A few years ago, there was a rumor flying that Dodge and/or Cummins was rejecting certain engine warranty claims on trucks equipped with K&N filters. Was there any truth to this? Somebody once showed me some paperwork from Cummins but, frankly, it looked forged to me. I know there are strong opinions on the K&N issue (I have mine), but I really just want to know if this was an urban legends kinda story akin to the JATO rockets on the Caprice, or if there was some truth and, if so, what was the final disposition of the issue.
Cummins and K&N- Rumor or Fact
- Thread starter Jim Allen
- Start date
- Status
It's a rumor.
Magnusson-Moss Act. Google it.
Unless Cummins/Dodge proved per incident that the K&N was the reason for the damage. That's the only legal way that would be true.
Magnusson-Moss Act. Google it.
Unless Cummins/Dodge proved per incident that the K&N was the reason for the damage. That's the only legal way that would be true.
It's a fact!
It used to be on the Cummins website in the FAQ section.
But It's been removed a while back.
Why? I don't know.
Probably K&N's forced them to delete the line threatening a lawsuit.
Or maybe the customers with K&N's got successfull in applying the Magnusson-Moss act.
I don't remember which line was it but suspect it's been question #24.
This is where you see a blank line now.
It used to be on the Cummins website in the FAQ section.
But It's been removed a while back.
Why? I don't know.
Probably K&N's forced them to delete the line threatening a lawsuit.
Or maybe the customers with K&N's got successfull in applying the Magnusson-Moss act.
I don't remember which line was it but suspect it's been question #24.
This is where you see a blank line now.
If it was operating in a dusty offroad enviroment like heavy equipment, like many Cummins do. Then they probably did see signs of dust injestion either visually or with oil tests, enough to deny a claim.
So it was a real deal then? I've worked for dealerships, know about the M-M Act and how you must prove it was the device that caused the problem. That's fair. Some dealership like to Lord it over you and threaten about mods. Others are more realistic. Bottom line, though, if an aftermarket product causes a parts major failure, it's right that the blame and the cost of that failure be borne by the aftermarket parts manufacturer and the owner that installed it... not the vehicle manufacturer.
Searching around the web, I've found the exact wording of the statement.
It sounds authentic, as far as I can remember.
"Does DaimlerChrysler authorize the use of high-flow aftermarket air filters such as K&N with my Cummins engine?
No. DaimlerChrysler and Cummins do not recommend the use of increased flow air filters such as K&N, because they can allow contaminants into the intake that can ruin an engine (scoring the sides of the pistons, etc.)"
It sounds authentic, as far as I can remember.
"Does DaimlerChrysler authorize the use of high-flow aftermarket air filters such as K&N with my Cummins engine?
No. DaimlerChrysler and Cummins do not recommend the use of increased flow air filters such as K&N, because they can allow contaminants into the intake that can ruin an engine (scoring the sides of the pistons, etc.)"
Jim, I do know that Cummins/Fleetguard (apparantly they had a name change last week to Cummins filtration) don't think very highly of K&N. A mate on another board is a filtration engineer, currently based in Germany doing R&D and works with Mann-Hummel, Donaldson and Cummins, where he was two weeks ago (Stoughton WI).
With his testing, and all the info which he has available, he thinks K&N are crap. Unfortunately he can't pass on specific filtration efficiency curves due to confidentiality, etc, but says Spicers test results mirror other testing he's seen.
I'll ask him whether he knows anything about the Cummins warranty thing.
With his testing, and all the info which he has available, he thinks K&N are crap. Unfortunately he can't pass on specific filtration efficiency curves due to confidentiality, etc, but says Spicers test results mirror other testing he's seen.
I'll ask him whether he knows anything about the Cummins warranty thing.
Some "proofs" that you would have a hard time disputing in a court or before an arbitrator.
Higher than normal silicon in a UOA
An air filter element that you can see holes in when you hold it up to the light.
Not applicable to a diesel, but oil on a MAF with an aftermarket oiled gause filters if you have a MAF problem. I believe GM has denied claims based on oily MAFs.
I seem to remember K&N had on their web site that their filters should not be used with forced induction. I'm almost positive that it was there 3 or 4 years ago. It was right around the time I dumped my K&N and went back to OEM paper in my turbo Volvo.
Dodge states right in the owner's manual that the use of aftermarket non-paper filters may void the warranty on the Cummins.
Magnusson-Moss doesn't really apply here. It exists to prevent a manufacturer from requiring you to buy their products for maintenance, not as a way to excuse yourself from negligence. You still have to use maintenance items that are suitable for the application. If a manufacturer recommends API rated oil, you still have to use something that is at least comparable. You can't use WD-40 as engine oil and claim it's okay because of Magnusson-Moss. Dodge isn't trying to stop you from using filters from other manufacturers, it's warning against using a certain filter design with inferior filtration.
I had a K&N once. Then I held it up to the light . . .
[ June 12, 2006, 03:57 AM: Message edited by: rpn453 ]
Magnusson-Moss doesn't really apply here. It exists to prevent a manufacturer from requiring you to buy their products for maintenance, not as a way to excuse yourself from negligence. You still have to use maintenance items that are suitable for the application. If a manufacturer recommends API rated oil, you still have to use something that is at least comparable. You can't use WD-40 as engine oil and claim it's okay because of Magnusson-Moss. Dodge isn't trying to stop you from using filters from other manufacturers, it's warning against using a certain filter design with inferior filtration.
Why would they make, market, and sell microwave popcorn that has 12g of trans fat per bag for human consumption?
I had a K&N once. Then I held it up to the light . . .
[ June 12, 2006, 03:57 AM: Message edited by: rpn453 ]
It's nice to see someone who actually understand what the Magnussen-Moss act actually is.
PS. I know I quoted a lot, but that was worth repeating
Okay, then what about the AFE filter I have in my 2001 Dodge Cummins? Am I harming my truck after being told how great it is?
Sorry acewiza, I thought you were disputing ALS's memory!quote:
Originally posted by acewiza:
You missed the point rpn453. Read the post directly above mine. ALS said "K&N had on their web site that their filters should not be used with forced induction." They don't recommend using their own filter? Get it?
Thanks, XS650.
Forced induction was the exact words that K&N used. Not Super Charged or Turbo Charged but Forced Induction. It was one of the reasons that I dumped my K&N after 5 years of use in my Volvo 745 Turbo. I can tell you when it was look up when the Air Filter study was first posted on BITOG. It was with in a month or so after that study was first posted on the home page that I made the decision to replace my K&N with a paper filter.
Well, if you use WD-40 as engine oil and you toast your bearings/score the cylinder walls/ruin your valvetrain/have any other lubrication related failure, then absolutely your warranty won't and shouldn't cover it. But at the same time, they can't deny the warranty on your steering rack and pinion because you have WD-40 in the crankcase. So of course Cummins can deny warranty for a K&N filter if you come in with, say, a worn turbo impeller and there is not a strong history of that problem on these engines. But they can't deny warranty on your injectors because of the air filter you're using. I can't see how using a K&N on a Cummins would be any different than using it on any manufacturer's engine. If it causes a problem, the engine warranty won't cover it. If it's an unrelated problem, they have to cover it no matter what filter you use. Cummins probably just made a bigger point of mentioning the risks of these kinds of filters since I'd guess that owners of Cummins engines in pickups are much more likely than the average to want to use these types of modifications. BTW, speaking of WD-40 in the crankcase, there was a guy on a different message board who had an old beat up Chevy truck with a filthy engine. He didn't really care if it died, so he did an experiment to try and clean it out by replacing the motor oil with Marvel Mystery Oil for a short time. Said he drove it up and down the road for a little while and actually didn't notice much out of the ordinary. As far as I know, the engine survived fine.quote:
Originally posted by XS650:
It's nice to see someone who actually understand what the Magnussen-Moss act actually is.
PS. I know I quoted a lot, but that was worth repeating
It was said above that: "Magnusson-Moss doesn't really apply here. It exists to prevent a manufacturer from requiring you to buy their products for maintenance, not as a way to excuse yourself from negligence".
Moss-Magnuson also protects you against a manufacturer who wrongly claims that an after-market add on, or a modification to the vehicle, voids the warranty. It only voids the warranty on something if the add on or modification caused the problem with that thing.
Moss-Magnuson also protects you against a manufacturer who wrongly claims that an after-market add on, or a modification to the vehicle, voids the warranty. It only voids the warranty on something if the add on or modification caused the problem with that thing.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked