Tuning 500 1.2 air filter
- Thread starter ru500
- Start date
Currently reading:
Tuning 500 1.2 air filter
I fitted one to my old Dodge Neon. I didn't detect any noticeable difference to the engine performance whatsoever. The only advantage as far as I was concerned, was that as I intended keeping the car for years, then buying the filter would eventually save me money over buying paper filters. One has to remember, that you should inspect it at least yearly (or sooner depending on driving conditions/sandy/dusty environments etc) and if it is dirty, clean and reoil it using the K&N filter service kit. The kit costs about 10 quid depending on where bought. Occasionally, kits pop up on the famous auction very cheap. Cleaning and reoiling using the proper kit is very easy, you just have to remember to not over oil the filter. Helps too when you've done the job, to put a K&N sticker on the air filter box indicating that the standard filter has been replaced. This should stop mechanics removing the K&N air filter and throwing it away.
I personally wouldn't fit a K&N filter whilst my car was still in warranty, that is just a personal issue for me. Not to say though that I wouldn't once it is out of warranty. Until then, I'll just replace with either a genuine Fiat or Ford KA filter. Having just checked our filter after its first year on the road, it was exceptionally clean. I might replace it though next year before its second service.
- Joined
- May 15, 2011
- Messages
- 3,769
- Points
- 568
A K&N or the like is a re-usable filter so in essence it is good for the environment. It would not be deemed to be a performance improvement and it does not have the impact on your insurance as fitting an induction kit has. It can give 1-2 bhp but unsure if it wil give that on a 1.2.
Abarth have a BMC filter (cotton gauze - similar to the K&N) on their esseesse and a lot of A500 owners fit them. K&N claim that a K&N wouldn't damage your MAF sensor - but as Frupi has already stated - you need to ensure that it's not over oiled when it comes to servicing them. A 're-charge' kit cost me €17 last day in Halfords with a trade card. K&N have a strong legal team but if I was sending my car in for a service I would still take it out.
On a 500 1.4 I did fit an ITG foam filter (this was expensive at €50+) and did not really notice any difference in performance. On a recent cotton gauze filter change on a different 'Fiat' I did notice the car was more responsive with a slight induction sound.
On the attached picture (excuse the quality) you can just about make out that the replacement K&N which is only a third of the thickness of the Paper one which is visually dirty at 5K miles - this affects performance.
I would say that Paper filters the best, whilst Tri-foam at 6K is performing better than paper and Cotton gauze performs the best but does not filter as well as the other 2.
Would suggest that if you're going to change the filter to also change the plugs to a new NGK set for a tenner if they have done over 12K. If you really wanted to splash out you could risk fitting a set of Denso VX Iridium plugs but they are expensive.
Attachments
Last edited:
Unless I'm missing something fundamental here, on a NA engine with a throttle plate & MAP sensor, whatever you fit as an air filter will have absolutely no effect whatever on the engine's performance or economy except when it's running at full throttle.
A less restrictive filter may allow a slightly less open butterfly for a given manifold pressure, but it's the MP which determines how much air goes through the engine - and if the lambda sensors are doing their job, the ecu will inject the correct amount of fuel irrespective of the relative position of the throttle plate.
Or am I indeed missing something?
A less restrictive filter may allow a slightly less open butterfly for a given manifold pressure, but it's the MP which determines how much air goes through the engine - and if the lambda sensors are doing their job, the ecu will inject the correct amount of fuel irrespective of the relative position of the throttle plate.
Or am I indeed missing something?
Last edited:
That's pretty much how I see it. I've fitted genuine filters up until now and from now on I'll buy something reputable like a Bosch filter, but I'll stick to paper filters. For something a bit sportier you might get some performance gain, but with a 1.2 you'll just have a lighter wallet.
At full throttle you should see a slight performance gain as a less restrictive filter will increase the available MP. Of course, engine makers can increase the MP a lot more by fitting a turbo.
- Joined
- May 15, 2011
- Messages
- 3,769
- Points
- 568
I did a lot of messing around with replacement filters on a 1.4 (never on a 1.2) hacking up a oversized K&N air filter, then got a 'proper' induction kit from Pipercross (custom made) and finally a ITG foam filter. The nature of the 1.4 and the gear ratios meant that you were constantly exploring the rev band and in Sport mode it was a bit eager beaver. Noticed little or no change on the ITG Foam but with the CAI it definitely sung a lot better up near the red line. Plus it seemed to perform a bit better on fuel possibly getting more air but this is contradicted by inputs that 500 1.4 is getting as much air as it needs. There was a thread comparing the kit verus a replacement panel but the results were inconclusive.
On the last 'experiment' with the K&N it was a T-jet (turbo charged) it was discovered by a dutch tuning company that the airbox was holding the power back on the multi-air model in the MiTo at 163bhp compared with the bigger box on the Giulietta at 170bhp.
With a NA the recommended route for any performance gain on the smaller 500 is still a replacement panel.
http://www.torquecars.com/fiat/500-tuning.php
I often wondered if the Angel Tuning CAI at the claimed 7bhp was ever proven on a RR. I suppose at the end of the day it's probably 'all in the mind' (plus you're doing your bit for the environment) but at least it's better than a 'home made' K&N setup which all by accounts are disasterous.
Last edited:
I think if your filter is looking particularly dirty, then it will probably be worth changing it. Engine will take in cleaner air and all that and mpg will probably go up a little. I checked our POP before it went in for its service and the filter was still very clean looking after 12 months, but then the car had only done just over 4000 miles from new when it went in. The pollen filter on the other hand was absolutely bogging and I was glad to change it despite cutting my hands to pieces trying to get the thing out.
As for whether a K&N filter will give you a gain in mpg, well that is something you would have to monitor very carefully. I don't think I saw an increase in mpg when my Neon was on the road and that has one fitted.
Perhaps. It depends entirely on how dirty it is.
The benefit in changing it is to minimise the possibility of foreign object ingestion - cheap insurance if you're running in dusty conditions. As I posted earlier, a dirty filter will have absolutely no effect on performance or economy except when the engine is running at full throttle.
I'd doubt you'd see any difference, but if you did, it'd be a slight reduction, not an increase - less filter resistance means more air through the engine (but only when the throttle is fully open) & the ecu will inject additional fuel to keep the mixture correct. You might see a couple more bhp, but you'd likely need a dyno to notice it.
It seems intuitive to think that a dirty air filter is 'bad' because it restricts air flow to the engine. What isn't so obvious is that a partially open throttle is exactly the same as a very dirty air filter - the engine doesn't care how you restrict the air; the end result is the same.
Last edited:
- Joined
- May 15, 2011
- Messages
- 3,769
- Points
- 568
You would have a better chance of improving you mpg with newer spark plugs. Check out a thread on spark plugs for a 1.2.
In the 'spirit' of keeping it concise and short I thought this was an interesting report
...http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/pdfs/Air_Filter_Effects_02_26_2009.pdf
A dirty air filter impacts acceleration and responsiveness but can't be sure if that is the case on a 1.2. In the 'old days' with carbs it did affect mpg but has little or no effect on modern day cars.
This is a bit of advertising but it is very recent & I thought it was interesting but of no relevance for a 1.2. Note the panel test report (8th page). It also covered mesh filters (Halfords have them). My comments on foam previously was in reference to panel filters which in the case of the ITG tri-foam have been proven to filter better than paper. In 'race' cars foam is chosen over cotton gauze. The mesh IMHO would be a risky choice.
http://www.fastcar.co.uk/2012/05/04/performance-car-air-filter-test/
yes, but......You would have a better chance of improving you mpg with newer spark plugs. Check out a thread on spark plugs for a 1.2.
In the 'spirit' of keeping it concise and short I thought this was an interesting report
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/pdfs/Air_Filter_Effects_02_26_2009.pdf
A dirty air filter impacts acceleration and responsiveness but can't be sure if that is the case on a 1.2. In the 'old days' with carbs it did affect mpg but has little or no effect on modern day cars.
This is a bit of advertising but it is very recent & I thought it was interesting but of no relevance for a 1.2. Note the panel test report (8th page). It also covered mesh filters (Halfords have them). My comments on foam previously was in reference to panel filters which in the case of the ITG tri-foam have been proven to filter better than paper. In 'race' cars foam is chosen over cotton gauze. The mesh IMHO would be a risky choice.
http://www.fastcar.co.uk/2012/05/04/performance-car-air-filter-test/
So for the 99% of 500's which will be standard, the standard airbox and filter will be just fine.
IMHO there is far too much to the performance of an engine than more air coming in meaning more fuel can be pumped in which means more power (though of course this is kind of true).
but the thread is asking about tuning
simply the answer is yes an induction kit will help the thottle response and full throttle breathing, also improve induction noise
BMC are a good brand, K&N questionable
- Joined
- May 15, 2011
- Messages
- 3,769
- Points
- 568
I looked at buying a BMC for the T-jet but with P&P it was working out a lot more expensive than the K&N with free P&P for me. So I spend the £40. Thought it was good quality but only realised that with 'cleaning' it - it loses 3-4% of its material -> so less filtering.
On a previous thread on air filters realised that there is a long service interval so a lot of 'head room' has been provided so that there will always be enough air.
Did get a 1.2 ITG filter from Camskill by mistake & it was around the £30 mark. Filter was as well made as the 1.4 that I ordered. I would be very confident that it would filter as well if not better than a paper filter and if it didn't give the 'performance' benefit that someone was after then at least it would be good on protecting the engine as demonstrated below. I would guess that all the dislikes came from K&N and have assumed that the Trueflow product is equivalent to the ITG which is highly regarded & possibly better. It's a pity it doesn't make an induction noise. It's also worth noting that cleaning a foam based filter involves letting it dry overnight while the cotton gauze is ready to go in around 30 minutes.
Last edited:
you misunderstood
K&N replacement elements are fine, its their induction kits that are, shall we say, a bit Heath Robinson...
- Joined
- May 15, 2011
- Messages
- 3,769
- Points
- 568
That's OK. I would always steer clear of their K&N induction kits. From that recent comparison test they came out the worst on test and most of the ones that I've seen installed have the filter cone stuck in the exhaust manifold.
That's OK. I would always steer clear of their K&N induction kits. From that recent comparison test they came out the worst on test and most of the ones that I've seen installed have the filter cone stuck in the exhaust manifold.
10 years ago i bought a 57i kit for my Cinq Sporting
It was so poorly 'designed' that i complained to K&N and went to their 'development workshop' at Warrington with the car to get it 'improved'
In the 'spirit' of keeping it concise and short I thought this was an interesting report
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/pdfs/Air_Filter_Effects_02_26_2009.pdf
A dirty air filter impacts acceleration and responsiveness but can't be sure if that is the case on a 1.2. In the 'old days' with carbs it did affect mpg but has little or no effect on modern day cars.
A very interesting report - well done for finding it
.I noticed almost all their testing was done with a wide open throttle (WOT) - not surprising since this is when you're going to notice the difference with a restrictive air filter.
Carburetted cars generally only performed at their optimum when the ambient air pressure was the same as when the car was set up - if the barometer changed, or you drove the car up a mountain, they went 'off tune'. Early cars with mechanical fuel injection had the same problems - I recall a number of Triumph Stag owners taking their pride & joy to the Alps & the cars being essentially undriveable above about 3000ft.
But on a modern car, as you quite rightly say, changing the spark plugs will likely have a far greater effect on economy than changing the air filter.
- Joined
- May 15, 2011
- Messages
- 3,769
- Points
- 568
A very interesting report - well done for finding it
Thanks for the feedback - it took a while to find that one.
In an attempt to summarise it for the OP on a 1.2 & IMHO...
Paper - simple & cheap & probably still the best option
K&N - bit of induction sound, no performance gain, might filter less
BMC - don't know if it exists for a 1.2. Used on the A500 SS. equiv. to K&N
ITG - no performance gain but possibly the best filter
ITG CAI - Claimed to have a performance gain but have seen no RR to back it up. (click here)
Knew a guy in my 'hey day' who had more money than sense and he owned a Triumph Stag but rarely got to drive more than 'a few miles' before it broke down. It made it into the top 20 biggest car fails of all time.
Sadly, the sleek and beautiful styling of the British engineered Stag was all for naught. The car represents a grand bait-and-switch, for after consumers paid the requisite thousands of dollars to roll out of Triumph’s lot in a sexy little convertible, they are soon contending with a sheer nightmare of an engine that failed in a multitude of horrible ways, all of them rendering the car a nice lawn ornament. The pistons shot through the engine block, the aluminum heads warped and twisted, the oil burned bone dry, the timing belts snapped, the bearings would seize and the water pump would malfunction. About the only thing the Stag did reliably was break down.
