Lexus CT200h Forums banner
1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
132 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
was wondering were it is located, and if anyone has a clue on how to get to it to change out the filter?

i was thinking of adding a K&N filter and also removing the extra charcoal filter.

that extra filter is very restrictive, from what i read on the prius forums it looks like they have it, so that means the ct200h has it also.

i call it the charcoal filter, since it makes the car a SULEV and not a ULEV.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
957 Posts
The filter box for the K&N filter is right in the front right.

I don't know where the charcoal filter is. Is it for interior filtering or is it an additional filter in the engine air flow schematic?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
132 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
found it, it's pretty easy once i opened the hood. think i should have done that first before asking. right in the front center, just unhook the two metal connectors and it's open... there is two filters in there the real air filter and there is a more restrictive permanent filter. And i took that restrictive filter out. should be better for air flow.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
414 Posts
found it, it's pretty easy once i opened the hood. think i should have done that first before asking. right in the front center, just unhook the two metal connectors and it's open... there is two filters in there the real air filter and there is a more restrictive permanent filter. And i took that restrictive filter out. should be better for air flow.
Here's the parts breakout from Sewell's website. I only see one filter? (pn: 17801)

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
255 Posts
found it, it's pretty easy once i opened the hood. think i should have done that first before asking. right in the front center, just unhook the two metal connectors and it's open... there is two filters in there the real air filter and there is a more restrictive permanent filter. And i took that restrictive filter out. should be better for air flow.
You are going to suck a lot of dirt into the engine. Not a good thing. Put the filter back.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
169 Posts
Call me stupid, but I don't get this. Here's Toyota MoCo, employing hundreds of the cleverest engineering boffins and spending billions in development, just to bring us the most efficient, highest quality hybrid cars. They endlessly tune the engine, hone its parts, write intricate computer code to get the engine management just right in all possible circumstances, add just the right filters to keep it running healthily as long as possible, rewrite the code to not lose any power with it - and there's Joe Sixpack who 'improves' his new car instantly just by removing a part.

What am I missing?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
957 Posts
I wasn't aware of a more restrictive 2nd filter. where is that located anyways?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
132 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Here's the parts breakout from Sewell's website. I only see one filter? (pn: 17801)
part 17705 look under there, there is another filter not shown in the diagram. that filter is a permanent filter, very restrictive. this filter keeps vapors from the engine in. but also thick enough that i would think it wouldn't be able to give max suction for air.

also there is no way i would suck dirt into the engine, that is what the replaceable air filter is for.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
957 Posts
Do you think it's there more for CA emissions standards rather than for dirt and dust?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
132 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
not sure, but from what i read, newer cars has the extra filter for meeting certain emissions standards...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
169 Posts
So you're not sure, but you take out the filter anyway. Have you any idea what you're doing?

Let me tell you about my own experience. I have a 70's sports car with two carbs on the engine. The previous owner put headers and a big bore exhaust on it. It made the car louder, but not faster. When I got it - I was young and foolish - I thought it would be a good idea to put K&N filters on the carbs. They looked and sounded great, but made the car run like sh*t. Turned out the mixture was way too lean and no amount of adjusting the carbs would cure it. If I'd run the car like that for any length of time, I would have at least holed a piston - or worse. It took a lot of dyno time and experimentation with jets and needles to get the engine running right again. Now the car is louder, uses more fuel and is not significantly faster than before.

Bottom line: it wasn't worth it. The engineers who originally designed the car were right; they knew what they were doing and most shade tree mechanics do not.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
132 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
your 1970 must have not had a MAF sensor, which regulates how much fuel to give compared to how much air is coming in. all newer cars have them.

after 15 miles of driving i'm noticing a slight better pull/response, i'll update my MPG later on once i fill up and do the calculations. if it turns out my MPG is worse then i can always put back the permanent filter.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
352 Posts
after 15 miles of driving i'm noticing a slight better pull/response, i'll update my MPG later on once i fill up and do the calculations. if it turns out my MPG is worse then i can always put back the permanent filter.[/QUOTE]

Hmm, you might be onto something, would be interesting to do 0-60 before and after filter.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
132 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
yea i should have done my 0-60 time with that extra filter on before i removed it....

for all i know it could be a placebo effect. but on my last car everyone was doing this mod and notice gains, so i figure i'd do this mod on this hybrid also....
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,101 Posts
In my last car (modded G35 sedan), I had many mods, one of which was the K&N filter then I went with the Stillen conical intake with K&N filter. Sounded better and was quicker, but I got worse mileage. No engine issues whatsoever, just change your oil and clean your filter and MAF sensor regularly.

That said, I love that CT owners are looking to get better acceleration times, it just seems like an oxymoron to me. If we were driving Panamera hybrids then I'd get it, but we're driving a car that takes almost 10 seconds to get to 60 mph, so I don't see the point.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
132 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
over taking another car when changing lanes? a little quicker on the merge or on ramp? going up a hill?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
53 Posts
I'm with jimmyc13 on this one: Changing 0-60 from 10.3 to 10.2 seconds is justifiably considered negligible. Especially considering that the potential exists to not clean the filter often enough or worse, to over-oil (which will very definitely have a BAD effect on the very expenseive MAF), the potential gain is not worth it.

'A little quicker' may be worth what, 1-3 hp? High-HP/High displacement cars are lucky to see 10 with a drop-in, and my suspicion is that intake restriction is not a particularly big inhibitor of power on the Atkinson especially since its already optimized for efficiency.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
875 Posts
car enthusiasts ...

Call me stupid, but I don't get this. Here's Toyota MoCo, employing hundreds of the cleverest engineering boffins and spending billions in development, just to bring us the most efficient, highest quality hybrid cars. They endlessly tune the engine, hone its parts, write intricate computer code to get the engine management just right in all possible circumstances, add just the right filters to keep it running healthily as long as possible, rewrite the code to not lose any power with it - and there's Joe Sixpack who 'improves' his new car instantly just by removing a part.

What am I missing?
The same reason people put shark fins on, lower their cars, tint their cars, change the wheels ..... They are car enthusiasts ...

By the way all the stuff in the engineering and design isn't necessarily for the best efficiency or the longest engine life or the most power... engineers work under certain constraints... a primary one is $$, another is protection of the company from recalls and lawsuits ... Their goals are not necessarily in line with those of the customer ...especially enthusiasts.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,101 Posts
over taking another car when changing lanes? a little quicker on the merge or on ramp? going up a hill?
In my opinion, I think it would be immeasurable, assuming the removal of the filter even does do anything for you. Let's assume for some reason it does increase your acceleration rate slightly, allowing you to achieve a certain speed quicker than in a non-modified CT (let's call it a 2 MPH difference when you're at the top of the on-ramp).

non-modified CT: ~60 MPH (88 feet/second)

CT w/ filter removed (assuming it even does anything): ~ 62 MPH (91 feet/second)

Based on that, you're only gaining an extra 3 feet per second at that instant. That would mean you need about 6 seconds or so just to gain 1 extra car length to merge in. Again, that's just a comparison and not based on real speed comparisons.
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top