Team-BHP - K&n Vs Ractive

Yup same with me RT. went with K&N stock replacement on my lancer. cost me 6K. now I feel its a waste. The intake sound is more than the OE but i really dint find any improvement in performance.

Plus I thought the mileage would increase. I was getting 10+kmpl in city after the filter I just about touch 9kmpl.

vid69: Get the Universal with the Cold Air Intake pipe, etc.

That way you can spend even more money for the same performance.

Strange though. Here's a guy who gets 9kmpl from a Lancer & cribs. On a good day, I get 7.5.

"I was crying because I had no shoes, 'till I saw a man who had no feet".

And no, that's not a rishism.

Quote:

Originally Posted by vid6639 (Post 402293)

The intake sound is more than the OE but i really dint find any improvement in performance.

You're one unlucky not-a-lady. I've got stock replacement K&N on my Swift - and I felt a perceptible change for the better. The moment I drove it out after the fitment some 8 months ago - I noticed the engine had gone deathly silent compared to before. Also a slight - but noticable increase in pickup - and I'm very sure this isnt placebo. Also the mileage - I get regularly ~ 15.5 kmpl with AC on 85% and Shell regular. I'd like to think the positive chagnes are due to the K&N.

That said - get rid of your Lancer engine - retain the filter - and plonk it into a Mivec.

Maggie's one lucky lady. Excellent mileage. Quiet engine. Lovely wit. And it ain't a placebo.

You buying MIVECs for the 30000 of us on the forum that have the stock 1.5s in our Lancers, darling?

Mebbe we should plonk a K&N onto her. From what she says, she can only get better. Quiter definitely. :p

Getting back to Ractive, i ve had one on my ohc since over a year now, and have i think been a reason for a few members on the forum doing the same.
I noticed a difference in the mid range of the car, seemed to have gotten better, the car seems to pull better even from the lower rpms.
Even if the gains are physchological, i'd just buy a Ractive filter for the Sound!!

manson.

Quote:

Originally Posted by elf (Post 402490)

Sure - I'd love to buy Mivecs for all ya unmentionables; I'm expecting some future illegal kid of mine to be the top honcho at RBI. So some patience please till this illegal kid comes along (I'm trying my best).

Btw -thats a stock replacement K&N I got - altho I felt 4.5k is high for what its done as mentioned in my earlier post, I've no 2nd second thoughts myself for having put it. But I'll recommend to anyone who cares to listen that instead of a stock replacement filter they might as well spend another 1.5K and go in for the K&N conical-preferably Typhoon with cold air intake.

I have previously posted my opinion on ractive in one thread, dont remember which, so here goes again:

I've been using a ractive EV500 polyurathane filter for about a year now. bought it for Rs. 2300/- The car's definitaly improved with respect to bottom - mid range torque. I can compare directly with my dad's baleno altura and my baleno sedan (both have the same G16B engine)
Also there's a drop in performance whenever i put back the stock air box when i give the car for servicing.

So yes, I'd say Ractive is worth every penny you pay..

t-bhp brothers please help ...i want an air filter for my ikon 1.6 but not available in jalandhar punjab....if i go to delhi which one should i get for my car....and what difference will i see in my cars performance???

Sorry BUSA for the late reply. It wasn't at HPM. My logic in the SS filter heating up was that, since the metal gets hotter than cotton, it would result in heating up the air in the intake pipe. But that said; the air could be passing so quick into the intake that it might not have enough time to absorb the heat.