I have a K&N CAI kit on my Mustang now, had a K&N CAI on my Tundra, my old 5.0 had a K&N CAI kit, and so on. Adding a K&N filter is one of the first things I do to a vehicle when I buy it.
If you do get one, don't forget to take care of the filter. K&N suggests cleaning the filters when they look like a political commentators mouth, I suggest 2x a year under normal use. Use their filter cleaning and recharge kits, follow the instructions, never use compressed air to dry the filter out and the filter may very well outlast the vehicle you installed it on. (CAI = Cold Air Intake)
They are as good as the condition they are in, keep them clean and they work well.
They are better than some OEM type air filters, others they are only slightly better if not at par. The cost savings may or may not be there depending on how much your paper air filters cost and how long you plan on keeping it.
Cold Air Intakes are a whole 'nother story though... depends on the car even more so.
Yes and no. Mostly no because they cause other issues with the way the intake airflow system has been designed. They can change the vacuum signal and venturi pressure-drop enough to cause issues with driveability.
Do they filter well? Yes, they do, and generally too well. That's the problem. I often could solve a "mystery" problem by replacing the filter assembly with the proper part.
Yes and no. Mostly no because they cause other issues with the way the intake airflow system has been designed. They can change the vacuum signal and venturi pressure-drop enough to cause issues with driveability.
Do they filter well? Yes, they do, and generally too well. That's the problem. I often could solve a "mystery" problem by replacing the filter assembly with the proper part.
Don't they also mess up sensors such as the MAF if they are over oiled?
This subject is usually a big can of worms because there are people very strongly on each side. Some are convinced they'll destroy an engine due to particulates they let pass; others are just as sure it'll add 40 horsepower to their Civic.
I have used them for 20 years now. I like them for their serviceability - wash, re-oil, re-install. I think they are more useful on forced-induction cars than naturally aspirated engines when it comes to power gains.
My cars have ranged from 130 horsepower to 500+ and they all did well with K&N. I like them enough that I'll continue to use them in any vehicle I get in the future.
It is just another way to filter air. Very common on dirt bikes. Oiled filters are nothing new.
The oil in the filter can actually cause damage to MAF sensors.
Paper filters work great. That is why manufactures use them. Want more HP? Tune the entire system. Or buy a car with more HP from the start. Adding a K&N is not going to do anything other than filter your air.
Want that deep throaty sound when you rev your engine? Remove the air system resonator. Or get a V8.
I'll stick with a new filter every time rather than trying to clean out and re-oil a K&N.
Heh heh -- I practiced this psychology in reverse. I put the K&N sticker on the side hatch window of my stock-appearing Dodge Stealth. I hoped that its presence would make others assume that was all I knew about performance.
The drawer full of 12.5 sec quarter mile time slips proved otherwise. I did my best to make it a sleeper
You have nothing to lose, and you save some $$ over paper filters.
Do you though? How many paper filters would you have to buy to equal one K&N, how many miles would you get per filter and how much are the oil recharge kits for the filter. It usually works out to be a wash in the end.
Not knocking them, I had one in my old car and will prob get one for my current.
Just put it this way. Your car is designed to operate with the stock filter. Paper filters filter more particles than a K&N which means less dirt through your engine. K&Ns even clog faster in the ISO 5011 test than paper filters.
Unless you are redesigning your engine to need more air to actually need a K&N filter it is pointless to use them and a waste of money.
said by »forums.nicoclub.com/debu ··· 100.html :Compared to the AC, the K&N “plugged up” nearly 3 times faster, passed 18 times more dirt and captured 37% less dirt. See the data tables for a complete summary of these comparisons.
Some paper filters are designed to last 50K miles. Most people can probably get 20K miles out of their paper filters before it needs to be replaced. OEM style air filter = $13 K&N = $52 K&N recharge kit = $12
Basically you can buy 5 paper air filters for one K&N + recharge kit. So you might be able to start saving money with a K&N after about 100,000 miles and that is only if you can use the recharge kit more than once. It just is not worth it on a stock engine when it filters less dirt.
»www.dieselplace.com/foru ··· ?t=66536 You should post his follow up study that was done at the K&N factory. The results he got were very different than the ones in the graph.
I hope no one buys a K&N or other performance filter to save money. The reusable aspect is nice but it really shouldn't be a selling point because of how long it takes to break even.
I also question the relevancy of the amount of particulates passed because we have no idea if that has a direct correlation with engine damage. For all we know this matter passes harmlessly through the engine. I'd worry about the size of these particles moreso than the quantity. I haven't seen anyone report the threshold at which a particle becomes hazardous to the engine in terms of wear.
Whatever the case, I believe that you will need to rebuild an engine for a host of other reasons long before your choice of air filter makes a difference in its service life.
»www.dieselplace.com/foru ··· ?t=66536 You should post his follow up study that was done at the K&N factory. The results he got were very different than the ones in the graph.
The tests were valid. K&N just tests were not as real world as the test in that link. Also K&N results were not that different. K&N still meets mfg minimum specs for cleaning air.
K&N definitely gives more airflow, but that means nothing with a stock engine. Unless you installed parts that you calculated needs more airflow it makes no sense to spend the extra money for a K&N filter. Your stock engine is designed to work with the stock filter.
»www.dieselplace.com/foru ··· ?t=66536 You should post his follow up study that was done at the K&N factory. The results he got were very different than the ones in the graph.
The tests were valid. K&N just tests were not as real world as the test in that link. Also K&N results were not that different. K&N still meets mfg minimum specs for cleaning air.
K&N definitely gives more airflow, but that means nothing with a stock engine. Unless you installed parts that you calculated needs more airflow it makes no sense to spend the extra money for a K&N filter. Your stock engine is designed to work with the stock filter.
From my understanding if a K&N gives more air flow than stock the car's computer is gonna compensate for more air by using more fuel? So you could actually get less mpg with a K&N?
Yes. More air = more gas = more power and poorer mileage. There's no such thing as free horsepower.
Whether that's .1 mpg difference or 2 mpg depends on how much power that is. A forced induction vehicle will make the most use of a free-flowing intake.
»www.dieselplace.com/foru ··· ?t=66536 You should post his follow up study that was done at the K&N factory. The results he got were very different than the ones in the graph.
The tests were valid. K&N just tests were not as real world as the test in that link. Also K&N results were not that different. K&N still meets mfg minimum specs for cleaning air.
K&N definitely gives more airflow, but that means nothing with a stock engine. Unless you installed parts that you calculated needs more airflow it makes no sense to spend the extra money for a K&N filter. Your stock engine is designed to work with the stock filter.
From my understanding if a K&N gives more air flow than stock the car's computer is gonna compensate for more air by using more fuel? So you could actually get less mpg with a K&N?
Fluid dynamics do not always work that way, if you have less restriction you also have less pumping losses so it does not necessarily equal less gas mileage. Less restriction will allow more power but dirt will cause more engine wear...there are trade-offs for most engineering solutions.
In an engine you're just lowering the resistaance to air coming in, you're not pushing more in.
It can mean the total air that gets in is a little more but not alot more.
What messes it up is if you use a MAF housing that gives a larger diameter than stock thus messing up the calculations due to the MAF sensor data not being accurate any more.
The correction is to fix the formulas (basicly a co-efficient.
For instance on the 2005-2010 mustant GT, the C&L CAI comes with an insert that narrows the path but if you have a tunner (like the SCT X3) and someone that can make tune files then you can remove that insert.
On the 05-2010 mustang GT's and CAI that doesn't require a tune won't give you much if any power (ie the K&N CAI)
·
