Nothing like that!! Did u clean it after that or does it filter better once it gets a "little" dirty like that?
K & N Air Filters Good Or Bad?
- Thread starter Krazymatt
- Start date
- Status
^Lol, that's when K&N says to clean their filter. When it looks THAT bad.
http://www.knfilters.com/cleaning-pics.htm
I could see that being the case as they claimed to me and have stated otherwise. A rep told me their users wash the filters too frequent and/or improperly wash them which 'could' lead to increased Si entry.
To me? Direct translation: Use one and let it load up.
For me? I'm not using them again as drop-in replacements.
http://www.knfilters.com/cleaning-pics.htm
I could see that being the case as they claimed to me and have stated otherwise. A rep told me their users wash the filters too frequent and/or improperly wash them which 'could' lead to increased Si entry.
To me? Direct translation: Use one and let it load up.
For me? I'm not using them again as drop-in replacements.
My dad has had a drop in K&N in his 03 Sierra since new and he does alot of off road driving and has not had any engine issues in 100,00+ miles. But, all this talk is making lean toward using paper filters. Probably go to a Wix.
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: bigmike
Took mine apart after 40+k miles and found no dust. It really depends on climate.
That, and application, too. I know there are some applications where I would use a K&N and others that I wouldn't. Some guys have problems with MAP sensors, so in such applications, one should exhibit caution. I have a K&N laying around for my old F-150. I may use it for that. It has no MAP sensor and sees use mostly in winter, and it's simply old.
It seems to me that the K&N style filter is, for a lot of applications, an answer to a question no one asked. Paper air filters are good for a lot of miles, usually, and are often too frequently replaced. A person doesn't need to change an air filter every 5,000 miles in the first place, so "extending" to K&N usage is a little weird in such a case.
I did have one in my Town Car years ago. I actually never washed and oiled it, since I ended up getting rid of the car before I actually needed to do so. I just inspected it. I don't think it caused any harm, but I can't see any benefit I got out of it, either.
An 89 F150 with a 4.9L and no MAP sensor? Did you change it to a carburetor or newer FI system? Either way it's MAF sensors that are supposed to be at risk from oiled air filters. The equivalent of a K&N to possibly harm a MAP sensor would be a valve cover gasket leaking oil onto the exhaust manifold.
Originally Posted By: bigmike
Took mine apart after 40+k miles and found no dust. It really depends on climate.
That, and application, too. I know there are some applications where I would use a K&N and others that I wouldn't. Some guys have problems with MAP sensors, so in such applications, one should exhibit caution. I have a K&N laying around for my old F-150. I may use it for that. It has no MAP sensor and sees use mostly in winter, and it's simply old.
It seems to me that the K&N style filter is, for a lot of applications, an answer to a question no one asked. Paper air filters are good for a lot of miles, usually, and are often too frequently replaced. A person doesn't need to change an air filter every 5,000 miles in the first place, so "extending" to K&N usage is a little weird in such a case.
I did have one in my Town Car years ago. I actually never washed and oiled it, since I ended up getting rid of the car before I actually needed to do so. I just inspected it. I don't think it caused any harm, but I can't see any benefit I got out of it, either.
An 89 F150 with a 4.9L and no MAP sensor? Did you change it to a carburetor or newer FI system? Either way it's MAF sensors that are supposed to be at risk from oiled air filters. The equivalent of a K&N to possibly harm a MAP sensor would be a valve cover gasket leaking oil onto the exhaust manifold.
I personally have never used a K&N but a good friend of mine received a couple bad, as in high silicon content or dirt, uoa's before he trashed his and went with oem filters. No problem since.
Last edited:
I have been running K&N filter in an older Taurus for 3-4 years now, with no issues. There were no measurable difference in mpg before and after it was installed. The engine intake note became louder and throatier, which I like. I re-oiled the filter only once. I think the MAF issues is overblown. You can buy a can of MAF cleaner at any parts store. Spray it on the MAF sensor a few weeks after you re-oil the K&N filter. Problem solved (even if it existed at all).
I do want to send an oil sample for UOA after my next oil change for a more conclusive evidence.
I do want to send an oil sample for UOA after my next oil change for a more conclusive evidence.
Last edited:
^Yeah, if it's passing more dirt it's more the potential for increased wear is all.
My approach is give the oil it's best shot without increase contaminants if possible.
The UOA will be more of a real translation for your app aside from not noticing anything out of the ordinary.
My approach is give the oil it's best shot without increase contaminants if possible.
The UOA will be more of a real translation for your app aside from not noticing anything out of the ordinary.
there is not an increase in wear! this is a old wives tale!! if there were small particles that pass, they would be so small below bearing clearance..k&n filters 96%-99%..everybody is an expert..lol..zako is spot on...and no i don't work for k&n..
Last edited:
K&N air filters work very well if you know how to maintain them....
boss. bingo!!!
numerous times in the past when i was using paper air filters i always noticed a slight thin film of dust in the throttle body but those particles are so small it would not make/hurt anything...i never observe that fine dust with k&n or afe filters
Originally Posted By: boxcartommie22
there is not an increase in wear! this is a old wives tale!! if there were small particles that pass, they would be so small below bearing clearance..k&n filters 96%-99%..everybody is an expert..lol..zako is spot on...and no i don't work for k&n..
Nothing I stated was incorrect or out of context, in the real world variety of end-user experiences with any product. I put it in real terms and didn't state anything definitive other than the possibility.
Definitively, there are quite a few UOA on this website alone that show silicon entry while using a K&N and the drop off after switching filters.
However, how can we know if it's the filter or not something else?
If it makes you feel better about using them that's sorta funny. If you don't have issues with contaminant entry then those with this problem of entry very rightly have every reason to suspect everything from the filter itself to post filtration and all other points of entry. K&N or not.
There is no wives tell. It's completely app and conditions dependent as well as all of the other unscientifically calculated variables which no one here will pursue to prove K&N is good or bad, because it's all relative and I don't see anyone out here to go after them. They do make good products. It's a tool like any other, some times it doesn't work as well as another tool does for another end-user relative to their app's needs.
In ideal conditions a K&N won't pass more than what isn't present to be passed and/or by nature of the app isn't putting anything at risk by use.
It's like me claiming 0w-20 oil will cause your engine to wear out more alone, that's out of context. A lot of reasonable folks may step up a grade at least if driving the same stop 'n go app 125 MPH for 2 hours on the autobahn.
I will give K&N this, if they believe washing 'too frequently' could reduce filtration then just tell folks to stop buying the recharge/cleaning kit unless it's dirty enough like they use as reference to 'when to clean':
http://www.knfilters.com/cleaning-pics.htm
ADDED: I'd probably not be as concerned with using a K&N cone filter, I'm talking about drop-in replacements. Again, my preference is indeed on the lines of 'best' filtration possible with still the least amount of added restriction in comparison to a stock paper filter's filtration/flow.
there is not an increase in wear! this is a old wives tale!! if there were small particles that pass, they would be so small below bearing clearance..k&n filters 96%-99%..everybody is an expert..lol..zako is spot on...and no i don't work for k&n..
Nothing I stated was incorrect or out of context, in the real world variety of end-user experiences with any product. I put it in real terms and didn't state anything definitive other than the possibility.
Definitively, there are quite a few UOA on this website alone that show silicon entry while using a K&N and the drop off after switching filters.
However, how can we know if it's the filter or not something else?
If it makes you feel better about using them that's sorta funny. If you don't have issues with contaminant entry then those with this problem of entry very rightly have every reason to suspect everything from the filter itself to post filtration and all other points of entry. K&N or not.
There is no wives tell. It's completely app and conditions dependent as well as all of the other unscientifically calculated variables which no one here will pursue to prove K&N is good or bad, because it's all relative and I don't see anyone out here to go after them. They do make good products. It's a tool like any other, some times it doesn't work as well as another tool does for another end-user relative to their app's needs.
In ideal conditions a K&N won't pass more than what isn't present to be passed and/or by nature of the app isn't putting anything at risk by use.
It's like me claiming 0w-20 oil will cause your engine to wear out more alone, that's out of context. A lot of reasonable folks may step up a grade at least if driving the same stop 'n go app 125 MPH for 2 hours on the autobahn.
I will give K&N this, if they believe washing 'too frequently' could reduce filtration then just tell folks to stop buying the recharge/cleaning kit unless it's dirty enough like they use as reference to 'when to clean':
http://www.knfilters.com/cleaning-pics.htm
ADDED: I'd probably not be as concerned with using a K&N cone filter, I'm talking about drop-in replacements. Again, my preference is indeed on the lines of 'best' filtration possible with still the least amount of added restriction in comparison to a stock paper filter's filtration/flow.
There have been numerous studies/tests(one recently posted here) that have shown K&N filters, allow more dirt/dust to pass then a regular paper filter. Those of you who deny this are delusional end of story.
...context strikes again!
I ran one for a year in the b3500 dodge van, 318 Engine. I did not improve mileage, but gave a deeper throaty sound on the throttle body when climbing hills or in passing gear. I went back to Napa filters after that. I guess they work, I bought the sizzle of the marketing style they presented, but the filter never did the mileage improvement thingy.
Originally Posted By: Jarlaxle
Several UOA on my 1992 F350 say YOU are the delusional one. The K&N filtered fine.
Bonus: it was worth a 100 degree EGT drop when towing!
LMAO, did you pick up a tornado fuel saver at the same time. I hear you can get much better MPG when combined with a K&N air filter. In fact most stores sell them on the same shelf.
Several UOA on my 1992 F350 say YOU are the delusional one. The K&N filtered fine.
Bonus: it was worth a 100 degree EGT drop when towing!
LMAO, did you pick up a tornado fuel saver at the same time. I hear you can get much better MPG when combined with a K&N air filter. In fact most stores sell them on the same shelf.
I never had a problem with my K&N on my 2001 GMC. The MAF sensor never got coated with oil, or I never saw any difference in the resistance before and after I cleaned the MAF sensor. It is a good idea to clean your exposed resistor type MAF sensor regardless of what type of air filter you use. I am sure some fuel/oil vapor will come out of the throttle body when the engine is off and condense on the MAF sensor parts.
- Status
