Got bored. Installed K&N filter.

[ZeeOSix]

Sprinkling clobs of crushed up cement dust on to the face of the filters to measure efficiency seems a bit Mickey Mouse to me. The reason there wasn't any difference in the dyno numbers between OEM and the aftermarket filters is because that OEM filter had megatons of filter media - look how deep the pleats are.

Engineering Explained guy did a similar dyno test of just swapping the OEM for a K&N back-to-back and he saw some increased HP.

 

[TiGeo]

Sprinkling clobs of crushed up cement dust on to the face of the filters to measure efficiency seems a bit Mickey Mouse to me. The reason there wasn't any difference in the dyno numbers between OEM and the aftermarket filters is because that OEM filter had megatons of filter media - look how deep the pleats are.

Engineering Explained guy did a similar dyno test of just swapping the OEM for a K&N back-to-back and he saw some increased HP.

Thank you.

 

[Warlord]

Sprinkling clobs of crushed up cement dust on to the face of the filters to measure efficiency seems a bit Mickey Mouse to me. The reason there wasn't any difference in the dyno numbers between OEM and the aftermarket filters is because that OEM filter had megatons of filter media - look how deep the pleats are.

Engineering Explained guy did a similar dyno test of just swapping the OEM for a K&N back-to-back and he saw some increased HP.

Out of curiosity what dust would you prefer they had used? Project farm used flour and I think this is better since cement is made of silicate sand and a few other binding agents. Is a particle of cement dust somehow easier to get past a filter than the same size particle of road dust? Seems like if a filter is not stopping a certain size particle it’s simply not going to stop it regardless of what the particle is.

He explains in the video about the stock filter already having way more filter media than the car can use thus no power gain from less restrictive filters.

 

[TiGeo]

Out of curiosity what dust would you prefer they had used? Project farm used flour and I think this is better since cement is made of silicate sand and a few other binding agents. Is a particle of cement dust somehow easier to get past a filter than the same size particle of road dust? Seems like if a filter is not stopping a certain size particle it’s simply not going to stop it regardless of what the particle is.

He explains in the video about the stock filter already having way more filter media than the car can use thus no power gain from less restrictive filters.

I never encounter conditions that are replicated by dumping dust on a filter like that or loading it with that much crap.

 

[Warlord]

I never encounter conditions that are replicated by dumping dust on a filter like that or loading it with that much crap.

In my mind it doesn’t matter what the conditions are if it’s letting through the particles. Whether the particulate passes gradually or is sprinkled on for a test they’re still going through into your intake. The paper filter didn’t let them through under the same conditions because it filters a lot better.

 

[ZeeOSix]

In my mind it doesn’t matter what the conditions are if it’s letting through the particles. Whether the particulate passes gradually or is sprinkled on for a test they’re still going through into your intake. The paper filter didn’t let them through under the same conditions because it filters a lot better.

There is no control on the distribution and thickness of the "dust" sprinkled over the face of the face of the filter. If you had an even distribution of thin dust vs a big pile just in the middle of the filter (both the same volume on the filter), then the filter will draw the particles through differently. Guess which method would draw more particles through the media. ISO testing for air filter efficiency doesn't do it this way for a reason.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Out of curiosity what dust would you prefer they had used?

Ideally, he should have used official ISO test dust ... not self crushed up concrete that has zero control on the dust size distribution. And I highly doubt every batch of his dust poured on the filters had the same particle distribution because of that fact.

 

[TiGeo]

In my mind it doesn’t matter what the conditions are if it’s letting through the particles. Whether the particulate passes gradually or is sprinkled on for a test they’re still going through into your intake. The paper filter didn’t let them through under the same conditions because it filters a lot better.

Nobody here is saying that the K&N filters better than the paper - but the difference in filtering efficiency isn't nearly as much as is portrayed by testing like this. You eat a little more dust or more flow that *may* be beneficial to you/your car....or not. Simple decision point. All of my UOAs on multiple cars running these higher-flow filters show no sign of filtering issues driving in "normal" conditions on the east coast.

 

[Warlord]

Ideally, he should have used official ISO test dust ... not self crushed up concrete that has zero control on the dust size distribution. And I highly doubt every batch of his dust poured on the filters had the same particle distribution because of that fact.

I think for a guy in a garage it’s as good a test as we’re gonna get. It’s not like the filters go into bypass because a bunch was added at once. Either it lets it through or it doesn’t.

 

[Warlord]

Nobody here is saying that the K&N filters better than the paper - but the difference in filtering efficiency isn't nearly as much as is portrayed by testing like this. You eat a little more dust or more flow that *may* be beneficial to you/your car....or not. Simple decision point. All of my UOAs on multiple cars running these higher-flow filters show no sign of filtering issues driving in "normal" conditions on the east coast.

I’ve seen your impressive UOAs but they seem to fly in the face of every other bit of evidence I’ve ever seen (UOAs, articles, YouTube vids, personal experience). I have no problem if someone wants to give up filtration for performance but you and I both know they’re mostly installed on vehicles that won’t benefit from it. The real interesting question in all of this is whether or not the lack of filtration will have an effect on the longevity of the vehicle but like most things there’s no real way to test that conclusively.

 

[ZeeOSix]

I think for a guy in a garage it’s as good a test as we’re gonna get. It’s not like the filters go into bypass because a bunch was added at once. Either it lets it through or it doesn’t.

Go into bypass? ... we're talking about air filters.

Of course we all pretty much know that K&N style filters are not as efficient as OEM paper filters. I'm just saying the test method is nothing more than a garage setup and can't really be trusted to show complete accuracy due to test methods.

 

[Warlord]

Go into bypass? ... we're talking about air filters.

Haha I know that’s what I said “it’s not like the filters go into bypass” regarding your assertion that the test was invalid because he didn’t sprinkle the dust evenly. Did the dust pass through the filter or not? You‘re not going to get perfect laboratory tests with multimillion dollar budgets on YouTube. All you can do is appreciate the amount of work and money this guy put into his video and make your own conclusions I suppose.

 

[TiGeo]

I’ve seen your impressive UOAs but they seem to fly in the face of every other bit of evidence I’ve ever seen (UOAs, articles, YouTube vids, personal experience). I have no problem if someone wants to give up filtration for performance but you and I both know they’re mostly installed on vehicles that won’t benefit from it. The real interesting question in all of this is whether or not the lack of filtration will have an effect on the longevity of the vehicle but like most things there’s no real way to test that conclusively.

I agree that most folks aren't benefiting at all from the extra flow and a paper filter is the way to go. As you state, that is really the question, a little more fine dirt is going in most likely, will this have any meaningful impact on a vehicle kept the average amount of time they are kept by average drivers. I say no but of course that's my gut and not based on a full-blow NASA study....hahahaha.

On my UOAs - so where are all the bad ones from K&Ns? I've not really seen any but have seen other ones like mine...normal looking. What you really have here is a sample population bias, we just don't have enough K&N UOAs to really say what is and isn't normal.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Haha I know that’s what I said “it’s not like the filters go into bypass” regarding your assertion that the test was invalid because he didn’t sprinkle the dust evenly. Did the dust pass through the filter or not? You‘re not going to get perfect laboratory tests with multimillion dollar budgets on YouTube. All you can do is appreciate the amount of work and money this guy put into his video and make your own conclusions I suppose.

Yeah, the dust did pass through the filter ... but what I'm saying is how the dust is introduced and distributed on the filter is very subject. and due to the dust itself (batch inconsistency in particle size distribution), and both factors most likely a big under controlled variables due to inconsistency. Let's just say I don't go buy air filters based on some guys YouTube garage test when ISO test data should be available.

 

[Warlord]

I agree that most folks aren't benefiting at all from the extra flow and a paper filter is the way to go. As you state, that is really the question, a little more fine dirt is going in most likely, will this have any meaningful impact on a vehicle kept the average amount of time they are kept by average drivers. I say no but of course that's my gut and not based on a full-blow NASA study....hahahaha.

On my UOAs - so where are all the bad ones from K&Ns? I've not really seen any but have seen other ones like mine...normal looking. What you really have here is a sample population bias, we just don't have enough K&N UOAs to really say what is and isn't normal.

I did a search for them but I’m not sure exactly how to link the threads. I’ll try my best.

https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/lincoln-town-car-3-000-miles-mobil-1-ep-5w30-4-6l.345833/

https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/uoa-2019-ford-ranger-2-3t-ecoboost.345513/

https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/t...miles-unknown-oil-unknown-oil-mileage.339585/

https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/t...00-mile-oci-2016-toyota-sienna-le-fwd.333388/

Thats 4 of the first 5 results that come up. All with pretty bad silicon numbers. The 5th one was still not good but tolerable in the grand scheme of things.

 

[Warlord]

Yeah, the dust did pass through the filter ... but what I'm saying is how the dust is introduced and distributed on the filter is very subject. and due to the dust itself (batch inconsistency in particle size distribution), and both factors most likely a big under controlled variables due to inconsistency. Let's just say I don't go buy air filters based on some guys YouTube garage test when ISO test data should be available.

I’ve never seen official ISO test data that supports the idea of running a K&N either. I’ll have a look on the google machine for it.

What process do you think causes the particulate to pass through the media of the filter in this test in a way that it wouldn’t on the open road? Is the volume of dust particles somehow pushing each other through the media taking advantage of their sheer weight and kinetic energy? He replicated the exact airflow his filter would be experiencing in his vehicle so that wouldn’t make much sense.

 

[OVERKILL]

I’ve never seen official ISO test data that supports the idea of running a K&N either. I’ll have a look on the google machine for it.

What process do you think causes the particulate to pass through the media of the filter in this test in a way that it wouldn’t on the open road? Is the volume of dust particles somehow pushing each other through the media taking advantage of their sheer weight and kinetic energy? He replicated the exact airflow his filter would be experiencing in his vehicle so that wouldn’t make much sense.

There was a test report that used the ISO test dust, I've quoted it in the now locked thread from 2018:

Let's look at the dirt passed and time to restriction limit data.

- The duration of the test was 60 minutes and during that period, the amount of dirt passed by the Donaldson unit was 0.4g.
- The K&N passed 7g of dirt within 24 minutes and hit the restriction limit.

If we break this down to g/minute passed, a simple metric, we can perhaps gather some clearer data comparing the most efficient filter in the test, which also loaded up the slowest, and one of the least efficient.

1. Donaldson PowerCore: 0.0067g/min loading rate
2. K&N oil cotton gauze: 0.2917g/min loading rate

This means the Donaldson is 43.5x more efficient.

Ignoring the loading limit, if we just look at the performance within a 6 hour window:
1. Donaldson PowerCore: 2.4g of dirt passed
2. K&N oiled cotton gauze: 105g of dirt passed

That's a HUGE difference.

The Donaldson would have to be run for 262.5hrs; 11 DAYS to pass the same amount of dirt as the K&N, or, looked at from the other direction, the K&N passes in 8.2 minutes what it takes the Donaldson 6 hours to pass.

 

[Warlord]

There was a test report that used the ISO test dust, I've quoted it in the now locked thread from 2018:

Let's look at the dirt passed and time to restriction limit data.

- The duration of the test was 60 minutes and during that period, the amount of dirt passed by the Donaldson unit was 0.4g.
- The K&N passed 7g of dirt within 24 minutes and hit the restriction limit.

If we break this down to g/minute passed, a simple metric, we can perhaps gather some clearer data comparing the most efficient filter in the test, which also loaded up the slowest, and one of the least efficient.

1. Donaldson PowerCore: 0.0067g/min loading rate
2. K&N oil cotton gauze: 0.2917g/min loading rate

This means the Donaldson is 43.5x more efficient.

Ignoring the loading limit, if we just look at the performance within a 6 hour window:
1. Donaldson PowerCore: 2.4g of dirt passed
2. K&N oiled cotton gauze: 105g of dirt passed

That's a HUGE difference.

The Donaldson would have to be run for 262.5hrs; 11 DAYS to pass the same amount of dirt as the K&N, or, looked at from the other direction, the K&N passes in 8.2 minutes what it takes the Donaldson 6 hours to pass.

Yeah every bit of ISO5001 data I’m seeing shows absolutely terrible filtration for K&N. Actually a lot worse than I thought it would be.

 

[TiGeo]

I did a search for them but I’m not sure exactly how to link the threads. I’ll try my best.

https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/lincoln-town-car-3-000-miles-mobil-1-ep-5w30-4-6l.345833/

https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/threads/uoa-2019-ford-ranger-2-3t-ecoboost.345513/

https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/t...miles-unknown-oil-unknown-oil-mileage.339585/

https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/t...00-mile-oci-2016-toyota-sienna-le-fwd.333388/

Thats 4 of the first 5 results that come up. All with pretty bad silicon numbers. The 5th one was still not good but tolerable in the grand scheme of things.

First one - could be filter issue for sure but it's one UOA and we don't know the history here. I've had really high SiO2 numbers from a new oil pan gasket/seal.

Second one - that's too new of a vehicle to put the 16ppm on the K&N during the last UOA - you always have more SiO2 with a new engine that tapers off over time which it looks like it is trending towards. It will likely dip into single digits. No air filtration issues in this one.

Third one - "air box was totally packed with a rats nest and had a well used K&N filter in it." - not the best example to use as it looks like this was not a well-maintained car or intake system.

Fourth one - there is no K&N in this vehicle...but they did note a new paper filter.

 

[Warlord]

First one - could be filter issue for sure but it's one UOA and we don't know the history here. I've had really high SiO2 numbers from a new oil pan gasket/seal.

Second one - that's too new of a vehicle to put the 16ppm on the K&N during the last UOA - you always have more SiO2 with a new engine that tapers off over time which it looks like it is trending towards. It will likely dip into single digits. No air filtration issues in this one.

Third one - "air box was totally packed with a rats nest and had a well used K&N filter in it." - not the best example to use as it looks like this was not a well-maintained car or intake system.

Fourth one - there is no K&N in this vehicle...but they did note a new paper filter.

You’re right about that 4th one. How careless of me. So 3 of the first 4. The 4th was 10ppm which isn't stellar either. I’m not willing to put in the time for an exhaustive compilation of the UOAs tonight but suffice to say yours are the only good K&N reports I've seen.