K&N Reusable Oil Filters...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix

So how do they rate the holding capacity and mileage interval ratings for these mesh filters like they would for a normal spin-on filter? I imaging if they ran the wire mesh filter through the ISO test suite we would know and it would be a real "apples-to-apples" performance comparison.


My guess would be a fairly poor performance on both a standard multipass and capacity tests... vs regular filters Of course the manufacturers know this and that's why those companies use all the tricks to avoid apples to apples comparisons with "regular" filters. I don't necessarily hold that against them... as long as they state the designed purpose of the filter, racing and high performance. And that's how you have to (should) look at them.

There are exceptions. Doug Hillary ran mesh filters on some OTR trucks in conjunction with centrifugal bypass (very fine filtration) and had good service. Makes sense. The mesh catches the chunks (say 35 um and up) and the bypass gets everything else down to submicronic. You then have maximum flow on cold starts and elsewhere with very no bypass or even much chance of the pump going into relief. That's a scenario that could work but it might not be the most practical solution for all.

But a mesh filter alone??? Not on my daily drivers.
 
Originally Posted By: Jim Allen
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix

So how do they rate the holding capacity and mileage interval ratings for these mesh filters like they would for a normal spin-on filter? I imaging if they ran the wire mesh filter through the ISO test suite we would know and it would be a real "apples-to-apples" performance comparison.


My guess would be a fairly poor performance on both a standard multipass and capacity tests... vs regular filters Of course the manufacturers know this and that's why those companies use all the tricks to avoid apples to apples comparisons with "regular" filters. I don't necessarily hold that against them... as long as they state the designed purpose of the filter, racing and high performance. And that's how you have to (should) look at them.

There are exceptions. Doug Hillary ran mesh filters on some OTR trucks in conjunction with centrifugal bypass (very fine filtration) and had good service. Makes sense. The mesh catches the chunks (say 35 um and up) and the bypass gets everything else down to submicronic. You then have maximum flow on cold starts and elsewhere with very no bypass or even much chance of the pump going into relief. That's a scenario that could work but it might not be the most practical solution for all.

But a mesh filter alone??? Not on my daily drivers.


Good example. I can understand where conditions dictate as much flow as possible so volume and consistent pressure are paramount,then a centri of by-pass of some sort to pick up the obvious particulate this gravel trap misses however where exactly would these type conditions present themselves and what kind of motor is designed in this fashion to require this kind of system.

They are a racing filter,for engines that last in terms of laps,not years.
For 200 bucks I can buy 14 fram ultras and they would go over 200000 miles worth of filter changes.
Or I can buy 40 napa platinums on the February sale which last 400000 miles worth of oil changes.
So do tell exactly at what point does this filter pay for itself. I doubt any engine its attached to is going 200000 miles either so maybe it saves you money in not having to maintain your already dead engine.
??????????
 
Honestly people bring up the price of the filter idon't think people buy it to save money. Its more about the flow characteristics and basically never bypassing the oil because it flows so well. Like for racing, where you don't want a failure due to high pressures.

At what holding capacity would it be considered poor? The site shows that it flows crazy amounts per square inch, so even if it was 3/4 covered it would not be bypassing oil. It seems to me if you cover an entire filter you've got other, more pressing problems to deal with. Besides, if it's only stopping 30 micron and up, it wont be stopping everything in the first place....

Honestly, if you left one in for 10, 000 miles do you think any filter would clog? Maybe
 
Last edited:
Another factor to consider is that with the high flow and never bypassing that it stops the big stuff (absolute up to 30u) on the first pass. Paper filters are not rated for first pass so bigger stuff does get through and circulates through your system to the eventually get caught. So there is another thought.
 
Originally Posted By: spinkick
Another factor to consider is that with the high flow and never bypassing that it stops the big stuff (absolute up to 30u) on the first pass. Paper filters are not rated for first pass so bigger stuff does get through and circulates through your system to the eventually get caught. So there is another thought.


Cellulose and syn filters are rated (or can be) for first pass absolute performance. It's just not commonly done.

First pass might be vitally important in some scenarios, such as right after a rebuild when there is a lot of junk in the oil. Or if you have a race engine that's shedding a lot of metal (lots more than a street engine will in a short period of time) because it's being thrashed for every fraction of a horsepower. That's one reason why you see them on race engines. Not only is the expected lifespan lower, but the oil is changed much more oftenIn a street engine, first pass in not vital because contamination rates are so much lower.

Also, the makeup of the contaminants is important to note and I would refer you to the breakdown of particle counts sizes you might find in the UOA section. Generally speaking, smaller particles (under 35um ) as just as responsible for wear long term as larger ones and there are LOTS more of them. One stat you see is that 5-15 um particles are the most responsible for wear in engines long term. How many of those does a 35um mesh screen catch? None. Zero, zip, nada! How many of those will an average cellulose filter catch in that range... 10-50 %. A premium syn filter will do better in that regard... maybe 15-70%.

While there are a few things a mesh filter can do well that a cellulose or syn can't, the benefits don't translate well to the street world IMO. Perhaps if you had a high performance car of some type and engaged in weekend racing or spirited driving, it might matter enough to place flow and first pass efficiency first but the likely result is a shorter overall life and/or a lot of oil changes. But a schlepp-mobile is better off with standard filtration for long term use.

Spinkick, if you are bound and determined to run a mesh filter, you can further our knowledge by doing the following test and giving us a snapshot:

Run a 7500 mile interval with your current oil and filter. Have a UOA done with a particle count. Change the oil and use the same oil but introduce the mesh filter into the equation. Run 7500 miles again and send the sample to the same lab as the first. For best results, try to match the driving scenario of the first run (i.e. same season, same general driving pattern, etc.). That will provide a a snapshot. Multiples of each of these, averaged, would be better and more telling but that's not likely to be practical for anyone. A UOA without the particle count would not be so helpful because we could not see the breakdown of particles. I doubt we would see a huge difference in wear between them in just one test, but YNK. The particle counts would be potentially more useful informationally.
 
Thanks Jim,

I'm not sold on using it but I'm more interested in discussing the weaknesses that are true as well as the strengths. Thanks for the discussion.
 
Originally Posted By: spinkick
Thanks Jim,

I'm not sold on using it but I'm more interested in discussing the weaknesses that are true as well as the strengths. Thanks for the discussion.


Sorry, I confused you with the dino33, the OP, who was considering the change.
 
Originally Posted By: spinkick
Honestly people bring up the price of the filter i don't think people buy it to save money. Its more about the flow characteristics and basically never bypassing the oil because it flows so well. Like for racing, where you don't want a failure due to high pressures.


I agree, the wire mesh filter is a good application for a race engine that isn't meant to last forever. The wire mesh filter makes it easy to inspect what's going on inside the engine and does provide hardly any flow restiction if kept clean, which you would want to do if this type of filer was on a race engine.

For street application, I could see using it if:
a) The engine was pretty new and was spotless inside from using good motor oil and doing decent OCIs.

b) It was cleaned at 3K miles the first couple times, and if inspection found low debris level then increase next cleaning interval to 5K, and then to 7.5K if clean at 5K. Depending on the engine and oil used, it could go as long as a long OCI if proven that the engine is a clean, low shedder.

How about the guys here that do use them? What kind of debris do you find on the screen? When you clean the wire mesh, can you see the total amount of debris that was removed? Got any pictures of the wire mesh after the filter was ran for 5K to 10K miles?
 
i like them because it reduces engine drag,peace of mind from bits of paper getting into the engine from ,for some reason,a catastrophic failure, alot better flow in the winters,not letting large particles into the engine such as paper does.i let these run up too 7000 miles i watch the flow under the valve cover and the flow rushes quickly!!i do have clean engines but for sludge ones on any filter would be a catastrophy and more so with this small stainless filter i would think.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: boxcartommie22
i like them because it reduces engine drag,peace of mind from bits of paper getting into the engine from ,for some reason,a catastrophic failure, alot better flow in the winters,not letting large particles into the engine such as paper does.i let these run up too 7000 miles i watch the flow under the valve cover and the flow rushes quickly!!i do have clean engines but for sludge ones on any filter would be a catastrophy and more so with this small stainless filter i would think.


Peace of mind? Bits of paper?
K. I'm in this forum called bob is the oil guy. There are members who post pics almost daily of cut open oil filters and of the hundreds or more pics I've seen not a single one had "bits of paper" missing from the filtering elements.
If these "bits of paper" were a catastrophe waiting to happen wouldn't over the last 70 years or so using them I'm sure they could make an filtering element that's didn't potentially dissolve leaving "bits of paper" floating around.
And what harm exactly can bits of paper do vs lets say agglomerated carbon(diamonds are made of carbon,think very hard stuff) floating around.
I think those carbon deposits are potentially far more destructive than paper.
Boxcartommie. I'm not trying to rip on you here but your entire argument in favour of their use in a street driven automobile is completely absurd.
These gravel traps let the most damaging particles by,the 35 micron and smaller. Those are the ones that grind up bearings and score cylinder walls because they are small enough to get into these small places.
You've obviously convinced yourself of their superiority so I'm not going to even bother wasting my time.
 
There is an sae article floating around that describes how fragments between 5um and 20um to be potentially the most damaging. less than 5 passes through the car's tolerances. Have you heard that? Seems like this filter would pass that all the way through over and over and over (at a high rate of flow)
 
Originally Posted By: spinkick
There is an sae article floating around that describes how fragments between 5um and 20um to be potentially the most damaging. less than 5 passes through the car's tolerances. Have you heard that? Seems like this filter would pass that all the way through over and over and over (at a high rate of flow)


My point exactly. It's those sized particles that do the most damage and this filter advertises that it catches absolutely none of them.
They are small enough to fit into the bearing clearances and grind up that soft lead,which I'm sure bits of paper won't do any harm.
I think once particle size gets smaller than a certain point they become harmless,so its a specific particle size that does the most harm and this filter advertises it catches nothing that small.
Peace of mind. Right
 
Another point... a conventional filter can catch a significant percentage of particle smaller than its rated capacity due to embedment and entrapment in the smaller pores.
 
Ok So I'm on the purepower website and these filters are the same ones as the K&N.. K&N probably puts their name on them. Well this is interesting, but they claim to filter down to 10micron and smaller.. check it out:

http://www.gopurepower.com/site/products/testimonials/default.asp#3

"Clearly the data confirms that Pure Power! Filters were much more efficient in removing the 10 micron and smaller particles, which cause engine wear.
--Greg Shank, Sr. Project Engineer
Mack Truck, Hagerstown, MD"

and

http://www.gopurepower.com/site/products/techsheets/filter.pdf

"..90% more efficient at removing 10 micron and smaller particles"

How can they claim this with the same 30 micron mesh as the others?
 
Originally Posted By: spinkick
Ok So I'm on the purepower website and these filters are the same ones as the K&N.. K&N probably puts their name on them. Well this is interesting, but they claim to filter down to 10micron and smaller.. check it out:

http://www.gopurepower.com/site/products/testimonials/default.asp#3

"Clearly the data confirms that Pure Power! Filters were much more efficient in removing the 10 micron and smaller particles, which cause engine wear.
--Greg Shank, Sr. Project Engineer
Mack Truck, Hagerstown, MD"


Could be that when they start getting plugged up they also catch some smaller particles. When a pore in the metal mesh traps a particle, it may not necessarily block that pore completely, and as debris collects it produces smaller pores.

But overall, I would think the metal mesh filter would load up faster compared to a conventional media filer is the same debris load rate was put on both filters.
 
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: spinkick
Ok So I'm on the purepower website and these filters are the same ones as the K&N.. K&N probably puts their name on them. Well this is interesting, but they claim to filter down to 10micron and smaller.. check it out:

http://www.gopurepower.com/site/products/testimonials/default.asp#3

"Clearly the data confirms that Pure Power! Filters were much more efficient in removing the 10 micron and smaller particles, which cause engine wear.
--Greg Shank, Sr. Project Engineer
Mack Truck, Hagerstown, MD"


Could be that when they start getting plugged up they also catch some smaller particles. When a pore in the metal mesh traps a particle, it may not necessarily block that pore completely, and as debris collects it produces smaller pores.

But overall, I would think the metal mesh filter would load up faster compared to a conventional media filer is the same debris load rate was put on both filters.


I think you are right. Ok so the K&P engineer emailed me back saying that he will post in this thread soon. So I found that someone else on here has talked to him already and they basically say it filters 10 micron up, just not to 100% like a regular filter on anything smaller than the 35 micron size we debate about.

here is the thread. Interesting

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1457507&page=1
 
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: spinkick
Ok So I'm on the purepower website and these filters are the same ones as the K&N.. K&N probably puts their name on them. Well this is interesting, but they claim to filter down to 10micron and smaller.. check it out:

http://www.gopurepower.com/site/products/testimonials/default.asp#3

"Clearly the data confirms that Pure Power! Filters were much more efficient in removing the 10 micron and smaller particles, which cause engine wear.
--Greg Shank, Sr. Project Engineer
Mack Truck, Hagerstown, MD"


Could be that when they start getting plugged up they also catch some smaller particles. When a pore in the metal mesh traps a particle, it may not necessarily block that pore completely, and as debris collects it produces smaller pores.

But overall, I would think the metal mesh filter would load up faster compared to a conventional media filer is the same debris load rate was put on both filters.



I agree. More media to hold more particles.
The filters we use have proven to help engines last longer than the car they are installed in. And cost vs reward just doesn't compute for me.
Anyways im out now. This thread has nothing more to give other than potentially start a more heated and less friendly discussion.
I'd use them in a heartbeat on a race engine where its attributes can be realized,but I won't be putting one on my daily driver.
 
I've used the K&P brand SS filter for about 20,000 miles now. There is definitely debris that washes out of the filter at typically 3,000 mile intervals.
I use a clean clear container and brake cleaner.....
Cool thread.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top