>daneli@umich.edu writes:
>
>>Burgess is clear, as Larry says, that replacing the stock
>>filters on dual SU MGB's with K&N's can lead to an
>>increase in volumetric efficiency, but only when two
>>conditions are met:
>>
>1) the stock air cleaner housings must be discarded and
>>2) the stock air cleaner entry plates must be retained.
>>
... or a set of K&N stub stacks must be fitted.
>>In other words, putting the K&N's into the stock air filter
>>cans does little to improve breathing and throwing away the
>>stock entry plates can actually decrease breathing. (The
>>entry plates are radiused and help shape and smooth the
>>incoming air/fuel charge.)
>
'Spot On' ... ;^)
>
>>The best setup then would simply be a stock entry plate, the
>>proper K&N filter, and some sort of endplate to seal the open
>>end of the filter. In this setup the filters aren't enclosed in a
>>housing and the stock through-blots are used to hold the whole
>>thing together. (Moss sells a fancy filter/endplate set for about
>>$140, but you could also purchase the filters separately and
>>just make your own endplates.)
>
Hmmm ... had not thought of this, but its the way to go on a 'B'
... on the 'A' you will need to purchase as set of filters and a set
of stub stacks as the 'A' rear plates are flat ... hmmm ... wonder
if the 'B' backplate could be used in conjunction with the 'A'
frontplate? In theory, fitting just a set of stub stacks to the 'A'
>would prove beneficial.
>
>>When I did this to my B, the mixture couldn't be adjusted
>>properly until I fit a set of richer needles.
>
Thanks for the confirmation ...
>
Safety Fast! ... larry.g.unger@lmco.com
> '61 MGA 1600 MkII
|