flyerjmr33

OK-- Meet me in Memphis TN -- about halfway between Houston and where you live and we'll make the swap! You do have 18" wheels, don't you? How many miles on the tires?

Where are you located--- I might be interested in a trade of sorts---

AS soon as you explain why the vehicle manufacturers haven't switched over to them-- and the use of oil has nothing to do with it. Everyone wants better gas mileage. Most of all, the vehicle manufacturers. The computer sensors control the gas mileage on all the current crop of vehicles. They measure air flow and exhaust gas and adjust the fuel mixture accordingly. If wasting money on gas saving gadjets makes you feel good, go for it-- get enough of them and you'll have to drain the gas tank to keep it from overflowing.

I believe that I stated in a previous post that if anything would improve gas mileage, the OEM's would jump on it like a Duck on a June Bug. There's a certain percentage of vehicle owners who, when they spend a buck on something that is all smoke and mirrors, have to attempt to justify the buck! You can't confuse them with facts--their mind is made up!

Ford says to change the paper filter every 30,000 miles--so--- when you change yours at 10,000 miles, would you please send the discarded filters to me. I can then use them for another 20K and save the 6 bucks that a new one costs--- If you pay 25 bucks for a paper filter, I'd sure like to be your supplier! :yup:

:beatdeadhorse: So, other than making more noise and gaining a small HP increase at wide open throttle, there is no benefit. It wont hurt anything in the normal course of the engine's life, so if it makes you feel good, go for it! For me, I've found that spending an extra 50 bucks for something that I have to wash and oil, just isn't in my agenda. I gave up washing and oiling air filters when the first papaer filter came to market back in the late 50's--- It takes 2 minutes to change a paper filter and 30 minutes to wash and oil the K&N if you include the time it takes to find the oil and the bucket that you need for the cleaning solution. Then you have to dispose of the cleaning solution--- More bad news-- I'll stick with my paper filters, thank you very much! :beatdeadhorse:

Not to fear--- the belly on the horn will alert folks to your problem and they'll come and rescue you!

If HP is all you are after, go for it--- the rest is nothing but a pipe dream! Perhaps in a vehicle with a carburetor and no computer, the K&N will give a small increase in fuel economy, but if you think it can fool the computer, you are just dreaming. The first half of the service period for the K&N you suck in extra dirt--the second half when the extra dirt starts to restrict air flow, it might filter as well as paper-- If it could increase fuel economy, every OEM would be using it. CAFE is what makes sales when gas prices are what they are now.--- Perhaps you could give some scientific reason that the K&N increases fuel economy on a computer controlled engine. Even if it improved economy, the cost of it makes no sense till you drive way past 150,000 miles. The HP increase only happens at WOT. You rarely drive at full throttle, and if you do, your economy sorta disappears, doesn't it!

Add it up--- Change the paper filter every 30,000 miles. That's 5 changes for 150,000 miles at even $10 a filter-- false economy-- And, there is no change in fuel economy! You're simply dreaming if you think that an air filter will make the computer change anything. There once was a time when an air filter could affect economy, but now, with air flow sensors, the computer simply adjusts for air flow and has nothing to do with a restricted air filter. A restricted filter will affect top end performance, but not fuel economy. The only reason you would seem to get increased economy when you put in a K&N is because you are now more concious of how you are driving ---

Hopefully, most folks would be smart enough to investigate a sound such as the one made by wear indicator clips. If they don't, then they have to pay the consequences. As far as riveted brakes vs bonded--- the pads cool by heat transfer. The glue that bonds the pads is an insulator and slows the cooling process down. Riveted pads cool better-- but, they also will cause more damage id not replaced when worn--so, you have the old proverbial double edged sword-- The old drum type brakes were, and still are, much better when riveted lining is used just because of the better cooling with the riveted stuff. It's much less expensive to bond friction material to the metal than it is to rivet it. Cost is the major factor in the manufacture of auto parts. Makes no difference whether it's for OE or replacement. The glue used now is much better than it was years ago, so it is easier to bond the pads where they hold. I can remember several cases of glue failure where the friction material came loose. For me, even with the new adhesives, I still prefer riveted material when there is a choice! As for wear indicator design, there's good and bad, just as there is in everything made. All of it is good for your business! I spent 35 years in the business --28 of which was spent working for a manufacturer of brake and alignment equipment.

It's such a small contact on the rotor that makes the sound that it makes no difference in the rotor wear pattern--- However, everyone is entitled to waste their money in anyway they wish!

There are metal wear warning devices that will make a squealing sound when the pads wear down to where they should be replaced. They will make noise till you step on the brake pedal. When you hear that sound, it's time to replace the pads. The noise you hear will not damage the rotors because ti is just a small piece of metal that contacts the rotor. There is enough pad material left at this point to go several thousand miles more, but only if you can stand the squealing noise!

Perhaps rather than blame the seat, find the cause--- like a tire out of balance or out of round----

A little research came up with this--- you all might want to read! http://www.nsxprime.com/wiki/Brake_Lines

I have an '08 with 35,000 miles on it-- been bulletproof, so far!

Ya got one of those old bumper stickers that says,"Lucky Me, I'm leaving Lubbock!"-- They came out right after the ones that said, "Lucky me I live in Lubbock."

I lived in Lubbock for several years and am now in Houston--- I sure don't remember seeing anything less than 87 till I got into the New Mexico highlands--- but, when you get much above 3000 ft., the engine that required 87 at sea level only requires something less to produce a normal run without detonation. http://lubbockonline.com/stories/101809/col_506046607.shtml

If you want to burn some holes in your nun's tits, disable her knock sensors--- you can't hear all detonation-- and, I do believe that 87 octane is the recommended grade for the edge. As far as I know, and I have traveled this whole state, there is no grade of fuel below 87 octane available in Texas. Colorado, yes, and possibly some parts of New Mexico, but I've never seen anything lower than 87 in Texas!

Why waste your time and money? The results will be in favor of the lower octane fuel because the edge engine is designed to run on regular grade gasoline.

All you have done is shown the surface voltage of the battery--- More than likely this battery is sulfated and will not provide any amperage. Any slight load will show a low voltage. Once in a while, a slow charge will remove the sulfation, but more than likely, a new battery is in order here. Try a set of jumper cables from a decent battery and see if the Edge will start--- or take that battery to an Autozone store or a Walmart or Sam's Club for testing. They have testers that are capable of testing a discharged battery and will give you the actual capacity in MAH. Anything that comes up below 80% of capacity is a bad battery---

Your 15 mile trip turns into a 30 mile round trip and unless it's all hiway driving, it will cost you 2 gallons of fuel--- and-- your engine will run no different and gas mileage will remain very close to the same as with Ethanol--- But--- you decide and let is know here as to your findings!

More than likely, they finally did the rear alignment. If they said the front was in specs, the only other place to fix would have been the rear. Improper rear toe in could cause a pull. Anyway, whatever they did, you now have a decent driving vehicle. When something is wrong, a little bitchin' to the right person goes a long way!

See, you're never too old to learn new stuff! :shades:

There may be a problem, but before you panic, do a "Break-in Run"--- do 10 full throttle accelerations from a standing start to 50 MPH. Then do 10 more to 60MPH. Now, check your oil and top it off and see if that doesn't cure the problem. Seating rings in some engines can take some time and the above method will definitely help.. I bough an '08 with 16,000 miles on it and the rings had not yet seated fully till I did the "break-in run". Good luck and keep us posted.

Perhaps you can explain how that's possible with a computer controlled fuel system--- Just the increased gas mileage part---