I like K & N filters...but WTF?
10-06-2013, 11:11 AM
#1
Team Owner
Thread Starter
Member Since: May 2001
Location: Virginia
Posts: 24,991
Received 1,227 Likes
on
874 Posts
St. Jude Donor '11
I like K & N filters...but WTF?
Last edited by Yello95; 10-06-2013 at 11:14 AM.
10-06-2013, 11:55 AM
#2
Advanced
IMO K&N's suck big time. Terrible filtration, basically the materiel they use is medical guase. I believe there is a lot better filter companies out there now. I wish this company would make filters for our cars. http://www.r2cperformance.com/
10-06-2013, 03:15 PM
#4
Team Owner
Thread Starter
Member Since: May 2001
Location: Virginia
Posts: 24,991
Received 1,227 Likes
on
874 Posts
St. Jude Donor '11
IMO K&N's suck big time. Terrible filtration, basically the materiel they use is medical guase. I believe there is a lot better filter companies out there now. I wish this company would make filters for our cars. http://www.r2cperformance.com/
...I did not know that...anyone else have an opinion on K & N air filters?
10-06-2013, 04:54 PM
#5
Melting Slicks
They don't filter as well from the get go. They don't hold as much dirt (clog sooner) and once they get filled with dirt they are terrible and just let most of the dirt thru.
Do a search on K&N testing and there have been a few SAE and ISO tests performed on them and they are well publicized junk. Much like Thompson's water seal (which is junk too), they run a lot of ads but the reality is they are junk.
Off road racers use those types of filters because they don't collapse if they get wet, but that is really the only advantage of them.
There are newer technology paper filters that have lower restriction than typical paper filters and filter a lot better than the oiled gauze filters like the K&N. Amsoil has a really good paper filter that is based on new technology from Davidsion and it is really much better than stock or a K&N.
Remember that the filter makes no difference until the throttle is wide open (as far as restriction is concerned), so the real difference is the couple of horsepower that the lower restriction gets you. If you are on the track and think a couple of horsepower would make a difference, you could put one in, but on the street they make no sense at all.
10-07-2013, 01:04 AM
#7
Team Owner
Thread Starter
Member Since: May 2001
Location: Virginia
Posts: 24,991
Received 1,227 Likes
on
874 Posts
St. Jude Donor '11
Yup... Junk. The video talks about the PITA of cleaning them but that's just the maintenance side.
They don't filter as well from the get go. They don't hold as much dirt (clog sooner) and once they get filled with dirt they are terrible and just let most of the dirt thru.
Do a search on K&N testing and there have been a few SAE and ISO tests performed on them and they are well publicized junk. Much like Thompson's water seal (which is junk too), they run a lot of ads but the reality is they are junk.
Off road racers use those types of filters because they don't collapse if they get wet, but that is really the only advantage of them.
There are newer technology paper filters that have lower restriction than typical paper filters and filter a lot better than the oiled gauze filters like the K&N. Amsoil has a really good paper filter that is based on new technology from Davidsion and it is really much better than stock or a K&N.
Remember that the filter makes no difference until the throttle is wide open (as far as restriction is concerned), so the real difference is the couple of horsepower that the lower restriction gets you. If you are on the track and think a couple of horsepower would make a difference, you could put one in, but on the street they make no sense at all.
They don't filter as well from the get go. They don't hold as much dirt (clog sooner) and once they get filled with dirt they are terrible and just let most of the dirt thru.
Do a search on K&N testing and there have been a few SAE and ISO tests performed on them and they are well publicized junk. Much like Thompson's water seal (which is junk too), they run a lot of ads but the reality is they are junk.
Off road racers use those types of filters because they don't collapse if they get wet, but that is really the only advantage of them.
There are newer technology paper filters that have lower restriction than typical paper filters and filter a lot better than the oiled gauze filters like the K&N. Amsoil has a really good paper filter that is based on new technology from Davidsion and it is really much better than stock or a K&N.
Remember that the filter makes no difference until the throttle is wide open (as far as restriction is concerned), so the real difference is the couple of horsepower that the lower restriction gets you. If you are on the track and think a couple of horsepower would make a difference, you could put one in, but on the street they make no sense at all.
10-07-2013, 01:47 AM
#8
Race Director
Yup... Junk. The video talks about the PITA of cleaning them but that's just the maintenance side.
They don't filter as well from the get go. They don't hold as much dirt (clog sooner) and once they get filled with dirt they are terrible and just let most of the dirt thru.
Do a search on K&N testing and there have been a few SAE and ISO tests performed on them and they are well publicized junk. Much like Thompson's water seal (which is junk too), they run a lot of ads but the reality is they are junk.
Off road racers use those types of filters because they don't collapse if they get wet, but that is really the only advantage of them.
There are newer technology paper filters that have lower restriction than typical paper filters and filter a lot better than the oiled gauze filters like the K&N. Amsoil has a really good paper filter that is based on new technology from Davidsion and it is really much better than stock or a K&N.
Remember that the filter makes no difference until the throttle is wide open (as far as restriction is concerned), so the real difference is the couple of horsepower that the lower restriction gets you. If you are on the track and think a couple of horsepower would make a difference, you could put one in, but on the street they make no sense at all.
They don't filter as well from the get go. They don't hold as much dirt (clog sooner) and once they get filled with dirt they are terrible and just let most of the dirt thru.
Do a search on K&N testing and there have been a few SAE and ISO tests performed on them and they are well publicized junk. Much like Thompson's water seal (which is junk too), they run a lot of ads but the reality is they are junk.
Off road racers use those types of filters because they don't collapse if they get wet, but that is really the only advantage of them.
There are newer technology paper filters that have lower restriction than typical paper filters and filter a lot better than the oiled gauze filters like the K&N. Amsoil has a really good paper filter that is based on new technology from Davidsion and it is really much better than stock or a K&N.
Remember that the filter makes no difference until the throttle is wide open (as far as restriction is concerned), so the real difference is the couple of horsepower that the lower restriction gets you. If you are on the track and think a couple of horsepower would make a difference, you could put one in, but on the street they make no sense at all.
they also flow the worst. a k&n is worth a solid 1mph which should be roughly 10hp over a wix, i tried them back to back, same weather, same track, stock z06.
you can feel the difference blowing through a k&n versus a wix, way way less restriction with the k&n
ahh, here's the article i was talking about. this is the best unbias air filter test i have ever come across. most tests have a bias to sway the outcome
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/airfilter/airtest3.htm
this was done grassroots with no company money involved. in short the more restrictive a filter is the better it seems to filter...this really shouldn't surprise anyone
Last edited by racebum; 10-07-2013 at 01:52 AM.
10-07-2013, 09:16 AM
#9
Melting Slicks
Member Since: Jun 2012
Location: Oceanside California
Posts: 3,163
Likes: 0
Received 4 Likes
on
4 Posts
This guy is just a ranting ***. As stated by himself, he knows nothing about performance nor cares about it. He doesnt need anything but stock for his lifestyle. He gave zero intelligent insight on any key information such as longevity, filtration, air-flow, etc. Yet is just junk because he doenst like waiting for it to dry. What a cry baby.
By the way, the filter being full and clogged up means its filtering, and filtering well. A lot of geniuses out there lately..
By the way, the filter being full and clogged up means its filtering, and filtering well. A lot of geniuses out there lately..
10-07-2013, 06:18 PM
#10
Melting Slicks
K&N Air Filter - RIP OFF! - YouTube
Is this guy an ahole/jerk/schmuck or all three...I think he is all three...whats your opinion?
Is this guy an ahole/jerk/schmuck or all three...I think he is all three...whats your opinion?
K&N Filters work! End of story!
10-08-2013, 03:48 AM
#14
Race Director
did 6 -1/4 mile runs and every single run on the k&n was between .5 and 1mph faster at the traps. stock air lid, no mods, 80 deg humid summer weather.
never have understood why this new gen of k&n haters popped up in the past few years
10-08-2013, 09:23 AM
#15
Melting Slicks
I am not suggesting that K&N's don't have less restriction than a paper filter, but as far as a filter goes they are junk. You could just take the filter out and get more airflow than a K&N too, if you are at the track and running a quarter mile. You aren't likely to do much damage to your engine in a couple of passes.
For street use K&N's are junk. Here is a link to a real test that was run to SAE and ISO standards on filtration test equipment.
http://www.nicoclub.com/archives/kn-vs-oem-filter.html
Read the entire test and make up your own mind. I've read it and IMHO K&N's are junk. Even when clean, they don't filter very well. They clog faster and when they clog the have more restriction than a paper element. That is, it takes less dirt to clog them, so they require more frequent service. If you don't service frequently, they are totally worthless. Also note in this test the Amsoil filter is their old, oiled foam filter that has been replaced and is no longer available.
K&N is very good at avoiding putting any real SAE or ISO test data on their filters. They tell you how they test, show the test equipment and what particle size dust they use, and then give a blanket statement that they filter between 96 and 99% of the particles. Good filters remove between 99.7% and 99.9% of the particles. Bottom line is that K&N's are at best 3x worse, and more often over 10x worse than a good paper filter in terms of allowing dirt into your engine.
K&N obviously has test data on their products, but it is absent from their advertising and isn't listed on the packages. If it was so darn good don't you think they would put the data out there and take credit for it???
K&N filters have a place, and if you want to use them on the track, or in an environment where the filter gets wet then go ahead. If you aren't racing the car wheel to wheel or at the strip, there is no reason to bother with the very small amount of additional airflow that they provide.
For street use K&N's are junk. Here is a link to a real test that was run to SAE and ISO standards on filtration test equipment.
http://www.nicoclub.com/archives/kn-vs-oem-filter.html
Read the entire test and make up your own mind. I've read it and IMHO K&N's are junk. Even when clean, they don't filter very well. They clog faster and when they clog the have more restriction than a paper element. That is, it takes less dirt to clog them, so they require more frequent service. If you don't service frequently, they are totally worthless. Also note in this test the Amsoil filter is their old, oiled foam filter that has been replaced and is no longer available.
K&N is very good at avoiding putting any real SAE or ISO test data on their filters. They tell you how they test, show the test equipment and what particle size dust they use, and then give a blanket statement that they filter between 96 and 99% of the particles. Good filters remove between 99.7% and 99.9% of the particles. Bottom line is that K&N's are at best 3x worse, and more often over 10x worse than a good paper filter in terms of allowing dirt into your engine.
K&N obviously has test data on their products, but it is absent from their advertising and isn't listed on the packages. If it was so darn good don't you think they would put the data out there and take credit for it???
K&N filters have a place, and if you want to use them on the track, or in an environment where the filter gets wet then go ahead. If you aren't racing the car wheel to wheel or at the strip, there is no reason to bother with the very small amount of additional airflow that they provide.
Last edited by Solofast; 10-08-2013 at 09:49 AM.
10-08-2013, 09:44 AM
#16
Melting Slicks
The Amsoil EA series of filters are very good. This is newer technology that has lower restriction than a conventional paper filter and much better filtration and less clogging than any available filter.
Here is a link .... http://www.amsoil.com/lit/databulletins/g2175.pdf
The newer EA filters are very close to a K:&N in terms of restriction, and yet filter better than a paper filter. These new filters were developed by Donaldson Corp and are really a substantial improvement in filtration technology.
It's what I am using in my car.
10-08-2013, 11:02 AM
#18
Melting Slicks
Come on guys, the video is a parlor trick.
It's set up so that the airflow of the K&N lifts the ping pong ball and any small amount of flow less than that doesn't. It doesn't mean anything other than the flow is slightly less with the paper filter and the flow rate difference could be very small.
Other than checking out the "equipment" on the model it's pretty much worthless.
It's set up so that the airflow of the K&N lifts the ping pong ball and any small amount of flow less than that doesn't. It doesn't mean anything other than the flow is slightly less with the paper filter and the flow rate difference could be very small.
Other than checking out the "equipment" on the model it's pretty much worthless.
10-08-2013, 11:09 AM
#19
Melting Slicks
Gee, this thread is a bit much. Obviously some strong feelings on both sides. I think this will be the proper solution by letting Daisy strut her stuff. Let's just say that Daisy has said to cool it for a bit....
10-08-2013, 10:12 PM
#20
Race Director
