I am looking for some oil analysis numbers on how much more dirt the K&N lets in the crankcase compared to a paper filter. I am sure someone on here must have done this comparision before. Any help appreciated.
K&N vs Paper - Oil Analysis Results
- Thread starter Oldswagon
- Start date
- Status
Patman
Staff member
That analysis isn't 100% clear on if the K&N was the one letting in 7ppm more silicone.
As you know there are other sources of leaks that may cause an increase in dirt ingestion:
PCV grommet
IAC breather tube
vacuum leaks
etc...
If you can show that the silicon level between TWO UOA's or more with a paper filter is consistently 9 ppm, and then suddenly adding a K&N would cause it to spike up consistently, then I'd say that's a sure sign the K&N is letting in more dirt.
That 7ppm could come from a slight leak in a grommet or tube. A car that's got 83k miles isn't exactly a spring chicken.
As you know there are other sources of leaks that may cause an increase in dirt ingestion:
PCV grommet
IAC breather tube
vacuum leaks
etc...
If you can show that the silicon level between TWO UOA's or more with a paper filter is consistently 9 ppm, and then suddenly adding a K&N would cause it to spike up consistently, then I'd say that's a sure sign the K&N is letting in more dirt.
That 7ppm could come from a slight leak in a grommet or tube. A car that's got 83k miles isn't exactly a spring chicken.
Patman
Staff member
True, it's possible the increase in silicon came from other sources.
But generally speaking, if you look through the UOAs on here, the ones with K&Ns on them show higher silicon. Sure, there are a few here and there with very low levels, but for the most part they are higher.
The microscopic view posted on here of the large gaps in the K&N's media is downright scary. No thanks, I'll stick to paper.
But generally speaking, if you look through the UOAs on here, the ones with K&Ns on them show higher silicon. Sure, there are a few here and there with very low levels, but for the most part they are higher.
The microscopic view posted on here of the large gaps in the K&N's media is downright scary. No thanks, I'll stick to paper.
Patman,
thanks for the link! I would tend to agree with you on this one about the filters. If there are results showing higher levels of silicon with the K&N's, why risk using it? Honestly, I don't think the little flow gains that one might get are not worth chancing more dirt getting into the engine.
If anyone else has any other UOA comparing K&N to paper, please post them.
thanks for the link! I would tend to agree with you on this one about the filters. If there are results showing higher levels of silicon with the K&N's, why risk using it? Honestly, I don't think the little flow gains that one might get are not worth chancing more dirt getting into the engine.
If anyone else has any other UOA comparing K&N to paper, please post them.
Here's a quote from GeorgeCLS,
"
I like to see single digit silicon (dirt). (that is a 1 to 10) I am awfully suspicious of this being real, honest to goodness engine damaging dirt... Not only is it the high silicon but my old friend Keep out Bricks and Birds K&N air filter. 90% of the analysis I review using a K&N result in elevated silicon (dirt) and associated high wear metals.
I would suggest replacing the K&N for a bit with an OEM/paper element, check your induction system closely for leaks and re-sample at 2000 to 3000 miles..
George Morrison, STLE CLS "
The full thread http://theoildrop.server101.com/cgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=000192
I love that "Bricks and Birds" comment.
"
I like to see single digit silicon (dirt). (that is a 1 to 10) I am awfully suspicious of this being real, honest to goodness engine damaging dirt... Not only is it the high silicon but my old friend Keep out Bricks and Birds K&N air filter. 90% of the analysis I review using a K&N result in elevated silicon (dirt) and associated high wear metals.
I would suggest replacing the K&N for a bit with an OEM/paper element, check your induction system closely for leaks and re-sample at 2000 to 3000 miles..
George Morrison, STLE CLS "
The full thread http://theoildrop.server101.com/cgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=3;t=000192
I love that "Bricks and Birds" comment.
K and N drop ins usually have no affect on performance as well, per some peoples findings at the drag strip and on dynos. If you build a good cold air intake setup with a cone filter, then you will see a moderate gain in real world performance.
i been working on a new cold air intake setup. it consists of an air box, 3'' piping, a 5 inch piping in the front with a foam prewrap, 2 intakes inside the air box. seems crazy. i decided for 2 air filters just for fun. the prewrap will get the huge particles and the two filters will filter the rest. donno how good it will be in terms of protection, though im using 2 paper filters. it depends on the velocity of the air that the engine needs...i dotn have the resources to test it out. this is a crazy design though. i had to take off my fender and bumper to adapt this. hehe of course i get a HUGE rush of air when i step on the gas, but i think the HP gain is only 2 hp at most. if i change to k & n i might get a little improvment but my goal is filtration and power.
im just hoping 2 paper filters will equal out k & n so i dont have to buy those.
5'' piping---->4'' piping---->3'' piping is the setup and the filter is between 5' pipe and 4' pipe.
im about to take it out though....probably rethink my ideas.
im just hoping 2 paper filters will equal out k & n so i dont have to buy those.
5'' piping---->4'' piping---->3'' piping is the setup and the filter is between 5' pipe and 4' pipe.
im about to take it out though....probably rethink my ideas.
I have a 2002 Camaro ls1 with 7,500 miles on it and I have a K&N flat filter in it. I plan on doing an oil analysis when I have 3,000 miles on the oil. I'll post the results and then I'm getting rid of the K&N. After the next oil analysis with a new paper filter we will see what differance it will bring!
since when were they looking for silicone?
I agree -Joe
[ April 01, 2003, 08:26 PM: Message edited by: joee12 ]
Not that I'm a proponent of K&N's, but on the dyno with less than 10 minutes between pulls, I gained 12 HP with no other change. Comparison filters were the OEM pleated paper with foam facing, less than 3K miles on them vs. 9K on the K&N's.
Not worth getting dirt in the engine, but obviously did increase HP. I now use on the strip or track only.
Not worth getting dirt in the engine, but obviously did increase HP. I now use on the strip or track only.
That was on a Viper correct? I doubt I'd see much of anything in my 94 Corolla
The other thing many people do not understand or realize is the fact that K&N filters contaminate the Mass Air Flow (MAF) sensor sample wires of many cars, especially Ford ! Parts of the the filter oil travels onto the sample wires and cake up with ultra fine dirt particles, which in the burn-off cycle after the engine shuts off, glaze onto the wires. In short order you have drivability issues = lean condition.
CLEAN YOUR MAFs.
[ April 04, 2003, 01:47 PM: Message edited by: Alex D ]
CLEAN YOUR MAFs.
[ April 04, 2003, 01:47 PM: Message edited by: Alex D ]
I agree with Metro, you should have seen the oil on the Motorcraft filter for my Explorer. The box had oil spots all over the outside of it where the oil had soaked through. You have to clean both your throttle body and MAF every so often regardeless what air filter you run -Joe
[ April 06, 2003, 10:02 AM: Message edited by: joee12 ]
There is some eye opening and semi-scary information here. What about the Amsoil foam filter? I've been using that for quite a while now and wonder if I should goto a good paper filter.
windsorfox, i tossed my k&n's long ago and went to baldwin air filters they flow better and remove 99.9% of all particle sizes so does donaldson but i liked the construction of baldwin better..the donaldson seemed to be too restrictive too many pletes..the baldwin was very even and uniformed and a much different material
I have had a K&N on a carbed Bronco for about 2 years now. I pulled the air cleaner top off yesterday to have a look, and everything was super clean. There was absolutely no residue inside the cleaner housing.
This contrasts with when I used paper filters on it. There was always grit that could be felt, and a tissue would show black residue when wiped on the air cleaner housing.
This may be a crude test, but it's "real world", and it shows that at least in my application, the K&N is superior to the stock paper filter.....
This contrasts with when I used paper filters on it. There was always grit that could be felt, and a tissue would show black residue when wiped on the air cleaner housing.
This may be a crude test, but it's "real world", and it shows that at least in my application, the K&N is superior to the stock paper filter.....
I'm using K&N (actually Accel Kool Blue filters) becuase I absolutely have to replace air filters almost annually in all of my cars becuae they started to get congested with dirt and debris and won't come off.
So far I haven't had much debris stick onto the Kool Blue and not come off when tapped. When I tap the KB on the Vic, a whole buttload of stuff comes crashing down into the wastebasket. It sounds like sand, grit, dirt, etc... but not much of it remains trapped in the medium.
Paper, OTOH, traps dirt particles like there's no tommorrow and just starts to get more and more restrictive with use.
At this rate I won't have to wash my K&Ns for maybe 5-10 years!
So far I haven't had much debris stick onto the Kool Blue and not come off when tapped. When I tap the KB on the Vic, a whole buttload of stuff comes crashing down into the wastebasket. It sounds like sand, grit, dirt, etc... but not much of it remains trapped in the medium.
Paper, OTOH, traps dirt particles like there's no tommorrow and just starts to get more and more restrictive with use.
At this rate I won't have to wash my K&Ns for maybe 5-10 years!
- Status
