normally passes 5cfm worth of air.
Add in a regular filter, it has a penalty of 20% airflow, so 4cfm.
Add in a "high quality" filter, lets say that has a penalty of 40% airflow, so 3cfm.
BUT. change out the 1inch pipe, to 2inch diameter pipe. that can pass apprxomately 4 times the amount of air.
so, 20cfm.
A regular filter would still be able to pass 16cfm, and a high quality one, 12 cfm.
So, if you increase filtering quality, AND increase aperture of filter, you can "have it both ways".
cleaner air, *and* greater airflow.
You dont even have to replace the entire air intake system; just the bit around the filter.
(it will then be limited to the air flow rate of the original pipes without a filter, though)
I am not trying to be argumentitive..but I am thick headed and don't understand...
Isn't it all limited by the "throat" of the carburetor? Or is it the diameter of the intake manifold? Or is it how far the intake valve opens???
I mean you can have a six inch diameter pipe, but when it necks down to 1 "...the restriction is due to the 1".
I could see using a larger filter, with more surface area, therefore more tiny pores for the air to pass through.
But now think of this...what limits the airflow into the engine? The throttle!!! I mean the whole reason for a throttle is to limit air, thus limiting power.
The only time the air filter is restricting air, is when at wide open throttle.....
Cookie
Quote from: seamax on December 01, 2011, 12:32:35 PM
To each his own opinion. I've always used K&N. I have them in my cars and bikes. They capture lots of dirt/debri and are easy to clean and reuse. If you want less or no resistance then get velocity stacks. :thumb:
But I think it also depends on the environment you ride in. My riding is mostly commute in non traffic, no highway or dirt roads. I clean and re-oil my filter twice a year. Which probably isn't necessary. It's mainly a hose spray from inside out and outside of the pods, if really dirty use the filter cleaner then hose, let dry and re-oil.
Here's what I use to clean my K&N pods also made by K&N.
http://www.motorcycle-superstore.com/1/4/72/7412/ITEM/K-N-Filter-Service-Kit.aspx?SiteID=CSE_Gbase_7412&WT.mc_ID=80003&zmam=88421133&zmas=1&zmac=45&zmap=7412
I have used K&N in some cars, and also in my airplanes. The big advantage is the ability to clean and reuse. The "power" gained by less restriction is meaningless IMHO. In ariplanes the air up there is pretty clean.....you're not sucking up road dirt all the time. Also on airplanes we have carburetor heat, to prevent ice forming in carb and manifold when flying thru moist air....when the carb heat is turned "on" the air comes in directly, bypassing the filter all together.
Cookie
Quote from: twocool on December 01, 2011, 05:10:07 PM
I am not trying to be argumentitive..but I am thick headed and don't understand...
Isn't it all limited by the "throat" of the carburetor?
...
okayokay that too :p
my post was only in response to the one about
(you can choose to have lots of air and minimal filtering, or have a super-clean filter and less air)
My point only being that if you increase the filter factor of the air filter, but also increase the amount of surface area for the filter at the same time, then you dont get hit with the "less air" factor.
Quote from: twocool on December 01, 2011, 05:10:07 PM
Quote from: Phil B on December 01, 2011, 03:45:00 PM
Quote from: twocool on December 01, 2011, 12:16:12 PM
Quote from: Phil B on December 01, 2011, 11:43:57 AM
Correction: you cant have it both ways, IF all you change is the filter material.
But, if you also change the aperture of the filtering mechanism, then you can have same(or greater) airflow, with increased filtering quality as well.
Which is why some people do that, I think.
???? ya lost me there.....
:thumb: Your are correct sir. I didn't understand the piping size and all that mumbo jumbo. The only way to get more air flow in is to get a larger carb or go force induction.
Picture an unrestricted, 1 inch diameter pipe. making up numbers, lets say it normally passes 5cfm worth of air.
Add in a regular filter, it has a penalty of 20% airflow, so 4cfm.
Add in a "high quality" filter, lets say that has a penalty of 40% airflow, so 3cfm.
BUT. change out the 1inch pipe, to 2inch diameter pipe. that can pass apprxomately 4 times the amount of air.
so, 20cfm.
A regular filter would still be able to pass 16cfm, and a high quality one, 12 cfm.
So, if you increase filtering quality, AND increase aperture of filter, you can "have it both ways".
cleaner air, *and* greater airflow.
You dont even have to replace the entire air intake system; just the bit around the filter.
(it will then be limited to the air flow rate of the original pipes without a filter, though)
I am not trying to be argumentitive..but I am thick headed and don't understand...
Isn't it all limited by the "throat" of the carburetor? Or is it the diameter of the intake manifold? Or is it how far the intake valve opens???
I mean you can have a six inch diameter pipe, but when it necks down to 1 "...the restriction is due to the 1".
I could see using a larger filter, with more surface area, therefore more tiny pores for the air to pass through.
But now think of this...what limits the airflow into the engine? The throttle!!! I mean the whole reason for a throttle is to limit air, thus limiting power.
The only time the air filter is restricting air, is when at wide open throttle.....
Cookie
Quote from: twocool on December 01, 2011, 05:10:07 PM
But now think of this...what limits the airflow into the engine? The throttle!!! I mean the whole reason for a throttle is to limit air, thus limiting power.
The only time the air filter is restricting air, is when at wide open throttle.....
Cookie
Side note: I thought the throttle had something to do with the amount of fuel put in, as well? :)
Quote from: twinrat on December 01, 2011, 12:14:48 AM
this is what i run , the filter on the left is a gs oem filter and the one on the right is a suzuki GSX 1400 filter ,if it will look after a 106 HP four it will certanly be large enough for a 500 and the beauty is it will fit straight into a standard airbox absolutly no modifications required.I like the standard airbox because it supports the carburettors best .Also i did vacuem tests on the airbox and found no vacuem issues with the standadr filter which proved the factory got it right.I only tried the GSX1400 filter because i was changing one.(http://i1186.photobucket.com/albums/z380/twinrat/IMG_0112.jpg)
Twinrat, do you notice a difference in performance with this filter? Are you running any leaner? If so, then I like this solution...per Phil B, it should allow more air to flow without sacrificing air quality.
definitly an improvement and in answer to your Q YES leaner ,this is what started me on my quest to get this bike performing as it should . i will post on here all the mods i have done ,timing sparkplugs ,vacuem tanks exhaust mods and carburation settings once ive done the mixture and timing again now i have modded the original exhaust .the engine wil rev cleanly to 10500 rpm but is still lean by the spark plugs
Great info. I added a mention of it to
http://wiki.gstwins.com/index.php?n=Upgrades.AirFilter
Any comparison info related to the others on that page would be appreciated.
That's cool. I already have a pair of 127.5 mains that I could swap out my 125's for. I might have to try this sometime next year.
Quote from: twinrat on December 03, 2011, 12:26:18 AM
.... i will post on here all the mods i have done ,timing sparkplugs ,vacuem tanks exhaust mods and carburation settings once ive done the mixture and timing again now i have modded the original exhaust
Nuts. side comment: would have been nice to have a stock exhaust comparison
will try and find some one locally to do an acceleration test against .Any one out there in NAPIER HASTINGS WAIPUKARU who has a standard gs500 and willing to do an acceleration test , or maybe i should post and others who have them can compare times. i have standard gearing.
TwinRat,
Do you have a part number for that filter GSX1400 or should I ask for a filter that fits a GSX1400??? :mad:
Quote from: twinrat on December 04, 2011, 12:13:21 AM
will try and find some one locally to do an acceleration test against .Any one out there in NAPIER HASTINGS WAIPUKARU who has a standard gs500 and willing to do an acceleration test , or maybe i should post and others who have them can compare times. i have standard gearing.
Your bike VS another bike is not fair test........too many other variables.....
Fair test is your bike against your bike....with and without mods....on same day...
Better yet...just enjoy...
Cookie
ghostrider
the number i have on a label is 13780-42F01 but just check that its NOT the standard gs 500 number.
TWOCOOL
i know you mean well by wanting a comparison of how the bike was and how it is now, but the mods without a
dyno means you have to work through the tuning variables one at a time and i started on this project before i found this great forum.
Quote from: twinrat on December 05, 2011, 12:01:28 AM
ghostrider
the number i have on a label is 13780-42F01 but just check that its NOT the standard gs 500 number.
TWOCOOL
i know you mean well by wanting a comparison of how the bike was and how it is now, but the mods without a
dyno means you have to work through the tuning variables one at a time and i started on this project before i found this great forum.
Yes, I understand....so make your mods...and enjoy...making mods is something that some like do do....you don't really need any specific data to justify....just mod for the fun of it!
Cookie
Just a bit of info here - using a larger air filter of any given material will not increase airflow, all other things being equal. To increase flow it has to have less resistance. What it will do, though, is that since it has a larger surface area, it will get less clogged up, so over time it will provide less resistance as it gets older than a smaller filter.
Quote from: comradeiggy on December 06, 2011, 10:55:13 AM
Just a bit of info here - using a larger air filter of any given material will not increase airflow, all other things being equal. To increase flow it has to have less resistance. What it will do, though, is that since it has a larger surface area, it will get less clogged up ...
"larger surface area" *does* usually mean "less resistance", all other things being equal.
that's why high efficiency air filters have more ripples than low efficiency ones. It gives them more surface area than a "flat" piece of material.
high efficiency air filters usually have a slower flow-through rate. If they had the same surface area, they would be allowing less air flow than the same sized low efficiency filter.
(note that "efficiency" in this context means "amount of contaminates filtered out")
When a material X allows air through at the rate of "y cubic foot per minute", that is based on an implied "*per square inch*" or some other commonly understood standard surface area of material.
Actual rate of flow through the filter (if the air ductwork isnt holding things up), can be properly calculated by
the flow rate of the filter material, x surface area of filter actually available for air to flow through.
Quote from: Phil B on December 08, 2011, 12:41:53 PM
Quote from: comradeiggy on December 06, 2011, 10:55:13 AM
Just a bit of info here - using a larger air filter of any given material will not increase airflow, all other things being equal. To increase flow it has to have less resistance. What it will do, though, is that since it has a larger surface area, it will get less clogged up ...
"larger surface area" *does* usually mean "less resistance", all other things being equal.
that's why high efficiency air filters have more ripples than low efficiency ones. It gives them more surface area than a "flat" piece of material.
high efficiency air filters usually have a slower flow-through rate. If they had the same surface area, they would be allowing less air flow than the same sized low efficiency filter.
(note that "efficiency" in this context means "amount of contaminates filtered out")
When a material X allows air through at the rate of "y cubic foot per minute", that is based on an implied "*per square inch*" or some other commonly understood standard surface area of material.
Actual rate of flow through the filter (if the air ductwork isnt holding things up), can be properly calculated by
the flow rate of the filter material, x surface area of filter actually available for air to flow through.
Yes....
Another way to look at it:
If you had a particular filter, which would pass say, 100 Cubic feet of air per minute.......then TWO of those filters could pass 200 CF/m! So could one filter which is twice a large........
But.....If you engine is pumping 100 CF/m......using a twice as big filter..will still only pass 100 CF/m...
Cookie