pantha
Registered User
According to my Math:
For a 2.0 TFSI (BWA) engine with the filter element in the engine cover.
The stock air filter is:
Surf. Area of a panel: L * H
408 x 174 mm (38mm thick)
Panel Area: 70,992 sq.mm
A pod (Cone) filter (K&N part no: RU-3580) is:
Lateral Surf. Area of a Frustum Cone: Pi * (R + r) * H
3.142 * (76 + 51) * 127
Pod Area = 20,426 sq.mm
Now, I understand that the filter element is pleated, but, if we assume both are pleated (Which they are) then we can assume it a constant (For comparative reasons) and even if the pod pleats are twice the size as the panel pleats... it's still a LARGE difference...?
So...
Is the stock filter element WAYYYY too big for what the engine requires???
I also understand that the Stock paper element filters are more restrictive than an aftermarket "Hi-Flow" Panel OR pod filter. But there's a difference there of 3.5 times the area.
Can anyone explain or give input into this? Has someone tested static pressure in the intake with different filters? I dunno...
For a 2.0 TFSI (BWA) engine with the filter element in the engine cover.
The stock air filter is:
Surf. Area of a panel: L * H
408 x 174 mm (38mm thick)
Panel Area: 70,992 sq.mm
A pod (Cone) filter (K&N part no: RU-3580) is:
Lateral Surf. Area of a Frustum Cone: Pi * (R + r) * H
3.142 * (76 + 51) * 127
Pod Area = 20,426 sq.mm
Now, I understand that the filter element is pleated, but, if we assume both are pleated (Which they are) then we can assume it a constant (For comparative reasons) and even if the pod pleats are twice the size as the panel pleats... it's still a LARGE difference...?
So...
Is the stock filter element WAYYYY too big for what the engine requires???
I also understand that the Stock paper element filters are more restrictive than an aftermarket "Hi-Flow" Panel OR pod filter. But there's a difference there of 3.5 times the area.
Can anyone explain or give input into this? Has someone tested static pressure in the intake with different filters? I dunno...