K+N Proves No Harm to MAF!

Status
Not open for further replies.
M

mechtech2

Joined
Sep 5, 2006
Messages
19,478
Location
Chicago Area
http://www.knfilters.com/MAF/massair.htm

Please take a peek at this, and please look at their short, boring, videos - because the info is striking..
Result? I no longer think K+N with it's oil does any harm, nor could it.
Amazing to me is how low the MPH of air is through one... 1-11 MPH or so.
And they NEVER saw a fouled sensor from their products!
EVAP systems and PCV systems at rest vaporize and cause problems sometimes.

OK.. this is the company line, but you tell me if it has the absolute ring of truth, with data and facts behind it.

I was wrong, and will put mine back in.
 
If you follow the instructions on cleaning and reoiling the air filter it wont cause any issues. If you use too much oil and put the filter back in, i can see how it may affect your maf. I use a Spectre filter (similar to k&n) and no issues. However, I dont believe it filters out as much as a stock filter, its half as thick as oem filter. Gains are negligable as far as I can tell. I use mine during Summer only and go with the stock one during winter. Only people who have issues with em are the ones who dont follow instructions.
 
IMO oiled high flow/low efficiency air filters contribute to or exacerbate existing engine issues that fog the MAF, not the sole cause. Also similar to the claim of "oxygen sensor safe", you can fog/foul a sensor making it lazy and inaccurate without physically damaging it. So IMO the no damage/sensor safe claims are misleading.
 
Imo,if you don't have an engine that requires a lot more airflow,such as a modified race car type of engine,this filter is overkill.A stock setup should be fine for daily driving.
 
Glad I'm not on this bandwagon alone, Mechtech!

I don't like oiled cotton gauze filters for several reasons but I also don't like inaccurate bovine scatology being circulated as fact and the facts are that K&N oil doesn't hurt MAFS... even if it does migrate (which seems to be fairly unlikely according to K&N). If you read the material that a high percentage of the MAFs sent in as "bad" were perfectly serviceable, showing misdiagnosis is rampant. They also showed that other oils may not be harmless, such as motor oil from blowby gasses which can migrate to the MAF with some setups. That is something I have seen a few times but in those instances, it did not appear to have any effect on engine operation.

The one thing I didn't see well addressed was the issue of dust that makes it thru the filter being attracted to the oil on the MAF wire and what effect that might have. Given all I read, that seems a fairly unlikely scenario but lack of efficiency in the area of fine dust is one of the OCG filter's weakest links..

Leaky: Hopefully you have fully read all the info at the K&N site. I would be very interested to know what information and testing you base your statement on? This is a legit question here because if you have seen any studies/testing done that counter what K&N says, I'd be very grateful to see them. Seriously! Give me some research clues to follow up on!
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: LeakySeals
IMO oiled high flow/low efficiency air filters contribute to or exacerbate existing engine issues that fog the MAF, not the sole cause. Also similar to the claim of "oxygen sensor safe", you can fog/foul a sensor making it lazy and inaccurate without physically damaging it. So IMO the no damage/sensor safe claims are misleading.


They did lengthy and involved tests.
So how do you prove they are misleading?
They could not get oil off of the filter when they tried.
Please state your references.
 
The K&N red oil will NOT hurt sensors. I have run those on Harleys for a long time and over oiled a few. That said...over oiling a motorcycle filter is a huge continuous mess.
lol.gif
 
not really related to K&N or similar air filters but years ago a major air filter manufacturer designed an air filter for HD diesels with a honey-like oil on the surface (iirc correctly it was called nudifix or something along those lines) and thay claimed the air filter trapped dirt/particles much smaller than an ordinary paper filter ever could. It wasn't long before engines began black-smoking - air starved - before long it was found the honey-like substance had clogged up the innercooler on 6V and 8V92 engines resulting in expensive teardowns and greatly diminished fuel economy. It wasn't too long after this discovery that the filters disappeared from the market. in this particular scenario, what seemed like a good idea soon cost a lot of fleets a lot of money. Of course, they NEVER made good on any warranty claims....there was ALWAYS an excuse of why the filter wasn't to blame.
 
Last edited:
None of my engines live within 500rpm of redline where this type of filter may flow more than a standard paper filter. I also want my engines to breathe the cleanest air possible as designed by the manufacturer for maximum reliability and longevity. Since almost all of OEM intakes flow more than the engine requires these days, the motivation decreases even more.

They can say whatever they want concerning MAF's, they can have graphs and labs write testimonials until the cows come home. I have run K&N in the past and while I never had an issue mechanically, there was always a bit of dust in the intake tract and being able to see daylight through the filter media really really bothers me as to its efficiency.
 
Originally Posted By: mechtech2
Originally Posted By: LeakySeals
IMO oiled high flow/low efficiency air filters contribute to or exacerbate existing engine issues that fog the MAF, not the sole cause. Also similar to the claim of "oxygen sensor safe", you can fog/foul a sensor making it lazy and inaccurate without physically damaging it. So IMO the no damage/sensor safe claims are misleading.


They did lengthy and involved tests.
So how do you prove they are misleading?
They could not get oil off of the filter when they tried.
Please state your references.

Re-read my statement. Not challenging the results at all. First I defended K&N to some extent. That the filter alone is not the problem, and something else may be going on. Then I gave an opinion on the use of words that can be misleading like safe and damage. Example would be spraying Seafoam Deep Creep lubricant on your MAF or o2 sensor. While Deep Creep would not damage the sensor permanently, it fouls the sensors with lube so they would not operate correctly/accurately. So while Seafoam Deep Creep "will not damage sensors", its not something you should spray on an o2 sensor. People see that claim and think its ok.
 
Originally Posted By: Gabe
K&N website advises NOT to add excessive oil due to potential damage from coating sensors.

http://www.knfilters.com/filter_facts.htm#OILING


You should accurately characterize what is said, Gabe, to avoid confusion. Here is the exact quote, with the relavant passage in red.

"When servicing a K&N filter, take care not to over-oil the element. Besides impeding air flow, excess oil can migrate into the intake system where it can coat electronic sensors, which some OEM’s claim may hinder the sensors’ operation and result in a repair that will not be covered under warranty. Although K&N disagrees with such claims, as explained in more detail on this web site, in order to avoid a dispute with an OEM over the denial of a warranty claim, we suggest that you be careful not to over-oil your K&N air filter. Never saturate the filter. If oil drips from the filter, wash it and start over. Use only K&N oil. For example, an E-1500 filter has 92.4-inches of surface area requiring 1.707 fluid ounces of oil. Follow oiling instructions included with your filter or refer to the instructions listed here.
 
Step 1: Hold filter up to light.
Step 2: See bright spots of light shining through.
Step 3: Realize that for a daily driver, there is no good reason to run a K&N.

That's my reasoning. Been there, done that. Wasted enough money on those filters. I can trust traditional filters. Can't say the same about K&N.
 
Originally Posted By: jhMalibu
Step 1: Hold filter up to light.
Step 2: See bright spots of light shining through.
Step 3: Realize that for a daily driver, there is no good reason to run a K&N.

That's my reasoning. Been there, done that. Wasted enough money on those filters. I can trust traditional filters. Can't say the same about K&N.

+1 - Every K&N that I have used (at total of 4 in 4 different vehicles) has allowed dust to filter past them into the intake duct. I do use a K&N on my Brute Force 750i, but I also run a pre-filter sock on it. While I believe that K&N allows more air to pass through, I also believe it is at the cost of allowing dust to pass with it.
 
I have seen MAF codes get triggered again, and again after people swap them into Mercedes. K&N can say whatever they want but they are in the business to sell air filters. Cracked air boxes that let unfiltered air past the filter cause the same problem.

The more silly part is Mercedes has never made a restrictive air box so I'm not sure what they are trying to gain...I don't know why you would want a filter that lets more dirt pass threw when the stock filter already has something like 50% excess capacity. The most laughable set up is when people throw away the nice stock cold ram air set up for those silly under hood hot air intake cone K&N's.

The only way to actually add the HP K&N claims to add is to change the entire air intake system to a carbon fiber Brabus one and you have to spend $5k to improve on the factory engineering enough to gain 10-15 hp.
 
Last edited:
The Pope said there is a god.
Bernie Madoff said,"You're making a fortune!" to his investors.
I told my wife,"Those jeans don't make your butt look big."
K&N said their air filters are as innocent as a lamb when it comes to filtration and MAF issues.

Denial, it ain't just a river in Egypt.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

SubieRubyRoo
Not all oiled filters are similarly bad to K&N...
2 3 4
Replies
75
Views
7K
ZeeOSix
G
210,000 miles with K&N air intake system
5 6 7
Replies
127
Views
11K
pocketchange
D
Second thoughts about K&N
3 4 5
Replies
86
Views
13K
Revving2Redline
RevRider
K&N 171 - Forum Article in Response To Their Oil Filter Performance For Harley’s
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
johnmyster
R
Beware of K&N and AEM, now part of K&N!
Replies
12
Views
4K
2strokeNorthstar
Back
Top