• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Opinion on K&N Filters?

M

mizzou

Diamond Member
Curious.

I'm thinking about doing one in my 2002 silverado 5.3lV8 just for the kicks!

http://images.oreillyauto.com/.../dyno/77-3021_dyno.pdf

http://images.oreillyauto.com/.../dyno/57-3021_dyno.pdf

looked at some dyno charts from the manufacturers websites and basically, I don't often push my vehicle to 5000RPM. So I guess it would only be noticeable if I floor the engine when passing vehicles or making a run from the law.


Any of you do this or vehemently against it? I could see how it would let more nasty stuff in your engine for maybe not so much of a performance increase
 
I like to run dry filters - the oil in the k&n filter messed up my maf - I probably over oiled it though. I have a 99 a4 btw.
 
Originally posted by: mizzou
So I guess it would only be noticeable if I floor the engine when passing vehicles or making a run from the law.
Click to expand...
It wouldn't be "noticeable" even in those instances.

 
thats what I figured! I've been spending alot of time repairing my saturn and it's alot of fun, just thought in the back of my head why I shouldn't be spending some time trying to tune up my other vehicle, might be fun as well.


Just did some searching, damn those things are expensive. Nevermind.

 
This is the most scientific review I've seen

It basically says that while they do have a minor advantage in airflow initially they allow significantly more dust through. Additionally, it shows that they clog up faster than your traditional paper filter, meaning that they lose any advantage for airflow relatively quickly.

Maybe if I was scraping for horsepower on a rarely used performance vehicle I would consider running a lower restriction filter, but on the cars I drive constantly I'm sticking with a good paper filter.
 
Originally posted by: Bignate603
This is the most scientific review I've seen

It basically says that while they do have a minor advantage in airflow initially they allow significantly more dust through. Additionally, it shows that they clog up faster than your traditional paper filter, meaning that they lose any advantage for airflow relatively quickly.

Maybe if I was scraping for horsepower on a rarely used performance vehicle I would consider running a lower restriction filter, but on the cars I drive constantly I'm sticking with a good paper filter.
Click to expand...

Pretty much 🙂 Yeah this topic has been beaten to death ..

(1)- Results vary widely vehicle to vehicle, from 3-5hp gain to even a loss in power of a hp or two
(2)- Improvements are marginal when they are even notable, see (1) above
(3)- It's nice to be able to re-use the same filter for a very long time, not so nice to have to clean it/oil it
(4)- Less effective at removing dirt/particles than paper filter = don't use in areas with dust/dirt
(5)- Profit?
 
bought them when i was younger along with throttle body spacers, mobil 1 oil and filters, and alot of other dumb things to make 0.1% MOAR POWER!!!

would i waste my money again? no. the only reason i have one on my truck is that i put a FIPK on many moons ago and i can't find my stock airbox to put a paper filter back in.
 
They are snake oil. Don't do anything for your engine, except let in more dirt. A stock, or even mildly-modified engine doesn't need more flow than the stock filter already delivers. Plus, the K&N's slight flow advantage goes away very quickly, as it becomes even a little dirty.

So, in review, K&N's:
1. Let more dirt in
2. Cause problems with MAF and other sensors becoming oil-fouled..there are TSB's from every manufacturer out there about this
3. Don't give you more power in the first place
4. Cost a crapload more, and if you factor in the oiling kit, you can buy a lifetime's worth of paper filters. (okay, not a lifetime, but over 100k miles' worth)

 
Originally posted by: Pacfanweb
They are snake oil. Don't do anything for your engine, except let in more dirt. A stock, or even mildly-modified engine doesn't need more flow than the stock filter already delivers. Plus, the K&N's slight flow advantage goes away very quickly, as it becomes even a little dirty.

So, in review, K&N's:
1. Let more dirt in
2. Cause problems with MAF and other sensors becoming oil-fouled..there are TSB's from every manufacturer out there about this
3. Don't give you more power in the first place
4. Cost a crapload more, and if you factor in the oiling kit, you can buy a lifetime's worth of paper filters. (okay, not a lifetime, but over 100k miles' worth)
Click to expand...

this. even a paper filter with 20-30k has plenty of airflow for a stock engine. no, it won't let the little ball in the tube lift, or whatever demo k&n is using nowadays, but a stock clean filter is enough and it takes quite a while for it to become dirty enough so significantly restrict flow (which is actually when it filters at the highest efficiency).

iirc k&n efficiency is like 97 or 98 percent, at best, whereas paper filters are more in the 99.x% category. but google it if you want the actual results.
 
Originally posted by: brblx
Originally posted by: Pacfanweb
They are snake oil. Don't do anything for your engine, except let in more dirt. A stock, or even mildly-modified engine doesn't need more flow than the stock filter already delivers. Plus, the K&N's slight flow advantage goes away very quickly, as it becomes even a little dirty.

So, in review, K&N's:
1. Let more dirt in
2. Cause problems with MAF and other sensors becoming oil-fouled..there are TSB's from every manufacturer out there about this
3. Don't give you more power in the first place
4. Cost a crapload more, and if you factor in the oiling kit, you can buy a lifetime's worth of paper filters. (okay, not a lifetime, but over 100k miles' worth)
Click to expand...

this. even a paper filter with 20-30k has plenty of airflow for a stock engine. no, it won't let the little ball in the tube lift, or whatever demo k&n is using nowadays, but a stock clean filter is enough and it takes quite a while for it to become dirty enough so significantly restrict flow (which is actually when it filters at the highest efficiency).

iirc k&n efficiency is like 97 or 98 percent, at best, whereas paper filters are more in the 99.x% category. but google it if you want the actual results.
Click to expand...

The one I posted previously in this thread had a pretty good set of numbers.
 
sorry, missed it. k&n did even worse than i had remembered.

only time i'd use a k&n would be on a carbed racecar. i wouldn't want one on anything with fuel injection, and it's certainly not the best idea on your daily driver.

edit- whoops, post-changing typos.
 
Originally posted by: brblx
sorry, missed it. k&n did even worse than i had remembered.

only time i'd use a k&n would be on carbed racecar. i wouldn't want one on anything with fuel injection, and it's certainly the best idea on your daily driver.
Click to expand...

What I was surprised about was how quickly the K&N plugged up. The test really shows that all the surface area from a good pleated filter really helps keep it functioning with relatively low restriction for quite a while. While the K&N starts off better it seems to lose its advantage pretty quickly.
 
Originally posted by: JDub02
bought them when i was younger along with throttle body spacers, mobil 1 oil and filters, and alot of other dumb things to make 0.1% MOAR POWER!!!..
Click to expand...
I agree on the other things but what's wrong with Mobil 1? 😕
Heck, I use ATE SuperBlue for brakes, Mobil 1 for oil and Royal Purple for trans and power steering on my 06 LS.
 
Originally posted by: brblx
sorry, missed it. k&n did even worse than i had remembered.

only time i'd use a k&n would be on a carbed racecar. i wouldn't want one on anything with fuel injection, and it's certainly not the best idea on your daily driver.

edit- whoops, post-changing typos.
Click to expand...

this
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top