K+N 225,000 miles - real life

[TheFuror]

quote:

---

Originally posted by nickmckinney:

Now about engine wear, what I learned in the machine shop business is that most wear is from.....guess.......guess.........

.........problems with the coolant.

Yes I said coolant, no bs.

---

I never would have thought this, before BITOG, but now I am a believer. Good tip.

Bob W.

 

[punisher]

I can really only speak to the MAF problems caused by any oiled gauze filter (10 years FoMoCo (strictly engine performance/electrical).

Correctly oiled or not, whenever a Mustang rolled in with a MIL light, and that MIL light was a P0171/P0174 you could pretty much make a bet that car had a vac leak or a K&N on it. It was to the point where customers were told "no more coverage of your MAF if you use this filter". I even remember a SSM from Ford about contaminated MAFs caused by aftermarket air filters. Not even going to get into an argument about dust and crap in the intake tract.

If it works for you, more power to you but I just saw too much in the shop to put a gauze filter in any of my rides. Racing- if you need max flow, go for it.

 

[Mike_dup1]

I thought Ford was using the K&N in the Mustang performance engines and other models??? I have heard some say that..

 

[Jtull]

...just a couple of comments and maybe a question too, if you guys don't mind. The stuff I'm learning here is unreal...There's a really good article on the sludge, extended oil service, etc, issue in December's issue of Car and Driver. Csaba Csere's article was pretty informative. I don't know if I'm comfortable with 10k oil changes but Nick, are you saying that 3k oil changes cause excess wear? I'd like to know details if you don't mind. Also, does anyone know what the exact ingredient(s) are in products such as Duralube and Prolube( or whatever)? I've seen the infommericals too and of course I dismissed the stuff, but let me just lay this out there: I took a training course to become a lock smith. It was actually alittle more than that, but the idea was to learn how to breach them, not fix them, and I'm not a lock smith. The instructors were not in any way affiliated with any particular lock manufacturer or the makers of Dura-lube(sic). From that training I learned that Schlege locks are bullet proof and the very best(hardest to breach or break) and the lock manufactuer has a no-questions-asked life-time replacement policy on all of their locks, including the super expensive, ultra heavy duty kind. Schlege ( is that spelled right?) makes a claim that the mechanisims will NEVER WEAR OUT. The reason, we were informed, is because they coat all of the internal parts with Dura-Lube.And Schlege has no business interest in Dura Lube, only that they buy alot of it. Now, I know locks aren't motors and you really can't compare the two, but...parts is parts..as they say and I'm just wondering what exactly is Dura Lube.

 

[Mike_dup1]

quote:

---

FTC Charges "Dura Lube" Misled The Public
Those who have used or paid for "Dura Lube", a brand of motor oil additive, should take note: the FTC has charged its manufacturers and marketers with making false and unsubstantiated claims about what the product can do.

Dura Lube claimed to be able to reduce engine wear by more than 50%, to prolong engine life, to reduce fuel emissions, and to improve gas mileage. FTC also claims that Dura Lube's claims of reducing engine wear and that "one treatment continues to protect the engine for up to 50,000 miles" are false.

If you or someone close to you has spent money on this product, Monheit, Silverman & Fodera, P.C. stands ready to assist you. We help people who have been the victims of consumer fraud. If you wish to initiate a legal investigation into the possibility of getting a full refund getting the charge erased getting the manufacturer to change its practices, to change its misleading advertising or labeling, or to take a product off the market getting a company to give back profits it has realized due to fraud bringing the fraudulent business to justice we may be able to help you.



This informational piece was prepared by Monheit, Silverman & Fodera. If you would like more information on this topic, call us at (800) 220-LAW1, or use the "Do I Have A Case?" button on this web site.

---

quote:

---

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

In the Matter of

DURA LUBE CORPORATION,
AMERICAN DIRECT MARKETING, INC.,
HOWE LABORATORIES, INC.,
CRESCENT MANUFACTURING, INC.,
NATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION,
THE MEDIA GROUP, INC., corporations, and
HERMAN S. HOWARD and
SCOTT HOWARD, individually and as officers of the corporations.

Docket No. 9292

AGREEMENT CONTAINING CONSENT ORDER

The Federal Trade Commission has conducted an investigation of certain acts and practices of Dura Lube Corporation, American Direct Marketing, Inc., Howe Laboratories, Inc., Crescent Manufacturing, Inc., The Media Group, Inc., and National Communications Corporation, corporations; Herman S. Howard, individually and as an officer and director of the corporations; and Scott Howard, individually and as an officer and director of the corporations ("respondents"). Respondents, having been represented by counsel, are willing to enter into an agreement containing a consent order resolving the allegations contained in the attached complaint. Therefore,

IT IS HEREBY AGREED by and between Dura Lube Corporation, American Direct Marketing, Inc., Howe Laboratories, Inc., Crescent Manufacturing, Inc., The Media Group, Inc., and National Communications Corporation, by their duly authorized officers; Herman S. Howard, individually and as an officer of the corporations; and Scott Howard, individually and as an officer of the corporations, and counsel for the Federal Trade Commission that:

1.a. Respondent Dura Lube Corporation ("DLC") is a New York corporation with its principal office or place of business at 102-3 Hamilton Avenue, Stamford, Connecticut 06902.

1.b. Respondent American Direct Marketing, Inc. ("ADM") is a Delaware corporation with its office and principal place of business located at 1000 Apex Street, Nashville, Tennessee 37210.

1.c. Respondent Howe Laboratories, Inc. ("Howe") is a Delaware Corporation with its office and principal place of business located at 102-3 Hamilton Avenue, Stamford, Connecticut 06902.

1.d. Respondent Crescent Manufacturing, Inc. ("Crescent") is a New York corporation with its office and principal place of business located at 8800 South Main Street, Eden, New York 14057.

1.e. Respondent The Media Group, Inc. ("Media Group") is a New York corporation with its office and principal place of business located at 102-3 Hamilton Avenue, Stamford, Connecticut 06902.

1.f. National Communications Corporation ("National") is a Delaware corporation with its office and principal place of business located at 102-3 Hamilton Avenue, Stamford, Connecticut 06902.

1.g. Respondent Herman S. Howard is or was at relevant times herein an officer of the corporate respondents. Individually or in concert with others, he has formulated, directed, or controlled the acts and practices of the corporate respondents, including the acts or practices alleged in this complaint. His principal office or place of business is the same as that of DLC, Howe, Media Group, and National.

1.h. Respondent Scott Howard is or was at relevant times herein an officer of the corporate respondents. Individually or in concert with others, he has formulated, directed, or controlled the acts and practices of the corporate respondents, including the acts or practices alleged in this complaint. His principal office or place of business is the same as that of DLC, Howe, Media Group, and National.

2. Respondents have been served with a copy of the complaint issued by the Federal Trade Commission charging them with violations of Section 5(a) of the Federal Trade Commission Act, and have filed answers to the complaint.

3. Respondents admit all the jurisdictional facts set forth in the complaint.

4. Respondents waive:

a. Any further procedural steps;

b. The requirement that the Commission's decision contain a statement of findings of fact and conclusions of law;

c. All rights to seek judicial review or otherwise to challenge or contest the validity of the order entered pursuant to this agreement; and

d. Any claim under the Equal Access to Justice Act.

5. This agreement shall not become part of the public record of the proceeding unless and until it is accepted by the Commission. If this agreement is accepted by the Commission, it, together with the complaint, will be placed on the public record for a period of thirty (30) days and information about it publicly released. The Commission thereafter may either withdraw its acceptance of this agreement and so notify respondents, in which event it will take such action as it may consider appropriate, or issue and serve its decision in disposition of the proceeding.

6. This agreement is for settlement purposes only and does not constitute an admission by respondents that the law has been violated as alleged in the complaint, or that the facts as alleged in the complaint, other than the jurisdictional facts, are true.

7. This agreement contemplates that, if it is accepted by the Commission, and if such acceptance is not subsequently withdrawn by the Commission pursuant to the provisions of Section 3.25(f) of the Commission's Rules, the Commission may, without further notice to respondents, (1) issue its decision containing the following order in disposition of the proceeding, and (2) make information about it public. When so entered, the order shall have the same force and effect and may be altered, modified, or set aside in the same manner and within the same time provided by statute for other orders. The order shall become final upon service. Delivery of the decision and order to respondents' addresses as stated in this agreement by any means specified in Section 4.4(a) of the Commission's Rules shall constitute service. Respondents waive any right they may have to any other manner of service. The complaint may be used in construing the terms of the order. No agreement, understanding, representation, or interpretation not contained in the order or in the agreement may be used to vary or contradict the terms of the order. The Commission will not file an action pursuant to Section 19 of the Federal Trade Commission Act based on this consent agreement.

8. Respondents have read the complaint and consent order. They understand that they may be liable for civil penalties in the amount provided by law and other appropriate relief for each violation of the order after it becomes final.
ORDER

Definitions

For purposes of this Order, the following definitions shall apply:

"Dura Lube" shall mean the aftermarket motor oil additive known as Super Dura Lube Engine Treatment, Advanced Dura Lube Engine treatment, or any product of substantially similar composition marketed as a motor oil product.

"Motor oil product" shall mean a product for use in conjunction with or in place of fully formulated motor oil.

"Competent and reliable scientific evidence" shall mean tests, analyses, research, studies, or other evidence based on the expertise of professionals in the relevant area, that has been conducted and evaluated in an objective manner by persons qualified to do so, using procedures generally accepted in the profession to yield accurate and reliable results.

Unless otherwise specified, "respondents" shall mean Dura Lube Corporation, American Direct Marketing, Inc., Howe Laboratories, Inc., Crescent Manufacturing, Inc., The Media Group, Inc., and National Communications Corporation, corporations, their successors and assigns, and their officers, agents, attorneys, representatives, and employees; and Herman S. Howard and Scott Howard, individually and as officers of the corporations, whether acting directly or through any corporation, subsidiary, division, trust or other device, or any of them.

"Commerce" shall be as defined in Section 4 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. § 44.
I.

IT IS ORDERED that respondents, in connection with the manufacturing, advertising, labeling, packaging, offering for sale, sale, or distribution of Dura Lube, in or affecting commerce, shall not represent, in any manner, expressly or by implication, that:

A. Dura Lube contains no chlorinated compound unless such is the case;

B. Dura Lube has been tested by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency unless such is the case; or

C. Dura Lube meets the specifications, requirements or standards of any governmental or standard setting organization, unless, at the time of making such representation, respondents possess and rely upon competent and reliable evidence, which when appropriate must be competent and reliable scientific evidence, that substantiates the representation.
II.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondents, in connection with the manufacturing, advertising, labeling, packaging, offering for sale, sale, or distribution of any product for use in any motor vehicle, in or affecting commerce, do forthwith cease and desist from:

A. Making any representation, in any manner, expressly or by implication:

1. That, compared to motor oil alone or motor oil treated with any other product, using such product:

a. Reduces engine wear;

b. Reduces engine wear by any percentage, dollar or other figure;

c. Prolongs engine life;

d. Reduces emissions;

e. Reduces the risk of serious engine damage when oil pressure is lost;

f. Improves gas mileage;

g. Improves gas mileage by any percentage, miles per gallon, dollar, or other figure;

2. That one or any other number of treatments of such product reduces wear for 50,000 or any other number of miles; or,

3. Regarding the performance, benefits, efficacy, attributes or use of such product,

unless, at the time of making such representation, respondents possess and rely upon competent and reliable evidence, which when appropriate must be competent and reliable scientific evidence, that substantiates the representation.

B. Misrepresenting, in any manner, expressly or by implication, the existence, contents, validity, results, conclusions, or interpretations of any test or study.
III.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondents, in connection with the manufacturing, advertising, labeling, packaging, offering for sale, sale, or distribution of any product, in or affecting commerce, shall not misrepresent, in any manner, expressly or by implication, that any demonstration, picture, experiment, illustration or test proves, demonstrates or confirms any material quality, feature or merit of such product, or the superiority or comparability of the product in a material respect relative to any other product.

IV.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, respondents, in connection with the manufacturing, advertising, labeling, packaging, offering for sale, sale, or distribution of any product for use in any motor vehicle, in or affecting commerce, shall cease and desist from representing, directly or by implication, that such product has been endorsed by a person, group or organization that is an expert with respect to the endorsement message, unless:

A. The endorser's qualifications give the endorser the expertise that the endorser is represented as possessing with respect to the endorsement; and

B. The endorsement is supported by an objective and valid evaluation or test using procedures generally accepted by experts in that science or profession to yield accurate and reliable results.
V.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, for five (5) years after the last date of dissemination of any representation covered by this order, respondents shall maintain and upon request make available to the Federal Trade Commission for inspection and copying:

A. All labeling, packaging, advertisements and promotional materials setting forth any representation covered by this order;

B. All materials that were relied upon to substantiate any representation covered by this order; and

C. All tests, reports, studies, surveys, demonstrations or other evidence in their possession or control, or of which they have knowledge, that contradict, qualify, or call into question such representation, or the basis relied upon for the representation, including complaints and other communications with consumers, third-party dispute mediators, or governmental or consumer protection organizations.
VI.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:

A. The corporate respondents and their successors and assigns shall notify the Federal Trade Commission at least thirty (30) days prior to any change in the corporate respondents that may affect compliance obligations arising under this order, including but not limited to dissolution, assignment, sale, merger or other action that would result in the emergence of a successor corporation, the creation or dissolution of a subsidiary, parent, or affiliate that engages in any acts or practices subject to this order, the proposed filing of a bankruptcy petition, or a change in the corporate name or address. Provided, however, that with respect to any proposed change in the corporation about which respondents learn less than thirty (30) days prior to the date such action is to take place, respondents shall notify the Commission as soon as practicable after obtaining such knowledge.

B. Each of the individual respondents, for a period of ten (10) years after the date of issuance of this order, shall notify the Federal Trade Commission of the discontinuance of his current business or employment, or his affiliation with any new business or employment. The notice shall include the respondent's new business address and telephone number and a description of the nature of the business or employment and his duties and responsibilities.
All notices required by this Part shall be sent by certified mail to the Associate Director for Enforcement, Bureau of Consumer Protection, Federal Trade Commission, Washington, D.C. 20580.

VII.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the corporate respondents and their successors and assigns and the individual respondents shall deliver a copy of this order to all current and future principals, officers, directors, and managers, and to all current and future employees, agents, and representatives having responsibilities with respect to the subject matter of this order, and shall secure from each such person a signed and dated statement acknowledging receipt of this order. Respondents shall deliver this order to current personnel within thirty (30) days after the service of this order, and to future personnel within thirty (30) days after the person assumes such position and responsibilities.

VIII.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondents shall:

A. Within fifteen (15) days after the date of service of this order, send by first class certified mail, return receipt requested, to each purchaser for resale of Dura Lube with which respondents have done business since January 1, 1994, notice of this order in the form attached as Attachment A. The mailing shall not include any other documents;

B. By May 15, 2000, send a representative to all facilities operated by each purchaser for resale to which respondents sent Attachment A to replace the Dura Lube labels and packaging with labels and packaging that comply with this order.

C. In the event that respondents receive any information that subsequent to its receipt of notice of this order any purchaser for resale is using or disseminating any advertisement or promotional material specified in Attachment A, respondents shall: (1) immediately send such purchaser for resale a letter requesting that it stop using or disseminating any item specified in Attachment A and notifying it that the respondents will report its use or dissemination of any item specified in Attachment A to the Commission; and (2) within thirty (30) days notify the Associate Director for Enforcement, Bureau of Consumer Protection, Federal Trade Commission, in writing, of such purchaser for resale's identity and its use or dissemination of any item specified in Attachment A.
IX.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondents shall, for five (5) years after the last correspondence to which they pertain, maintain and upon request make available to the Federal Trade Commission for inspection and copying:

A. Copies of all signed statements obtained from persons or entities pursuant to part VII of this order;

B. Copies of all notification letters sent to purchasers for resale pursuant to subparagraph A of part VIII of this order; and

C. Copies of all communications with purchasers for resale pursuant to subparagraph C of part VIII of this order.
X.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that:

A. Not later than five (5) days after the date this Order becomes final, respondents shall deposit by electronic funds transfer into an escrow account to be established by the Federal Trade Commission for the purpose of receiving the payment due under the provisions of this order, the sum of two million dollars ($2,000,000). In the event of any default on any obligation to make payment under this Part, interest, computed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1961(a) shall accrue from the date of default to the date of payment. In the event of default, respondents shall be jointly and severally liable for the two million dollar ($2,000,000) payment required by this paragraph and any interest on such payment.

B. The funds paid by respondents pursuant to subpart A above, together with accrued interest, less any amount necessary to pay the costs of administering the redress program herein, shall be used by the Federal Trade Commission or a Redress Administrator designated by the Federal Trade Commission to provide refunds to Dura Lube purchasers. Payment to such persons represents redress and is intended to be compensatory in nature, and no portion of such payment shall be deemed a payment of any fine, penalty, or punitive assessment. A consumer shall have the right to participate in the redress distribution only upon signing a waiver of rights and release of all claims against respondents. The Federal Trade Commission has sole discretion to determine how any redress funds are administered and distributed. Respondents shall be notified as to how the funds are disbursed, but shall have no right to contest the manner of distribution chosen by the Federal Trade Commission. The Federal Trade Commission, or its designated Redress Administrator, shall in its sole discretion select the escrow agent.

C. Respondents relinquish all dominion, control and title to the funds paid into the escrow account, and all legal and equitable title to the funds shall vest in the Treasurer of the United States unless and until such funds are disbursed to the designated purchasers of Dura Lube. Respondents shall make no claim to or demand for the return of the funds, directly or indirectly, through counsel or otherwise; and in the event of bankruptcy of any respondent, respondents acknowledge that the funds are not part of the debtor's estate, nor does the estate have any claim or interest therein.

D. Not later than the date this Order becomes final, respondents shall, to the extent available, provide to the Federal Trade Commission, in computer readable form (standard MS-DOS diskettes or IBM-mainframe compatible tape) and in computer print-out form, a list of the name and address of all consumers in the United States who purchased Dura Lube from January 1, 1994, to December 31, 1999.

E. The Redress Administrator shall destroy all records relating to this matter six (6) years after the transfer of any remaining redress funds to the U.S. Treasury or the closing of the account from which such funds were disbursed, whichever is earlier, provided that no records shall be destroyed unless and until a representative of the Federal Trade Commission has received and approved the Administrator's final accounting report. Records shall be destroyed in accordance with disposal methods and procedures to be specified by the Federal Trade Commission. The Federal Trade Commission may, in its sole discretion, require that such records, in whole or in part, be transferred, in lieu of destruction, to the Federal Trade Commission.
XI.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that respondents shall, within sixty (60) days after service of this order, file with the Federal Trade Commission a report, in writing, setting forth in detail the manner and form in which they have complied or intend to comply with this order.

XII.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this order will terminate twenty (20) years from the date of its issuance, or twenty years from the most recent date that the United States or the Federal Trade Commission files a complaint (with or without an accompanying consent decree) in federal court alleging any violation of the order, whichever later occurs; provided, however, that the filing of such complaint will not affect the duration of:

A. Any paragraph in this order that terminates in less than twenty years;

B. This order's application to any respondent that is not named as a defendant in such complaint; and

C. This order if such complaint is filed after the order has terminated pursuant to this paragraph.
Provided further, that if such complaint is dismissed or a federal court rules that the respondent did not violate any provision of the order, and the dismissal or ruling is either not appealed or upheld on appeal, then the order will terminate according to this paragraph as though the complaint had never been filed, except that the order will not terminated between the date such complaint is filed and the later of the deadline for appealing such dismissal or ruling and the date such dismissal or ruling is upheld on appeal.

This Agreement Containing Consent Order is signed the _____ day of January 2000.

DURA LUBE CORPORATION

By:
______________________________________
Name:
Title:

AMERICAN DIRECT MARKETING, INC.

By:
______________________________________
Name:
Title:

HOWE LABORATORIES, INC.

By:
______________________________________
Name:
Title:

CRESCENT MANUFACTURING, INC.

By:
_____________________________________
Name:
Title:

THE MEDIA GROUP, INC.

By:
______________________________________
Name:
Title:

NATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION

By:
______________________________________
Name:
Title:

__________________________________________
HERMAN S. HOWARD, individually
nd as an officer of said corporations

__________________________________________
SCOTT HOWARD, individually
and as an officer of said corporations

__________________________________________
LEWIS ROSE, Attorney for Respondents

__________________________________________
GINA SCHAAR HOWARD,
Counsel for the Federal Trade Commission

APPROVED:

___________________________________
HEATHER HIPPSLEY, Assistant Director
Enforcement Division, Bureau of Consumer Protection

___________________________________
ELAINE D. KOLISH, Associate Director
Enforcement Division, Bureau of Consumer Protection

___________________________________
JOAN Z. BERNSTEIN
Director, Bureau of Consumer Protection

ATTACHMENT A

BY CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

[To be printed on respondents' letterhead]

[date]

Dear [purchaser for resale]:

As you may be aware, on April 29, 1999, the Federal Trade Commission ("FTC") issued a complaint against Dura Lube Corporation, American Direct Marketing, Inc., Howe Laboratories, Inc., Crescent Manufacturing, Inc., National Communications Corporation, The Media Group, Inc., Herman S. Howard, and Scott Howard.

In its complaint, the FTC alleged that advertisements for Dura Lube Engine Treatment have made unsubstantiated claims that, compared to motor oil alone or motor oil treated with any other product, using Dura Lube Engine Treatment: (1) Reduces engine wear; (2) Reduces engine wear by more than 50%; (3) Prolongs engine life; (4) Reduces emissions; (5) Reduces the risk of serious engine damage when oil pressure is lost; (6) Improves gas mileage; and (7) Improves gas mileage by up to 35%. In addition, the FTC alleged that Dura Lube Engine Treatment advertisements made an unsubstantiated claim that one treatment of Dura Lube Engine Treatment continues to protect the engine for up to 50,000 miles.

Further, the FTC alleged that Dura Lube Engine Treatment advertisements falsely claimed that tests prove that, compared to motor oil alone, using Dura Lube Engine Treatment: (1) Improves gas mileage; (2) Improves gas mileage by up to 35%; (3) Reduces emissions;

(4) Prolongs engine life; (5) Reduces engine wear; and (6) Reduces the risk of serious engine damage when oil pressure is lost. The FTC also alleged that Dura Lube Engine Treatment advertisements falsely claimed that tests prove that one treatment of Dura Lube Engine Treatment continues to protect the engine for up to 50,000 miles. Finally, the FTC alleged that Dura Lube Engine Treatment advertisements set forth two deceptive demonstrations and a deceptive expert endorsement.

The FTC also alleged that advertisements for Dura Lube Engine Treatment have made false and unsubstantiated claims that: (1) Dura Lube Engine Treatment does not contain any chlorinated compound; and (2) Dura Lube Engine Treatment has been tested by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

On [date] the FTC issued a consent order to cease and desist which prohibits certain claims for Dura Lube Engine Treatment. We consented to the issuance of the order for settlement purposes only and without admitting any of the FTC's allegations that we violated the law. The order requires us to request that our distributors and wholesalers stop using or distributing advertisements or promotional materials containing claims challenged by the FTC. As one of our distributors or wholesalers, we are required to send [purchaser for resale] this letter.

Specifically, the FTC order prohibits us in the future from making false claims that Dura Lube Engine Treatment (1) contains no chlorinated compound; and (2) has been tested by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The order also requires that we have a reasonable basis for any performance claims we make for Dura Lube Engine Treatment or any other product for use in a motor vehicle. Finally, the order prohibits us from disseminating (1) any deceptive demonstrations regarding Dura Lube Engine Treatment or any other product, or (2) any expert endorsements regarding Dura Lube Engine Treatment or any other product for use in a motor vehicle.

We request your assistance by asking you to discontinue using, distributing, or relying on any of your advertising or promotional material for Dura Lube Engine Treatment received from us prior to January 1, 2000. Please also notify any of your customers who resell these products and who may have such materials to discontinue using those promotional materials. Under separate cover, we will be sending you replacement promotional material that you will be able to use. You do not need to dispose of your existing inventory of Dura Lube Engine Treatment because we will send someone to your facility to replace the Dura Lube Engine Treatment labels and packaging with labels and packaging that comply with the FTC order shortly. If we receive information that you are continuing to use materials that do not comply with the FTC order, we are required to notify the FTC of your failure to comply with this request.

Thank you very much for your assistance.

Sincerely,

[name]
President

[respondents]

---

 

[Deere John]

In regard to your pvc filter- there is a product with a product called "CONDENSATOR" that makes claims of greatly increased mpg,power, etc , it has a filter and a see thru bowl that catches solids before going into intake. Please check to see if its like what you made. They also have a air bleed of some type on it.I plan to make one once I get more info on air bleed and filter, Thanks

 

[Mitch]

I work for a municipal water dept.One of my co-workers put a k+n filter in a new chev truck for a test run to show us how great they are. Now we drive on mostly dirt back roads ,not city type drving.Well the truck is at the dealer now because of high oil consumption @45K.The long and short of it is the cylinders have .007 taper and the UOL showed a hi amount of silica.The same year trucks with paper filters have normal silica levels.Maybe oiled filters are great in the city but not in dusty enviornments?

 

[Ron Jeremy]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Mitch:
I work for a municipal water dept.One of my co-workers put a k+n filter in a new chev truck for a test run to show us how great they are. Now we drive on mostly dirt back roads ,not city type drving.Well the truck is at the dealer now because of high oil consumption @45K.The long and short of it is the cylinders have .007 taper and the UOL showed a hi amount of silica.The same year trucks with paper filters have normal silica levels.Maybe oiled filters are great in the city but not in dusty enviornments?

---

You are exactly right. Vehicles that see only city driving may have get acceptible filtration from K&N. I've seen from experience that they don't filter well in dusty envirinments unless they have a good coating of dirt on the media.

 

[Huhwhye]

From an Off Roaders perspective the K&N I had on my Toyota 4x4 let tons of dirt through. I had the filter on for less than 3000 miles and 1 off road trip. That trip left my red K&M brown with dirt. When I removed the filter to clean it I noticed a thick layer of dirt coating the inside of the intake tube. Thick enough that running your finger across it leaves the tip of my finger black with soot. I removed the tube and saw the same on the throttle body. Now that's real. Forget all the hype, commercials, scientific tests. I saw it with my own 2 eyes, dirt was getting into my engine.

So you say, how do you know the paper would have stopped the dirt? When I put the K&N in my truck had 140k miles on it with paper element filters. There was no dirt in the intake tube when I put the K&N on there. Remember only 3000 miles had passed. And I've had many many off road trips on paper filters.

Now this was a new stock replacement filter. And one trip. Maybe a street car won't see this to the same degree. Look at some of the off road boards, you'll see similar experiences.

[ March 08, 2005, 04:51 AM: Message edited by: Huhwhye ]

 

[Colt]

Most people don't realize there's no performance advantage with a K&N air filter till you hit 5000 RPM or above.
K&N also lets more dirt in.
I went back to paper filters after a couple of Blackstone oil analysis showing the silicon level was higher with my K&N versus a paper filter.

 

[mechtech]

Concerning the engine getting most of it's air flow from the PCV at idle and cruise, I don't think so.
That PCV air is blow by, and is recirculated to be 'reburned'. It doesn't have the O2 you need to keep combustion occurring, as it is depleted.
There's no way the car would idle or cruise with the throttle sealed and the idle air bypass closed, running on PCV alone. It contributes in a minor way, and less as speed increases.

 

[Uneasy Rider]

I personally am a fan of K&N filters. I have used them on my past 3 vehicles, quads & motorcycles & had never had a problem with excess dirt entering the intake system. My quads see more dust & sand in a single ride than most cars will see in a year.

The gentleman with the Avalanche who was expecting miracle gains just by installing an air filter is not being very reasonable. Even if it did add 10hp to the vehicle...on a 5000 pound vehicle you are never gonna feel it.

K&N filters advantages are increased airflow, increased mpg,(at least in my experience)& the fact that you never have to replace them.

IMHO they are worth the money.

 

[kenneth neeley]

I've seen from experience that they don't filter well in dusty envirinments unless they have a good coating of dirt on the media. [/QB][/QUOTE]
Amen,brother. We tried a couple K&N's in our farm trucks once apon a time. It was spring and we were hauling bulk 19-19-19. I would pull the buggy underneath the beltline and shut the engine off. We pulled several loads that week. Roughly a week later done a pm on the truck and just want to look at the filter which had not been installed alittle over a week. To my surprise there was fertilize in the intake piping. I removed the filter and installed a paper and never looked back.

 

[Huhwhye]

And if it needs to get dirty to work, what's happening when you put it in new and clean. So you're ok with injesting dirt until your filter is dirty enough to work. That makes no sense.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Uneasy Rider:
I personally am a fan of K&N filters. I have used them on my past 3 vehicles, quads & motorcycles & had never had a problem with excess dirt entering the intake system. My quads see more dust & sand in a single ride than most cars will see in a year.

---

Just because by some miracle you think no dirt made it into your engine that doesn't mean it doesn't happen. There is a ton of data that show's those this suck and I do mean suck. Like someone said in another thread if they work so great why don't they subject their filters to a controlled test by an independant lab instead of that stupid ping pong ball

http://home.usadatanet.net/~jbplock/ISO5011/SPICER.htm

 

[TooSlick]

Ran one for about 50,000 miles in my '95 Tacoma pickup - Fe averaged 2 ppm/1000 miles. Then switched to the OEM toyota paper filter and Fe dropped to 1.15 ppm/1000 miles for the next two analyses - even though I did some testing of 5w-20 and then 0w-20 grades in this motor!

TS

 

[uconn1150]

I use a K&N since I'd have to change out filters 2-3 times a year because of the desert sand and tumbleweeds--my K&N paid for itself in one year. They also offer a "nylon" wrap to cover the filter if you live in a dusty enviroment. I like that one even better. I just rinse off the wrap a few times a year and DON'T clean the filter. 1.5 years so far and so good!

 

[fdunford]

quote:

---

Originally posted by nickmckinney:
Another trick I learned only recently is to install a remote mount oil filter inline with the PCV valve and the intake manifold.

---

Let me ask a few questions, as I'm willing to try this on my '84 Bronco.

What your proposing is an in-line PCV filter, using a standard oil filter & related mounting h/w, right?

I can see how this will filter the PCV line well enough, but isn't their a chance the oil filter will fill with oil? Have you seen this before?

Did you see any improvement in drivability or mileage (I can see how this is similar to the condensator mentioned here also)?

 

[Deere John]

The pcv filter would catch oil, water, and other blowby products, I've seen pic of what the condensator catches and it looks like a choc milkshake ,seems to me engine will run better/cleaner without some of the blowby products.

 

[nickmckinney]

quote:

---

Originally posted by fdunford:

quote:

---

Originally posted by nickmckinney:
Another trick I learned only recently is to install a remote mount oil filter inline with the PCV valve and the intake manifold.

---

Let me ask a few questions, as I'm willing to try this on my '84 Bronco.

What your proposing is an in-line PCV filter, using a standard oil filter & related mounting h/w, right?

I can see how this will filter the PCV line well enough, but isn't their a chance the oil filter will fill with oil? Have you seen this before?

Did you see any improvement in drivability or mileage (I can see how this is similar to the condensator mentioned here also)?

---

Well an update to the PCV deal.

I tried it on a newer Cougar with the 4.6 I just picked up, that oil filter in the PCV line makes a loud whistling noise indeed. Never heard it on my 440 hotrod (duh) Its fricking annoying and all the oil filters I have tried make various sounds when used this way.

The Ford 4.6 has a HUGE problem with oil in the PCV!!!! Especially the motors with the PCV on the passenger side, I posted this in detail in a seperate listing on the car and truck oil section what I found.

I learned from a 4.6 performance site that people are using the air compressor oil seperators from Walmart for $12. Steeda even sells a kit for it. Tried it and love it, it works so far. Probably a few hundred people before me using it as well so there is some real world testing going on. Some of these 4.6 are really bad with this PCV problem, especially the supercharged 32V ones.

My fathers Cadillac had a broken piston land I think, he was getting some serious crankcase pressure, a mountain of smoke coming out of the crankcase vent, etc. I stuck this oil filter seperator on the PCV to give me time to build a new engine for him, he went about 10K miles with it, and crashed the car :-( I have a sweet Chevy 350 with Vortec heads sitting on the stand for sale now..........

Anyway when I pulled it off the oil filter had about 3 tablespoons of water, and was full of frothy sludge (from the water and oil mixing) Worse case scenario, but what was really funky was the filter was silent on his ride, maybe for the froth, I don't know.

I would reccomend the oil seperator from Walmart, its in the air compressor section, 5 micon filter, designed to centrifuge the oil out, has a drain at the bottom, etc. It works, I have tried 3 on 3 different cars now (97 Cougar, 97 Dakota, 67 Mopar) and all have a small amount of oil collecting in the bottom. The 97 Dakota uses so little oil even at near 160,000 miles I wonder how much was going out the PCV.

Another update, I really read in detail all the stuff on the paper vs K&N debate and was thinking of going back to paper myself. But then I changed the throttle body out on my Dakota for a larger one (best mod yet for this truck) and dammit if the throttle body and intake wasn't near spotless. That K&N went on at about 1K miles, is an open element round in a chrome housing on top of the engine, and is about totally black at the moment. I used a 10X loupe (sp?) and looking at the filter from the engine side. The metal maxtrix this thing is weaved in was spotless looking up close, the outside of the filter looks like a bear crapped on it. So its still on the truck - I did polish the chrome nice though, Mother Chrome Polish is super sweet ;-)

 

[thunderchild]

Well, I just put on a new throttle body on my truck. I had the IP Stage II CAI just sitting around so in the name of "just to fiddle with it", I put it back on. I am keeping a close eye on the intake to be sure it is not letting in too much grime. I drive highway 90 mile round trip every day. But, this is my worry, what is the possibility of getting "hydrolock" using one of these filters? Has anyone experienced any problems during heavy rain storms using these performance filters? If there is a possibility of water damage to an engine this baby is coming out ASAP!