K&N for Subaru?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
some turboed Subarus can flow up around 14 GPM max, and that (along with the flow performance of their OEM filter) is why they spec a higher BPV setting on those engines.


Actually, Zee, even the plain-jane EJ251/253 is spec'd for something stupid like 47.2 quarts/min at 5k rpm with the oil at 176*F. It's kinda crazy to think that with the short gearing most Subarus have (esp. with 3.91 & 4.11 differentials) that an EJ25 is pumping nearly 8 gallons per minute just cruising at 70mph on the highway. Seems like they should have been able to drop the pump output to free up some HP and MPG. Instead, they built the FA/FB engines
lol.gif
 
For the record.. my family has owned strictly subarus since the mid 90s, and I have owned 3 STIs over 13 years now.... with zero issues.

We never cared about bypass pressure, nobody in the real world cares.
The N/A subarus got cheap $2-4 whatever filters, and the STIs always got M1 filters and my current built STI is getting the cheaper K&N Pro series.
 
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by Ablebody
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by Ablebody
It should have the correct bypass setting because that's what the manufacturer decided. Also we're talking about the tough guard in the extra guard as well. I want to know how there's cellular media and their semi synthetic media or Blended media whatever can flow the same since they have the same bypass setting. You know since the argument for Ultra not having the correct bypass setting is that it flows better how does that apply to the other to filters

You're missing a simple point ... each and every oil filter doesn't have to have a "custom" bypass valve setting. Probably 80+% of oil filters have a bypass valve setting of 12~14 PSI. And they all don't have the same media type or media flow area, or the same media flow performance. You've latch on to some misconception that's got to be the case, and if a better flowing filter has the same bypass setting as a filter that might not flow quite as good you think there's some kind of problem, but there isn't. Filter manufactures are smart enough to know what bypass setting to give their filters based on the oil pump and oil viscosity specs of the vehicles they specify filters for.

No that's not the case. If a filter is said to be fine having a lower bypass setting than the oem because it's "Full synthetic media flows better" then you can't say the same for a cellulose media that has the same bypass setting.

Like I said before, there's nothing wrong with using a higher bypass valve setting if it's not going to cause the PD oil pump to hit pressure relief way too soon which would cut back oil flow to the engine - especially at higher RPM. On a filter that flows very well, a bypass valve being set to the same as it's more restrictive sister model isn't going to hurt anything. So as a filter designer specing a bypass valve for 3 different models that all flow differently, you would spec the highest bypass valve setting for the most restrictive filter, and then use that same bypass valve on the others that flow better ... it's not going to hurt, and you don't need to "custom design" a unique bypass valve for every different filter model. So claiming that using the same bypass valve on 3 different models with 3 different media blends is all nonsense.

Originally Posted by Ablebody
Most isn't all so if a vehicle such as mymazda2 requires 8psi yet the after market filter is 15 or the spark requires 22 and the after market is 9-15 well that's just not correct. The cellulose eg that fits the spark has a bypass setting listed 9-15 though it should be 22. Ya can't say its ok because it's full synthetic and flows so much better. It's not 22 psi because GM just made that number up. So a filter going into bypass between 9 to 15 psi when it's supposed to be 22psi is a problem. Now why would I believe anything fram or k&n or whoever says knowing this? I don't need to be an expert to notice a discrepancy like this.

There is nothing wrong with using a filter with a 12~15 PSI BPV for a vehicle that specs 8 PSI. Why would you think it's going to hurt something? Even if the filter became clogged enough to make the BPV open, it's only taxing the pump with 4 PSI more of output pressure to maintain the same oil flow, which is nothing when it doesn't hit pressure relief until 80+ PSI.

What can be bad is if a filter with too low of a BPV setting is used on an engine with very high oil pump output, heavy viscosity oil, or is hammered with high RPM before the oil warms up much. IMO, GM has become overly paranoid of filters going into bypass, or have a bunch of crazy owners who rev their engines high with cold thick oil. Even the Vettes don't put out over 10 GPM of oil full at redline. However, some turboed Subarus can flow up around 14 GPM max, and that (along with the flow performance of their OEM filter) is why they spec a higher BPV setting on those engines. Also, the new variable output oil pumps don't put out any more oil flow than a good old fashioned non-variable pump. In fact, car makers are cutting back on the oil pump output flow to help gain a hair more gas mileage.

Ok I'll tell GM that some guy on an oil forum knows better than they do, ok lol.
 
Originally Posted by Ablebody
Ok I'll tell GM that some guy on an oil forum knows better than they do, ok lol.


After you call K&N and tell them they are blowing smoke. I didn't say GM was wrong, just paranoid. Setting a filter BPV setting too high can cause problems too.
 
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by Ablebody
Ok I'll tell GM that some guy on an oil forum knows better than they do, ok lol.


After you call K&N and tell them they are blowing smoke. I didn't say GM was wrong, just paranoid. Setting a filter BPV setting too high can cause problems too.

I'll have to call fram and tell them their blowing smoke too. Maybe thell listen but in the meantime I'll use filters that meet the requirements.
 
Originally Posted by Ablebody
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by Ablebody
Ok I'll tell GM that some guy on an oil forum knows better than they do, ok lol.


After you call K&N and tell them they are blowing smoke. I didn't say GM was wrong, just paranoid. Setting a filter BPV setting too high can cause problems too.

I'll have to call fram and tell them their blowing smoke too. Maybe thell listen but in the meantime I'll use filters that meet the requirements.


Yeah, you better call Fram too. Ask if they could hire you as a filter designer since you know their design guys are amateurs, lol.
 
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by Ablebody
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by Ablebody
Ok I'll tell GM that some guy on an oil forum knows better than they do, ok lol.


After you call K&N and tell them they are blowing smoke. I didn't say GM was wrong, just paranoid. Setting a filter BPV setting too high can cause problems too.

I'll have to call fram and tell them their blowing smoke too. Maybe thell listen but in the meantime I'll use filters that meet the requirements.


Yeah, you better call Fram too. Ask if they could hire you as a filter designer since you know their design guys are amateurs, lol.

Then you and I would have the same people issuing our paychecks.
 
More misconceptions ... batting near zero. Guess I was a "Purolator employee" at one time too ...
lol.gif
 
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
More misconceptions ... batting near zero. Guess I was a "Purolator employee" at one time too ...
lol.gif


You said it.
 
Originally Posted by SubieRubyRoo
Use NAPA Gold 7055 / Wix 57055. It's rated 27# bypass so you keep warranty concerns down, is a good filter, and we haven't seen any of the issues with the Wix/NG 5/7055 like some have shown about the K&N filters having quality concerns.

car 51 C&P'd one of the NAPA 7055's that I sent him a couple months back; it's here on the board in the filter section. Check it out... it's a stout little sucker, and you can pick them up twice a year at less than $4 per filter at NAPA!

QFT, hard to beat the quality or the price.
 
Originally Posted by Ablebody
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
More misconceptions ... batting near zero. Guess I was a "Purolator employee" at one time too ...
lol.gif


You said it.


Even a "WIX/NAPA Gold employee" too at one time ... zing!
laugh.gif
 
Originally Posted by Garak
Here, we also wonder why users can't keep the same user ID long.
whistle.gif



Mastering his rolling of dice and picking new names out of a hat, without looking inside the hat.
 
Originally Posted by Garak
Here, we also wonder why users can't keep the same user ID long.
whistle.gif


Sometimes they do keep it since it was only a vacation, not a ban. So we end up with someone who now has two IDs whereas before they only had one.

One poster on here got busted because a mod noticed the same IP address for his two names. Some boards display a partial IP address of posters for this reason, but of course there are ways around it for the truly determined.
 
Originally Posted by kschachn
One poster on here got busted because a mod noticed the same IP address for his two names. Some boards display a partial IP address of posters for this reason, but of course there are ways around it for the truly determined.


I think that was the one that was caught answering his own questions esp when things weren't going his way. Cajun-something or Robert I believe.

I remember on another board one of the mods was able to post a picture of this one trouble-maker's house. Not on the public side of the site but the private side that only mods could see. It was a nice blue colonial or maybe just a teenager living there. Who knows, lol. With a little more detective work one could probably bring up a picture or two of the person.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top