How so, what is different on yours?
ha ha, I like Peter’s dialogue! Fundamentally agree with it. And I’m still lurking on this thread as I’ve to do the same to my 3.8, but I’m a long way from running. I can say, as David has stated, that the installation of the ITG filter is a piece of cake (or a doddle if you prefer!). It also looks like it belongs in the E-type engine bay. When you get it all done Bob, pics would be nice.
Just assume the gaskets and insulators need replacing… and replace them.
AFTER you determine if all is needed is the nuts need snugging up.
1 Like
I agree. I’ve had the car now 2 1/2 weeks and have been busily taking care of some other cosmetic things given that the local Jag club is having a show this weekend. I had planned on cleaning the engine bay, but time has slipped away. This is definitely on my to do list.
As for the air filter performance, more horse power is great, but I don’t see myself barrelling down the straightaway at Le Mans anytime soon. My motivation is to begin the process of cleaning up the engine bay and I dislike the current air box and have been considering solutions that also allow for the breather pipe to be handled as a feed into the engine.
1 Like
SNGB video showing the Mangoletsi ITG filter install:
It mounts directly to the carbs, not to the original base plate. It has just a plain Aluminum sheet which is trapped by velocity stacks.
And, on the street, in 99.x% of the time, the supposed power increases will not be sensible.
Tweety went 200,000 miles plus, wit the stock system, and I never felt the need for more horsepressure.
I think this is the ITG filter Larry has:
It has stub stacks inside the foam to replace the stock air trumpets which, unfortunately, do not perform as well but it was the only way of getting the ITG filter to fit. John Mangoletsi designed the new filter to mimic the shape of the stock air box and made sure it cleared trhe various fittings. It leaves a large space below which many owners use to fit a bespoke tool box or oil can carrier.
1 Like
David,
If UE needles produce 6% more power, why did Jaguar choose UM needles for the SUs? What was the thinking/rational? Do you know?
Ultimately, I will move to the ITG/Mangoletsi filter, but after driving my Jag for the first time today, I have added a few things to me To Do Li$t…
While test driving it, I noticed 1) the speedo bounces +/- 5-10 mph around my speed, 2) I now suspect the front shock of being spongy (braked suddenly and the nose dove down considerably), 3) brakes work well but pull to the right, and 4) the oil pressure varies from 20 psi at idle to 45 psi at about 45-50 mph, 5) the dual horn seems to have a dead side that needs investigated. So I have a bunch of projects to keep me busy for the next few weeks before I get to the air cleaner…
From a lot of dyno testing we’ve done the XK engine generates significantly more power when richer than a UM needle permits, but there is a corresponding decrease in fuel mileage. I run UP needles - a little bit richer than a UE on my stock 4.2L coupe, and there is a noticeable power increase, particularly at 2500 and up as compared to the UM. With UM’s on a couple of long high altitude trips the car returned 24 mpg (IMP) . With the UP’s at sea level it’s a rather dismal 18mpg or maybe a bit more, but that involved more stop and go. The difference is noticeable in increased frequency of fill ups. I suspect that Sir William used UM’s for economy.
I should add that I live at sea level. When I go inland into the mountains and higher altitude I use UM’s - UP’s are too rich higher up IMO
Yet a different David, but I believe the original advice about a 6% increase in power from UE needles is in conjunction with the freer-breathing Mangoletsi air cleaner, since this flows more air. Not for the stock airbox which Sir William shipped.
Dave
Actually Dave the stock airbox costs up to 16 hp - Jaguar acknowledged this but valued the noise reduction from it more.
I think that was the original point - the Mangoletsi air cleaner flows better than stock. Interestingly, 6% of 265 hp (the factory claimed output of course) is 15.9 HP…
Dave
The Factory measured a 6% improvement with the air silencer/filter removed and a further 10% with a straight through exhaust system but neither were considered acceptable for production. This information is detailed in the Porter tome.
Hi I bought the Maxogen filter described in this thread but the fit on to the intake plenum is very loose - what do people use to make it a snug fit?
Thanks!
If you really want to do what you first said Bob…. You could use copper pipe and fittings … then have it nickel zinc plated
Ok here is what I did. 4x4” flexible PVC connector bought at Lowe’s with two stainless steel hose clamps. The upper one probably isn’t necessary as the fit is quite snug.
I’m running UE needles and slightly retuned after installing this but the car definitely has a bit more power than before. Induction noise is increased a little bit doesn’t bother me.
ITG Maxogen JC60/99 filter.
The other reason I did this is that the bolt for my OEM air cleaner is underneath the frame rail which is very difficult to remove with the under shield installed. This set up can be removed in one piece with the plenum and makes getting the oil filter off much easier and less messy.
I recently completed a triple SU conversion on my '70 E Type and used (of all things) a wash machine drain hose that I bought from Home Depot. It has a glossy black finish, and once soaked in hot water, was flexible to mount to the air plenum and the breather. I’ll take px tomorrow and post. I hope this is what you’re inquiring about.