K & N filter change

...

Frankly, if anyone wants to have the ultimate free flowing intake they should remove the filter altogether. All one need do is look at the incredibly sparse K&N filter to realise it is basically an oily, fuzzy cotton screen door, and we all know screen doors do obviously still grab the wind when it slams them around, in spite of all the open little holes that let skinny light and no-see-ums through.

No filter works great for boats (no dust at all!) and should work fine for people who obviously do not drive off clean pavement and desperately need that last .5 hp gain. Of course one should keep in mind that it was once advertised that K&N "Engineers" have "discovered" that their unit flows more air than no filter at all... ha, ha, ha. They're killin' me.

I would think that some folks on here remember the same type heavy ad campaign propoganda run by JetFire Fuel Ignitors. They advertised that there was no need to run spark plugs any longer and that JetFires produced more power and better mileage. Hee, hee.
"JET-FIRE FUEL IGNITORS use no sparks. Instead a fanning swath of flame walks across a semi-conductor bridge from one electrode to another, exploding far more fuel, getting far more power. There is no gap that can widen, and carbon deposites actually improve performance. They do not have to be adjusted or replaced -- ever!"

The only thing better than JetFires was those little magnets one can put on their fuel lines along with the little super-charger fans above the carb. Here's some more fuel savers. J.C.Whitney used to be a good place to find them. I'm sure they sell K&N's now too.

I received a K&N along with other intake equipment on a racecar, and I may very well use it on pavement to keep bugs, saboteurs and metal track shards out of my engine.

Wes ;)
...

Jarlaxle wrote:

Some cars DID offer a K&N as an option. (Offhand, the Viper ACR and, IO think, Ram SRT10.) They are not used because they cost more.

You go ahead and enjoy yours then. Until my engine shows signs of air starvation and the K&N offers a fix, I'll stick with OEM dry media filters.:C

Me Again wrote:
No one has posted that they did pre and post oil samples and did not see increased silica readings with the K&N, which you will. That equals increase internal engine wear.

Chris

I did, in fact, do oil samples. The silicon reading was LOWER with the K&N, EVERY TIME!

Hannibal wrote:
K&N's LIfetime warranty is number one reason I've never owned one. Read it word for word. Number two reason is I'm not having any problems with the OEM style paper media filter. Why would I revert back to '40's technology? Manufacturer's are doing everything feasible to meet CAFE requirements. If there were any gains to be had by simply using an oiled gauze filter, they would be using them as OE. Oiled media filters were used in the '50's and earlier. We've evolved since then. NASCAR "used" to use oiled gauze filters. After it was determined that many engines lost during the race were caused by tiny clumps of dirt building in the filters, breaking away, sticking to cylinder walls and causing catastrophic engine damage, they went back to dry media filters much like our OEM filters. I seriously doubt K&N's marketing geniuses know more than auto manufacturers' engineers. But they do come with an ultra cool sticker! :B

Some cars DID offer a K&N as an option. (Offhand, the Viper ACR and, IO think, Ram SRT10.) They are not used because they cost more.

chevor wrote:
I ran K&N filters in the my diesel truck for over 460,000 miles now. They collect more dirt than paper and need to be cleaned regularly. They do wear out, can only be cleaned a few times, thats where I have experience the MAF fault. Replace the filter and faults stop. I have and do use an Edge CTS to monitor the sensor while driving. Whats happening is at idle less air is allowed to enter engine than what the Truck computer is programed to be acceptable. The truck doesn't surge, sputter or stall. This BS the dealer tells you that it soaks the MAF sensor in oil is a lie. They just want to sell you an over priced air filter. I haved do use an Edge CTS to monitor the sensor while driving. I have run oil samples too and see no prove that a dry filter stops more dirt.

I think its funny how others can comment on a product they have never used. A "wet" filter is going to stop more dirt than a dry one. They filter allows more air flow because it has an larger surface for air to enter. I would say over 3 times as much.

Have you ever seen a dry filter look this dirty?

An over-oiled K&N CAN foul a MAF sensor...but that is not the fault of K&N, that is 100% user error!

dodge guy wrote:

fla-gypsy wrote:
The K&N will add nothing but more noise and dirt. K&N engineers (if there is such a thing) do not know more than the manufacturers engineers.

I've seen some of the******manuf., and engineers put together! I'm not impressed!

No kidding! Offhand...look at the OE intake tract on a 1995-98 DOHC Neon! An Iceman is worth most of 20HP...not because it's that good, but because the OE setup is just that BAD!

I often have somewhat different priorities than the OE designers!

old guy wrote:
my son used to run NASCAR and he said if you are racing you are tearing down the motor after every race or so and the K&N is OK for that application. family car not so OK. how many of you want to tear down the motor every few months. I don't.

I have 100,000+ on the K&N on my Caddy's 542 stroker. Probably 65K on Liz's Grand National. 65K on my first F-350, 7.3 turbo. Maybe 45K on my 79 (12-valve Cummins). 40K on my Cherokee (4.0 six). Not one single problem from any of them. Oil analysis on all showed that the K&N filters just fine! (In fact, the Jeep's HIGHEST silicon was with a paper filter!)

Note: the GN spins a Stage II stroker to 7500RPM with 25+psi of boost and cranks out 800+HP. The Caddy's huge stroker flows enough air to deform some paper filters.

Bob Vaughn wrote:
After all the responses I decided to remove the K & N and go back to the OEM filter....that was an expensive lesson.....

I have been running mine since late 2001 and don't plan on quitting anytime soon.good filtration and good economics also. When I bought the truck a new paper filter was. 27:00 I paid 32:00 for the Kand n plus oil kits for all these years. Intake passes the Kleenex test and it runs fine too. Good for me j

After all the responses I decided to remove the K & N and go back to the OEM filter....that was an expensive lesson.....

No one has posted that they did pre and post oil samples and did not see increased silica readings with the K&N, which you will. That equals increase internal engine wear.

Chris