Pros and Cons of a K&N Drop in Filter

Status
Not open for further replies.
You post shows as a reply to mine in which you seem to be implying I made some stupid claims that I didn't make.

Solo2 and I were only talking about WFO power and I made a point of saying K&Ns passed more dirt.
11.gif
 
I'm pretty happy with my K&N filter and am yet to detect any silicon in any of my UOA, although that's with a detection limit of 10ppm so make what you will of that. I also have an aftermarket MAP based ECU so no air flow meter to worry about.

The main benefits I can think of is the ability to build a decent cold air intake box with them and the added induction noise, which might appeal to a certain crowd. Both apply more so to turbo cars than N/A but I've never owned an N/A car and don't plan on it any time soon.

I also regularly circuit race and auto cross so WOT is probably more important to me than most. I wouldn't bother modifying something that wasn't raced.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Ken2
The air flow argument is a bunch of hype. Your car's throttle ...errr...throttles the air flow. The throttle's job is to choke down the air flow to just what the engine needs. The only time max air flow is needed is full throttle at high rpm. How often is this important to you?

The dirty air filter affecting gas mileage is also a bunch of hype. The dirty air filter acts exactly like a throttle that won't quite open all the way. It limits max power, but has no effect on any other range of power or economy. Your engine's mass airflow sensor measures the exact amount of air flow and causes the control system to send the exact correct amount of gasoline through the injectors. Things were different in old cars with carburettors, but those days are past for most of us.

You will find no advantage of a K&N or other expensive air filter over any good pleated paper filter in any except full throttle high rpm driving. A dirty K&N filter flows less air than a paper air filter. A clean K&N filters less dirt out than a paper air filter.


Depends on what and how you drive. My Townie sees WOT several times a day. I drive hard. There are people that autocross and drag race their DD's and for them the added airflow (if the engine can use it) may be beneficial.

Speed Density systems would be affected differently than MAF systems as well..... Which many older EFI vehicles use.
 
This was UOA was done with a K&N
2003 Toyota 4Runner 4.7 V-8 (2UZ-FE)
6203 Miles on M1 5W-30 (9 Months)
4830 Miles on M1 5W-30 (Previous Sample)
26409 Miles on Engine
Lucas UCL used every fill w/93 Octane gas
Wix Oil Filter
This sample, Previous sample, Universal Averages

Aluminum 2,2,2
Chromium 0,0,0
Iron 7,5,6
Copper 2,1,5
Lead 0,0,3
Tin 0,0,0
Molybdenum 73,61,56
Nickel 0,0,0
Manganese 2,0,1
Silver 0,0,0
Titanium 0,0,0
Potassium 0,0,1
Boron 39,45,59
Silicon 12,11,13
Sodium 9,5,10
Calcium 2199,1894,2230
Magnesium 12,9,135
Phosphorus 596,517,695
Zinc 715,576,823
Barium 0,0,0

Sus Vis@ 210F 63.1 Should be 55-62
Flashpoint 395 should be >365
Fuel Antifreeze 0.0 Should be 0.0
Water 0.0 Should be 0.0
insoulbles 0.2 Should Be <0.6
 
I bought one for my mitsubishi mirage, 7-8 yrs ago. what a waste of money. I don't have the car anymore but still have the air filter. no use for it actually..
 
i put my k&n up for sale, used it for 400 miles (purchased it last month).. i find it didnt do anything but allow more dirt to enter, when i held up the filter up to the sun, it was the thinnest piece of filter i have ever seen, there was a bunch of visible tiny holes too.. i installed a amsoil EAA filter afew days ago.. rock solid filter, no holes, not thin. this thing will block anything, gotta love synthetic nanofibers. and my vehicle feels and runs the exact same as it did with the k&n..


this test http://www.duramax-diesel.com/spicer/index.htm is very old (afew years old).. i wouldnt give it any credit now, for example the amsoil filter they used in that test was one of their wet type filters.. the TS-123.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top