Recent Topics
Kia Proceed?
by WhyMe - 02/17/20 12:44 PM
RIP Donald Stratton
by 02SE - 02/17/20 12:41 PM
WIX 51393 C&P
by FordBroncoVWJeta - 02/17/20 12:09 PM
Interesting find..
by Mad_Hatter - 02/17/20 10:09 AM
Step Shift Transmission
by Gebo - 02/17/20 09:24 AM
Hope to hear from State Farm today
by WyrTwister - 02/17/20 09:20 AM
Removing transferred dye?
by aquariuscsm - 02/17/20 08:53 AM
ST 0W-20 2013 Sienna 100k
by Mangos86 - 02/17/20 08:43 AM
Starter/Generator bearing grease
by puma4440 - 02/17/20 08:04 AM
I Did Buy the 4Runner 3.4 V6 w/253,000 miles
by Speak2Mountain - 02/17/20 07:59 AM
Proper Brake Bleeding Sequence
by Gebo - 02/17/20 07:32 AM
Do new Jeeps have death wobble?
by supton - 02/17/20 07:21 AM
New to me 2014 Passat TDi- T6?
by racin4ds - 02/17/20 07:07 AM
Chemtech Fuel Additive
by momo - 02/17/20 06:36 AM
Hydraulic oil filter cross reference
by shibby6600 - 02/17/20 01:13 AM
War of 1812
by pkunk - 02/16/20 09:40 PM
Difference in brake hose brands?
by dan_erickson - 02/16/20 09:30 PM
End of Holden...
by Shannow - 02/16/20 09:10 PM
Newest Members
jds59, JimMorrison, bjfangjd, 45ander5, FlightRT
70725 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
107 registered members (aquariuscsm, AndyB, atikovi, allepunta, 11 invisible), 2,372 guests, and 15 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums67
Topics301,563
Posts5,198,147
Members70,724
Most Online4,538
Jan 20th, 2020
Donate to BITOG
Print Thread
Hop To
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3
Re: Went back to stock [Re: 92saturnsl2] #5209700 09/10/19 10:09 PM
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,685
C
CR94 Offline
Offline
C
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 2,685
Originally Posted by 92saturnsl2
If you are waiting until you experience restriction to replace an air filter, you're waiting too long IMO.

Some restriction is inevitable even with a new filter. It's rational to wait until it begins to increase significantly.


2011 Toyota Prius now at 109K
1981 Mazda GLC (323) retired at 606K
1972 Subaru DL retired at 190K
1954 Chevrolet retired at 121K
Re: Went back to stock [Re: rooflessVW] #5209761 09/11/19 02:42 AM
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 169
T
tahoe_hybrid Offline
Offline
T
Joined: Jun 2019
Posts: 169
Originally Posted by rooflessVW
[quote=oldhp]- stock components are always a compromise and are developed to find the balance between performance and efficiency while also considering noise and ease of serviceability.

That is not true


ask scotty kilmer

Re: Went back to stock [Re: barkingspider] #5209793 09/11/19 04:54 AM
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 19,627
SteveSRT8 Offline
Offline
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 19,627
My 05 Silverado I sold had an AEM intake on it with the Dryflow filter. Ran extremely clean. One full mpg gain over the stock airbox.

But the noise eventually drove me back to stock. Could not stand that low moan all the time!


"In a democracy, dissent is an act of faith."
J. William Fulbright
Best ET-12.79 @ 111 mph
4340 pounds, Street tires
Just like we go to Publix
Re: Went back to stock [Re: 92saturnsl2] #5209845 09/11/19 06:10 AM
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 6,773
DoubleWasp Offline
Offline
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 6,773
Originally Posted by 92saturnsl2
Originally Posted by Chris142
That stock lid has the restriction gauge. No reason to open the lid until it shows a restriction.


If you are waiting until you experience restriction to replace an air filter, you're waiting too long IMO.


Why?


07 Lincoln Navigator M1 0w-40/FU
68 Charger R/T / Supercharged 440 VR1/DBL7349
07 Ram 3500 4x4 / Cummins 6.7 /DBL7349
17 Maserati GranTurismo Cabrio
Re: Went back to stock [Re: barkingspider] #5209898 09/11/19 07:13 AM
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,544
R
ragtoplvr Offline
Offline
R
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,544
Back when the K&N filter was invented stock air cleaners were not well engineered for the most part. Significant horsepower gains could be had simply by bolting on a K and K filter and housing.
Significant gains could also be had just by reducing the restriction of the air cleaner housing and keeping the better paper element. they have been living off that reputation since.
The true genius of K&N was and is marketing.

I have worked with people that drove thru deep puddles and ended up bending a rod. It would never have happened with a stock airbox.
I have seen dirty maf and dust in the intake tract.
Any gain these days is slight. Often they are a tiny bit slower. The ET don’t lie. The sound is better though, it must be faster.

Rod

Re: Went back to stock [Re: barkingspider] #5210437 09/11/19 06:44 PM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 405
T
TiGeo Offline
Offline
T
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 405
Open intakes are really for noise/looks - a proper closed air box bringing in outside "cold" air is the best but I argue running a K&N or other high-flow filter (can be dry media for all I care) is a great DD mod (will give a touch louder intake note and flow better) for folks in areas that aren't seeing huge particulate issues in the air they drive through. I also think that when a vehicle is moving at speed through the air the IAT is going to be about teh same between an open or closed intake. Also, no shocker on the MAF...that's the great urban legend of the oil coming off the K&N ruining them...it's B.S. Watch this video...some interesting testing they did (yes, I know it's by K&N so if you are a conspiracy theorist..move along)...I think it's quite interesting.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gE6moItrZNg&t=892s


2018 VW Atlas SEL 4Motion 3.6 - Castrol OE 5W40 VW filter
2018 VW GSW S 4Motion 1.8 Unitronic St2 IS20 - LiquiMoly 5W40 VW filter+Ceratec/MoS2
2013 Ford Focus SE HB 2.0 - MC syn-blend 5W20 MC filter
Re: Went back to stock [Re: barkingspider] #5210595 09/12/19 12:00 AM
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 6,773
DoubleWasp Offline
Offline
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 6,773
The myths swing both ways on K&N.

It's the facts of K&N that are more relevant.

K&N uses 2 more layers of cotton gauze for their diesel truck filters than they do for passenger cars.

For off-road and dirty areas, K&N recommends the use of a foam pre-filter.

K&N themselves after Arlen Spicer's visit to K&N admitted outright that their filter was a compromise between flow and filtration. (But don't admit that in advertising)

K&N also admitted that their efficiency figures are based on testing using constant and not variable dust loading and admitted their filters don't fare as well during a variable loading test. (But don't admit that in advertising)

As I have said many times before, K&N air filters are a valid product with a valid application. K&Ns only crimes are misrepresentation by omission, and recommending products for inappropriate applications.


07 Lincoln Navigator M1 0w-40/FU
68 Charger R/T / Supercharged 440 VR1/DBL7349
07 Ram 3500 4x4 / Cummins 6.7 /DBL7349
17 Maserati GranTurismo Cabrio
Re: Went back to stock [Re: DoubleWasp] #5210740 09/12/19 07:14 AM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 405
T
TiGeo Offline
Offline
T
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 405
Originally Posted by DoubleWasp
The myths swing both ways on K&N.

It's the facts of K&N that are more relevant.

K&N uses 2 more layers of cotton gauze for their diesel truck filters than they do for passenger cars.

For off-road and dirty areas, K&N recommends the use of a foam pre-filter.

K&N themselves after Arlen Spicer's visit to K&N admitted outright that their filter was a compromise between flow and filtration. (But don't admit that in advertising)

K&N also admitted that their efficiency figures are based on testing using constant and not variable dust loading and admitted their filters don't fare as well during a variable loading test. (But don't admit that in advertising)

As I have said many times before, K&N air filters are a valid product with a valid application. K&Ns only crimes are misrepresentation by omission, and recommending products for inappropriate applications.



I guess the "admitted outright that their filter was a compromise between flow and filtration" is a duh to me - of course! The issue to me w/r to K&N or any other high-flow filters is this...does you car need an extra X% of filtering efficiency? Does that X% make any meaningful difference? In the K&N testing (Spicer) that is so famous on the interwebs, the difference is about 3% if I am remembering correctly (96% for K&N and 99% for all the paper ones with AC Delco being highest?). And that graph was quite misleading as th axis started at 90% (again, from memory here) so tha the K&N looked way worse than the others. Last UOA I did on my Golf running a K&N had the comment "excellent filtration" based on low Si and other numbers - not everyone has issues with these. K&N produces an after-market performance product and like all of these companies, markets it accordingly.


2018 VW Atlas SEL 4Motion 3.6 - Castrol OE 5W40 VW filter
2018 VW GSW S 4Motion 1.8 Unitronic St2 IS20 - LiquiMoly 5W40 VW filter+Ceratec/MoS2
2013 Ford Focus SE HB 2.0 - MC syn-blend 5W20 MC filter
Re: Went back to stock [Re: DoubleWasp] #5210878 09/12/19 10:21 AM
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,566
AZjeff Offline
Offline
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 4,566
Originally Posted by DoubleWasp


It's the facts of K&N that are more relevant.

K&Ns only crimes are misrepresentation by omission, and recommending products for inappropriate applications.



You sound like a K&N supporter. Do you view these "crimes" as minor?

Credit where due, K&N has thrived for a long time on solid marketing.



14 RAV4 2.5 5W-20 PP
18 Nissan Titan 5.6 DI, 0W-20 QSUD

The most important thing to do in your life is to not interfere with someone else's life. - Frank Zappa

Re: Went back to stock [Re: TiGeo] #5210912 09/12/19 11:19 AM
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 6,773
DoubleWasp Offline
Offline
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 6,773
Originally Posted by TiGeo
Originally Posted by DoubleWasp
The myths swing both ways on K&N.

It's the facts of K&N that are more relevant.

K&N uses 2 more layers of cotton gauze for their diesel truck filters than they do for passenger cars.

For off-road and dirty areas, K&N recommends the use of a foam pre-filter.

K&N themselves after Arlen Spicer's visit to K&N admitted outright that their filter was a compromise between flow and filtration. (But don't admit that in advertising)

K&N also admitted that their efficiency figures are based on testing using constant and not variable dust loading and admitted their filters don't fare as well during a variable loading test. (But don't admit that in advertising)

As I have said many times before, K&N air filters are a valid product with a valid application. K&Ns only crimes are misrepresentation by omission, and recommending products for inappropriate applications.



I guess the "admitted outright that their filter was a compromise between flow and filtration" is a duh to me - of course! The issue to me w/r to K&N or any other high-flow filters is this...does you car need an extra X% of filtering efficiency? Does that X% make any meaningful difference? In the K&N testing (Spicer) that is so famous on the interwebs, the difference is about 3% if I am remembering correctly (96% for K&N and 99% for all the paper ones with AC Delco being highest?). And that graph was quite misleading as th axis started at 90% (again, from memory here) so tha the K&N looked way worse than the others. Last UOA I did on my Golf running a K&N had the comment "excellent filtration" based on low Si and other numbers - not everyone has issues with these. K&N produces an after-market performance product and like all of these companies, markets it accordingly.


Percentages are also misleading, especially in a narrow range.

A percentage point can represent multiplication. In the case of K&N, if we forget the percentage point completely, we find that it allowed 18 times more dirt than the AC Delco filter.

There, the "percentage system" was far far far more charitable to K&N than the actual dirt passage figure revealed. This is why I don't understand people getting mad over the percentage figure. That figure is doing K&N the most favors, making the dirt passage sound small by comparison.

I'd rather hear "3% worse" than "18 times worse" any day of the week if I were them.

And let's keep in mind that this is their 7-layer media that let 18 times more dirt through. How much worse do you think the media is with only 5 layers?

All this is going on is a very gentle test. In the real world, things get quite nastier. This is how I have ended up seeing so many K&N filters in front of some very dirty intake tracts.

I understand that Blackstone told you "excellent filtration", but Blackstone will say that for any engine with low Si numbers. They've said that for marine UOAs I have sent in. Do boats have "excellent filtration"? No. They don't. I can put a full strip of paper right through a marine flame arrestor. If I poured sand on the flame arrestor of some of them, I bet I could get every grain through without making a mess before the engine blew up. Metal slats or tremendously spaced screens.

It's not "excellent filtration" it is "favorable conditions". Your Golf is an on-road vehicle that likely does not exist in a harsh environment. The truth of the matter is your vehicle is likely benefitting from both filtration and favorable conditions.

Is it really obvious that a performance filter is a compromise? Most K&N buyers barely know what an air filter is, and K&N isn't telling them any better, so how would it be obvious?

Does a vehicle need "X filtration"? Some do. K&N will literally sell you one for anything at all. The point is that K&N could care less what your filtration needs are or are not. They're going to sell you one anyway.

Coming back to the metal flame arrestors, I actually replaced all of mine with K&N filters. Why? Any cotton gauze beats that junk, and K&N media is a USCG certified flame arrestor. Perfect application for K&N.

K&N does NOT market their filters accordingly to the fact that their filters are a compromise. That information is NOWHERE in their advertising. They even used to market fuel economy benefits, which is complete horse manure, and no longer do.

They are an entire species of gorillas when it comes to marketing, but it is not at all accurate.


07 Lincoln Navigator M1 0w-40/FU
68 Charger R/T / Supercharged 440 VR1/DBL7349
07 Ram 3500 4x4 / Cummins 6.7 /DBL7349
17 Maserati GranTurismo Cabrio
Re: Went back to stock [Re: AZjeff] #5210913 09/12/19 11:21 AM
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 6,773
DoubleWasp Offline
Offline
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 6,773
Originally Posted by AZjeff
Originally Posted by DoubleWasp


It's the facts of K&N that are more relevant.

K&Ns only crimes are misrepresentation by omission, and recommending products for inappropriate applications.



You sound like a K&N supporter. Do you view these "crimes" as minor?

Credit where due, K&N has thrived for a long time on solid marketing.



Lol. Anyone here can tell you I am far from being a supporter. I just keep it fair.

No, I do not feel this is minor, especially the filters marketed for the dirtiest of off road machines like dirt bikes and ATVs. Their small valves are very sensitive to dirt contamination and can lead to a very early valve job being needed.


07 Lincoln Navigator M1 0w-40/FU
68 Charger R/T / Supercharged 440 VR1/DBL7349
07 Ram 3500 4x4 / Cummins 6.7 /DBL7349
17 Maserati GranTurismo Cabrio
Re: Went back to stock [Re: barkingspider] #5210915 09/12/19 11:27 AM
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 405
T
TiGeo Offline
Offline
T
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 405
Understood and good points all around. Plenty of dyno tests in the MK7 VW world that show that when combined with other modifications to the stock air box etc. that there are gains from using high-flow filters. You are also correct that favorable conditions are a big part of this but to the "OH MY GOD K&N WILL RUIN YOUR VEHICLE" crowd, that needs to be taken into account. If I lived out in the desert would I use one? Maybe not. I do have to laugh at the mpg comment because yeah...that's laughable. It flows more air at the expense of filtering period.

Last edited by TiGeo; 09/12/19 11:56 AM.

2018 VW Atlas SEL 4Motion 3.6 - Castrol OE 5W40 VW filter
2018 VW GSW S 4Motion 1.8 Unitronic St2 IS20 - LiquiMoly 5W40 VW filter+Ceratec/MoS2
2013 Ford Focus SE HB 2.0 - MC syn-blend 5W20 MC filter
Re: Went back to stock [Re: barkingspider] #5211014 09/12/19 02:01 PM
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,519
Yah-Tah-Hey Offline
Offline
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 4,519
Gave the K&N the old heave ho eh? Good for you. That OEM air filter is all you will ever need.

Re: Went back to stock [Re: barkingspider] #5233719 10/08/19 09:07 AM
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,126
M
metroplex Offline
Offline
M
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,126
I have a 2009 Cobalt SS Turbo with the LNF 2.0 (260 hp stock, K04 stock turbo). I ran the K&N hot air intake for years and had it tuned right. I decided to go back to the stock airbox, and immediately felt the car had much better performance. The K&N allowed the intake air temps to rise well over 100F which is not good for power. The stock airbox kept the temperatures much more consistent to ambient. I've run stock airboxes on all my vehicles since then, and have datalogged evidence to show those K&Ns yield zero gains for performance even with the twin-turbo EcoBoost engines.

Re: Went back to stock [Re: barkingspider] #5235093 10/09/19 04:02 PM
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,454
N
nthach Offline
Offline
N
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 6,454
There's a time and a place for K&N but IMO on stock, daily driven cars it's not the ideal choice. An ex-friend had a K&N CAI on his truck and he neglected it badly - it was never cleaned and it wasn't installed right. I had his intake apart and I saw a gaping hole on the fender side of the filter where it was rubbing against a mounting bolt. MAF was coated in oil.

I cleaned it up for him but I said to find the stock intake setup. He got one off eBay and I installed it. Truck seems to run a little better and it's not as loud as it was with the K&N.

Now, if it was a car that sees the track, a race car/bike or something that needs more air flow I can see a K&N being appropriate. They're popular for boats.

Page 2 of 3 1 2 3
Previous Thread
Index
Next Thread

BOB IS THE OIL GUY® Powered by UBB.threads™