flyerjmr33

I just looked at the ignition system parts breakdown and--- they do use a camshaft sensor on these engines. Looks like the change was made when they started the "coil on plug" system. As I said, I have been out of the loop for a while, but never too old to learn new tricks!

And your information source comes from where? Mine is here--- may not be used on current coil on plug engines, but until we get an answer from a Ford Tech, why don't your read this and then come back and re-state what you just posted. http://www.alternativeauto.com/waterbox/wb_archives/edis.html

I know for a fact that Ford, when they went to the EDIS with coil paks, fired on each revolution of the crank-- Now that they have "coil on plug" they may have added a cam sensor, but I don't think so--- Where are all the Ford Techs when you need one ?

It's a whole lot easier and helps the final burn of the mixture--- The extreme lean mixtures we have today take a long time to burn and continue the burn right through the exhaust stroke. The crankshaft sensor does feed the PCM and the PCM is programmed to let the spark happen on every stroke. . Chrysler also uses a camshaft sensor and that allows firing only on the compression stroke. I've been out of the loop for a few years, so one of the Ford techs will have to confirm as to whether or not Fords's system uses a camshaft sensor also. The vehicles with what is called "coil paks" fire each revoultion of the crankshaft. It's possible that Ford uses a cam sensor, but I haven't been able to find the info so far.

Your math is correct for an engine with an ignition distributor. I think that you might find that the ignition system in this case has no distributor and fires each plug at least once for every revoultion of the crankshaft. In other words, the crankshaft sensor triggers spark for both the compression and the exhaust stroke. The voltage required for the exhaust stroke firing is very low compared to the power stroke firing. .

Thanks, and I didn't even show you the private stuff he started laying on me!

"Computer" mileage--- what an accurate way to calculate --- too many things affect that. I would believe a fully controlled test that is done when the OAT and BP is the same for the K&N & the paper and done on a dynomometer. Past that, it's all a guestimate. Believe whatever you wish.

So, you do own stock in K&N--- I bought my Edge Ltd because it was quiet and smooth running--- now you want me to make it noisey? I don't think so--- I'll just stick to those inexpensive and easily replaced paper filters that remove finer particles of dirt than the K&N--- I don't race with the edge. If I wanted a race car, I'd have bought one. You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear---- at least not without spending a lot more money than if you had simply bought a silk purse in the beginning! The automotive aftermarket makes lots of profit on folks who are willing to spend a lot of money for a small return in performance! My 35 years in that business gave me a really good living and a great retirement income. Keep spending--- there are a few others like me who would love to do business with you! I don't hate K&N-- I just don't feel that I personally need one no matter what you say--- or think your results are.

Looks to me that with results that you state, if really true, the manufacturers would jump on K&N like a duck on a june bug--- They don't for obvious reasons--- Changing an air filter alone, will not increase fuel economy. The computer and the sensors control the fuel economy. What most folks see when they add something like a K&N filter is that their driving habits improve enough to get the increase. Once they see it, they believe that it's gonna just be there regardless of how they drive. So, dream on and spend the money as you wish. It's your bucks. If you really believe what you say, you should be selling the product for a profit.

There's an obvious lack of system knowledge here--- The computer controls the fuel/air mixture. It remains the same no matter how easy or hard it is for the engine to breathe. The only change with increased air availability would be a small power gain, and that happens only at full throttle. Most of us here are not running NASCAR and only require full throttle rarely--- Why waste money on unusable stuff? I personally find it better spent on creature comforts. Your "straw" theory doesn't compute here because the engine has no muscles that tire from lack of air. Even K & N doesn't make mileage increase claims in their advertising---

There was a thread about which fuse is controlled by the ignition--- You can do a search for it--- I think it was either fuse # 34 or 35--- The only way you are going to get a switched outlet is to wire one in.

Normally, I sell the vehicle before I've ever had a problem --- so, I'll just let someone else pay later--- I really don't want to drive a vehicle for 20 years to prove that one filter is better than another--- 20 years and the body and interior will be ready for the scrap heap BUT-------------- you'll have a helluva engine? Gimme a break---

I was trained to use a knife, fork, and spoon ---------------------------

From the test results, it looks like the Fram XG5 is the obvious choice---

At how many miles on the filter? Did it get wet?

Why not? What actual problems have you or any of you other "experts" had with a Fram Filter?

Use the special super glue remover--- available at your local hobby shop--- test an area not visible before going for the kill!

I rarely keep a car much past 100k--- The most I ever drove one was 137K--- and, if your hands get dirty changing an air filter then perhaps you should do as I do and wash that underhood area at least once a year. I do my cars twice a year and rarely ever get my hands dirty working under the hood. Your investment in air filters is all up front. Mine is on the installment plan--- I can't see the reasoning behind using a filter that allows more dirt to enter the engine than a stock paper filter, but as I said, whatever floats your boat!

Yeah, but if that air bag deployed, -----big time ouchhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! :rip:

And, how will a K&N save you 5 minutes per oil change?

Whatever floats your boat--- but when it comes to taking care of your car, it could be an obscession instead of a hobby when you go for every gadjet that is advertized to do a minute betterment of performance. I've done that in the past with a couple of vehicles and soon learned that the gain wasn't worth the pain!

Add it up--- about 60 bucks for a K&N and a wash kit---- for me, 60 bucks will buy about 8-10 paper filters that will last 30,000 miles each or 60 bucks of filters will take me at least 240,000 miles. What do I gain with K&N other than getting my hands all dirty and oily? No increase in gas mileage-- they don't make any mileage claims--- and if it breathes more air, it has to pass more dirt--- No thanks--I'll stick with paper! Way back in the oil bath air filter days, I did all the cleaning of air filters I ever wanted to, thank you very much! I only drive about 12K/yr so that 240K miles would take me 20 years to do--- In all fairness to K&N, I did use one of their filters on my Honda Helix Scooter--- It made sense there because of the Cost of Honda paper filters even though it was a PITA to clean!

OK

Here's a solution--- put byour wife'scar up on blocks--- send me your wheels-- I'll swap them out and send you mine. I'm sure your wife won't mind not having a car for a week or so----