| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Errol
Alfa Sprint
Joined: 20 Mar 2003
Posts: 114
Location: Sydney, Australia
|
 Posted: Fri Jun 06, 2003 11:50 pm Post subject: Just got a K&N Panel Filter |
 |
|
Well i just put the new k&N panel filter in and just went for a drive. Maybe its my imagination but it seems like ive lost a bit of torque down low but im not certain on this. Maybe im just paranoid. Because it is a superior filter than the one i already in there and if anything its gonna go better.. but i notice the car breathes better...so it is probably going better and im just paranoid.. 
_________________
91 Alfa Romeo 33 16v * SOLD*
Lowered 45mm
15 x 7 inch advanti wheels
Falken 195 low profile
K&N Pod filter
Cannon 2inch exhaust from cat-back with 3inch tip. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Gary UK
Alfa Sprint
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
Posts: 218
Location: Darlington UK
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 08, 2003 8:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
You are probably right as the lessened restriction will effect the engine characteristics. If it's an ECU car then it may be learning the new set-up or a carbed car might need a tweak. But increased high rev HP will lessen low end torque, life's a compromise.
Basically your car has been running with a set amount of 'suck'(induction) restiction and a set amount of 'blow'(exhaust) restriction. You have reduced the 'suck' resistance so this will have changed the HP & Torque curve.
I have always prefered the carbed 8v to the 16v due to the extra torque as though not as powerful at high revs the engine in my opinion is more user friendly (and fantastcally - nay - unbelievably robust, if I was ever going the turbo route it would be on an 8v'er, you need that torque till the turbo kicks in). Plus I recon the 16v'er is a bit 'fragile', a last ditch attempt to meet emission/power targets with a head redesign on a 25 year old engine. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mixsynth
Alfa Sprint
Joined: 27 Mar 2003
Posts: 165
Location: Peterborough UK
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 13, 2003 11:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well you can always boost low down torque with a supercharger rather than a turbo, so having the 16V would give you more room to expand overall. That was my view when planning what to do with my car. I have 137bhp stock now, as opposed to 118bhp before. That's a much better 'starting point' from which to carry out further modifications.
_________________
Hugh B
'98 145 QV
'89 33 1.7 16V Veloce SportWagon (in hibernation)
16V conversion pics/videos - now updated with extra pictures and explanations |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gary UK
Alfa Sprint
Joined: 17 Mar 2003
Posts: 218
Location: Darlington UK
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2003 1:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I think the sturdy design of the 8v heads would take the extra power better and the engine would last longer. That's just my opinion |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mixsynth
Alfa Sprint
Joined: 27 Mar 2003
Posts: 165
Location: Peterborough UK
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 14, 2003 3:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I do admit, the 8v heads are built like tank turrets. If you want to make sure the engine doesn't blow up then go that route. Doesn't bother me if my 16v blows up, after all, I've still got a spare 8v here! 
_________________
Hugh B
'98 145 QV
'89 33 1.7 16V Veloce SportWagon (in hibernation)
16V conversion pics/videos - now updated with extra pictures and explanations |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
