Ford Mustang Ecoboost Forum banner

1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
6,149 Posts
I did it initially, by itself it didn't seem to make any "seat of the pants" feel difference.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,282 Posts
I Installed one on my 2017.
Here in Australia, we pay around AUD$100 for the filter, so it is a low cost upgrade and reasonable bang for your buck.

After doing a lot of research on CAI's for the Mustang, there seems to be a general consensus amongst Ecoboost owners, that Ford got it fairly right with the stock airbox in these cars.

Many Mustang owners have found that by just replacing the restrictive paper filter with a K&N oiled filter, added better throttle response and slightly better fuel economy again.

Some have found that you can actually lose horsepower with some of the aftermarket CAI's, which is a testament to the excellent airbox Ford put in these mustangs.

I didn't do this mod for any gains in horsepower, which I know are negligible unless you get a special CAI that requires a tune.

I have always been happy with K&N filters on my previous cars and never had any issues with them, including the "urban myth" of them creating issues with MAF sensors, which is utter and complete nonsense from uninformed backyard mechanics.

If they did, Ford would not offer them as part of their official Ford Performance tune package on the Mustangs.

The K&N filter, is part of the supplied hardware package sold and endorsed by Ford in the USA with warranty.



Here is the K&N compared to the stock paper filter.
The filter comes pre-oiled, so no need to oil it on its first use.



You can see the difference in thickness of the stock paper filter compared to the less restrictive cotton gauze K&N.



After replacing the filter, and driving it around for awhile to allow the MAF sensor to adjust for any airflow differences,
I could definitely feel the better throttle response, especially on take off, and my fuel economy has certainly improved slightly.



The filter comes with the necessary stickers, to remind mechanics not to change your filter when you take it for scheduled services.

 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
3,237 Posts
Our cars don't use MAF, but are MAP calibrated.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,282 Posts
Sorry I mean't MAP sensor. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,945 Posts
If they did, Ford would not offer them as part of their official Ford Performance tune package on the Mustangs.

The K&N filter, is part of the supplied hardware package sold and endorsed by Ford in the USA with warranty.
The CAI/filter Ford Performance supplies with the Ecoboost Calibration Kit (and GT Stage 1) is lifted directly from the GT350. It is made of the same paper material as the flat panel filter that comes stock. It is a giant cone filter with a lot more surface area but the filter media is the same.

If you do a Google search and read all the comparison tests between factory paper, washable synthetic dry media and oiled gauze type filters that are performed by other than the filter manufactuers they all say the same thing. From a flow standpoint: 1. oiled gauze, 2. Synthetic dry, and 3. Paper. But, there is so little difference that it is not worth mentioning. From a filtering capability: 1. Paper, 2. Synthetic dry and 3. Oiled gauze. But again there is very little difference. Plus quite a few say the oiled gauze plug up quicker than paper and the flow numbers flip in favor of paper after a few thousand miles.

With that being said I have been using K&N or other manufacturers drop in replacement oiled gauze filters since the 70s. Never noticed any change in power or throttle response. I do it because I keep vehicles for a long time and I save a few bucks in the long run with the K&N type filter.

I have had the Ford Performance calibration kit on my 17 Ecoboost Mustang for over 15k miles now. I did swap the paper cone filter that came with it for another paper cone filter but will be trying one of the washable dry synthetic media filters on the next change.

Dave
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
I Installed one on my 2017.
Here in Australia, we pay around AUD$100 for the filter, so it is a low cost upgrade and reasonable bang for your buck.

After doing a lot of research on CAI's for the Mustang, there seems to be a general consensus amongst Ecoboost owners, that Ford got it fairly right with the stock airbox in these cars.

Many Mustang owners have found that by just replacing the restrictive paper filter with a K&N oiled filter, added better throttle response and slightly better fuel economy again.

Some have found that you can actually lose horsepower with some of the aftermarket CAI's, which is a testament to the excellent airbox Ford put in these mustangs.

I didn't do this mod for any gains in horsepower, which I know are negligible unless you get a special CAI that requires a tune.

I have always been happy with K&N filters on my previous cars and never had any issues with them, including the "urban myth" of them creating issues with MAF sensors, which is utter and complete nonsense from uninformed backyard mechanics.

If they did, Ford would not offer them as part of their official Ford Performance tune package on the Mustangs.

The K&N filter, is part of the supplied hardware package sold and endorsed by Ford in the USA with warranty.



Here is the K&N compared to the stock paper filter.
The filter comes pre-oiled, so no need to oil it on its first use.



You can see the difference in thickness of the stock paper filter compared to the less restrictive cotton gauze K&N.



After replacing the filter, and driving it around for awhile to allow the MAF sensor to adjust for any airflow differences,
I could definitely feel the better throttle response, especially on take off, and my fuel economy has certainly improved slightly.



The filter comes with the necessary stickers, to remind mechanics not to change your filter when you take it for scheduled services.

Thank you very much for your reply.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,282 Posts
The CAI/filter Ford Performance supplies with the Ecoboost Calibration Kit (and GT Stage 1) is lifted directly from the GT350. It is made of the same paper material as the flat panel filter that comes stock. It is a giant cone filter with a lot more surface area but the filter media is the same.

If you do a Google search and read all the comparison tests between factory paper, washable synthetic dry media and oiled gauze type filters that are performed by other than the filter manufactuers they all say the same thing. From a flow standpoint: 1. oiled gauze, 2. Synthetic dry, and 3. Paper. But, there is so little difference that it is not worth mentioning. From a filtering capability: 1. Paper, 2. Synthetic dry and 3. Oiled gauze. But again there is very little difference. Plus quite a few say the oiled gauze plug up quicker than paper and the flow numbers flip in favor of paper after a few thousand miles.

With that being said I have been using K&N or other manufacturers drop in replacement oiled gauze filters since the 70s. Never noticed any change in power or throttle response. I do it because I keep vehicles for a long time and I save a few bucks in the long run with the K&N type filter.

I have had the Ford Performance calibration kit on my 17 Ecoboost Mustang for over 15k miles now. I did swap the paper cone filter that came with it for another paper cone filter but will be trying one of the washable dry synthetic media filters on the next change.

Dave
I was referring to the Ford Performance Stage 1 tuning kit which comes with the flat drop in K & N oiled panel fiter in my above post.


 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,262 Posts
I was referring to the Ford Performance Stage 1 tuning kit which comes with the flat drop in K & N oiled panel fiter in my above post.


I think that's a GT Performance tuning kit, not the Ecoboost.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,282 Posts
I think that's a GT Performance tuning kit, not the Ecoboost.
If the K&N drop in flat Filter is good enough for Ford to include in the GT Performance tuning kit... It's good enough for the Ecoboost. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,262 Posts
Are you running the Ecoboost Perfomance tune without the CAI? All good? Same gains? Truth be told, I was thinking about doing the same? I've also read that the new filter isnt all that much better, and that really the only way you can improve the intake is by opening the fitting into the turbo. All ears for your thoughts. Thanks.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
3,237 Posts
Take a look at all of the CAI threads...

Ford did pretty well designing the airbox for the ecoboost. It's been shown that it flows as well or better than many CAI kits, and that the best for performance gains is a drop in high flow filter with the AirRaid intake tube.

No, that's not what I run. I went with a CAI for the sound, because I love me the noise of the turbo and BOV.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,282 Posts
I've also read that the new filter isnt all that much better, and that really the only way you can improve the intake is by opening the fitting into the turbo. All ears for your thoughts. Thanks.
No matter how big you make the tube going to the turbo, the limiting factor is still the diameter of the turbo mouth itself that the air has to ultimately go through.

It is like having a big diameter exhaust pipe part of the way, then tapering down to a smaller diameter.

There is also another consideration... A tapered tube, rather than a big fat one, also creates a "venturi effect", and speeds up the airflow to the turbo.
While you may get more air in volume per second with a larger fat tube with less tapering, you can lose low down torque because of this.

This was proven with our locally produced Ford Falcon XR6 Turbo cars, which had a tapered inlet pipe to the turbo, and owners were modding their cars by putting in a larger non-tapering pipe in.
They lost torque at low rpm's.

The problem with most of the aftermarket CAI's is there is no scientific independently published data on airflow speed or increased air volume at different rpm ranges... Just a lot of marketing hype. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,262 Posts
ARe
No matter how big you make the tube going to the turbo, the limiting factor is still the diameter of the turbo mouth itself it has to ultimately go through.

It is like having a big diameter exhaust pipe part of the way, then tapering down to a smaller diameter.

There is also another consideration... A tapered tube, rather than a big fat one, also creates a "venturi effect", and speeds up the airflow to the turbo.
While you may get more air in volume per second with a larger fat tube with less tapering, you can lose low down torque because of this.

This was proven with our locally produced Ford Falcon XR6 Turbo cars, which had a tapered inlet pipe to the turbo, and owners were modding their cars by putting in a larger non-tapering pipe in.
They lost torque at low rpm's.

The problem with most of the aftermarket CAI's is there is no scientific independently published data on airflow speed or increased air volume at different rpm ranges... Just a lot of marketing hype. :)
So are you running an aftermarket or Ford Performance tune with your K&N?
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top