Keep K&N or NOT ?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted by ka9mnx
I have been a K&N user for 20 years. Trying to squeak out every bit of MPG. K&N says over oiling by the user could cause MAF sensor oiling but I had MAF sensor oiling issues with a factory new K&N in my Ranger. Last year I did a lot of research on these types of filters. Yes, they will flow better than paper. At WOT which I rarely do. In the Spring I changed all my K&N filters for the paper ones (I kept the paper filters). I haven't noticed any change in MPG or performance.



Good input … A post like this is one of the reasons I come to this site … used to run them as well until understanding the downside vs the claims
 
Mahle makes a high quality product and I'm running Mahle air and oil filters in my entire fleet. Their paper us actually nanofibers and flows and filters extremely well. They are very efficient filters and you wont be disappointed.

Hastings makes a top notch air filter as well. Their price is about the same as the Mahle.

Throw the K&N in the trash.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by AZjeff
It wil be 9 to 1 to ditch the K&N for more reasons than oiling the sensor.

But if you're intent on using it keep going, it got you this far and you ignored it.


Agree, ditch the K&N. Its nothing but marketing that people ... ugh ... never mind.

I dont understand why people use a KN filter, its a throwback into the 1930s or 40s, ([censored] my lawn mower engine just a few decades back used an oil sponge) when oil would be used to catch dirt because we were not capable of manufacturing material so precise to filter out small particles of dirt.

Sure if your on a race track where speed over engine wear is more important because race engines are rebuilt regularly, then K & N or no air filter is an option.

If you want whats best for your engine, buy any normal air filter, its not rocket science.
 
Last edited:
Like I've said 1000 times, K&N filters are a valid product for certain applications. They have been marketed for incorrect applications. Got a race engine with a custom intake? Go for it. Aviation or marine? Sure. I use them in boats.

Daily driver? Nope. Consumer off road? No. Commercial truck? No.
 
It would be interesting if we could somehow quantify the loss of life an engine would see using a K&N vs oem filter. I suspect the difference wouldn't be as great as people think. If there is any shortening at all.
 
Not an issue. They are charging good money for a product that does not do what it says, and reduces the quality of the intended purpose. It's a scam plain and simple. I could care less how much I'm getting screwed. Getting screwed even a little is enough.

But if we are going to get into it, poor filtration can kill the valves in a small engine in a matter of a few hundred miles.
 
Obviously that isn't the case for K&N or they'd be out of business. Also, in some applications these filters do exactly as they say they will. A well respected youtuber (Engineering explained) just showed power gains dynoing his subaru vs stock filters. Not to mention he isn't the only one to have shown this.

I'm not an advocate for K&N, I run OEM filters in all my stuff. But I do believe this whole K&N witch hunt has really gotten silly. They are a cleanable, reusable filter that in some cases can make more power. But we all know they don't filter like a paper OEM style filter. Everything in life has a trade off.
 
Specious reasoning, and the oldest "logic" of a snake oil salesman. "We wouldn't be in business if it weren't good!!!!"

EE's demonstrated "gains" were well within the margin of error for a dyno, and so miniscule that I would lay out good money would never result in a measureable improvement in acceleration.

Witch hunt? You do understand that this company is lying to people about its product's abilities? People should ignore this? Where do I find K&N's explanation of this "trade-off" on their website?
 
Interesting take on my comment, as i clearly implied they wouldn't be in business if they were ruining motors left and right. I made no comment about them being good/great or anything else.

What are some specific lies they've told? Things that have been proven without a shadow of a doubt to be false? You have to understand that marketing is a slippery thing. Companies like K&N use non-specific and ambiguous claims so they cannot be proven false. This is common in most/all advertising. Do we really know Castrol Magnatec has intelligent molecules? Maybe they're big liars! Worst company ever!
 
Originally Posted by JoelB
Obviously that isn't the case for K&N or they'd be out of business. Also, in some applications these filters do exactly as they say they will. A well respected youtuber (Engineering explained) just showed power gains dynoing his subaru vs stock filters. Not to mention he isn't the only one to have shown this.

I'm not an advocate for K&N, I run OEM filters in all my stuff. But I do believe this whole K&N witch hunt has really gotten silly. They are a cleanable, reusable filter that in some cases can make more power. But we all know they don't filter like a paper OEM style filter. Everything in life has a trade off.


How much were the "gains" with the K&N? And was this just a panel filter swap or an entire CAI? Remember that there is a margin of error for dyno results, so unless he did multiple back-to-back tests and averaged the results, swapping back and forth between stock and the K&N, all we have are two results from a dyno.
 
I believe he did 3 runs each with a new OEM filter, used OEM filter, some sort of parts store "premium filter" and the new K&N. All of these were swapping out panel filters with stock intake.

It made 4 more hp and 5 ft'lbs of torque over the clean OEM filter. Call it a margin of error, call it anything you want. But in this case it consistently made more power. Hopefully he follows up with some sort of filtration test as he mentions. It will be very interesting to see a % difference on filtration ability.
 
Originally Posted by JoelB
I believe he did 3 runs each with a new OEM filter, used OEM filter, some sort of parts store "premium filter" and the new K&N. All of these were swapping out panel filters with stock intake.

It made 4 more hp and 5 ft'lbs of torque over the clean OEM filter. Call it a margin of error, call it anything you want. But in this case it consistently made more power. Hopefully he follows up with some sort of filtration test as he mentions. It will be very interesting to see a % difference on filtration ability.


4HP is definitely within the margin of error for a dyno. Should have done 1x OEM, 1x used OEM, 1x Parts Store & 1x K&N, then repeat, then repeat. By the time he got to the K&N he had 9x runs on the engine, based on what you describe.

Even if the results are legit, is 4HP (which is SFA) worth significantly poorer filtration performance? I'm going to go out on a limb and say no, it isn't.
 
Originally Posted by JoelB
Interesting take on my comment, as i clearly implied they wouldn't be in business if they were ruining motors left and right. I made no comment about them being good/great or anything else.

What are some specific lies they've told? Things that have been proven without a shadow of a doubt to be false? You have to understand that marketing is a slippery thing. Companies like K&N use non-specific and ambiguous claims so they cannot be proven false. This is common in most/all advertising. Do we really know Castrol Magnatec has intelligent molecules? Maybe they're big liars! Worst company ever!




Funny you should mention Castrol, because I have called them out before for having some seriously bad advertising, as well as having what I consider the absolute poster child for bad modern oil advertising (The Castrol Dirt Hunting Fighter Jet). There's an important difference though. Castrol is selling a superior product that is in no way a detriment to an engine it is being used in, as recommended by them. Magnatec isn't making life harder for an engine. The other end of things is that if Castrol did drop a 100% honest ad about their oil, probably 50 people out of million watching would even understand what they were hearing. Does that excuse thing like the dirt hunting jet? No. It just makes it not nearly as bad. A pitch to sell a valid product is not nearly as bad as a pitch to sell an inferior one.

How would they not be in business by selling an air filter that causes early death of some engines? Hypothetically, I install a K&N in my dirt bike, and the valves are shot after a few months. How do I go about getting K&N in trouble? I can't prove anything at that point. K&N will just say "must have been something else", and that's where it ends. As you noted, K&N is a marketing juggernaut. They even had an army of trolls attack the internet over Arlen Spicer's report. When that failed and worked against them, they invited him to their facility and bent the 5011 test as much as possible to achieve favorable results for their filter. K&N is never going to admit to anything. The marketing machine will keep chugging out bent tests and results, and people will keep buying. That's literally what is going on. Might as well say that a politician wouldn't be in office if he's really a crook.
 
K&N…so much info/discussion/argument about them online. In terms of the testing etc., plenty on both sides. Some UOAs show no difference in silicon, some show increased with K&N. Some dynos show improvements, some don't. As a science-guy by profession, I am always skeptical of what I read online especially w/r to experiments folks do and I think this is the reason you get so much variability in the results (some good some bad). The biggest thing I see is lack of controlling the variables and lack of repeatability as well as not doing apples-to-apples comparisons i.e. huge diesel truck motor data vs. smaller economy cars etc. At best, I think K&N filters save you some money in terms of a one and done filter. K&N filters will be slightly noisier than stock b/c the media is more porous and allows sound waves from the intake through easier than a paper filter. The increased noise is likely a placebo for folks' butt-dynos and part of the "I can feel the difference!". My 2013 Focus has had one since nearly new which now has over 100K on it (and I run them in both of our newer other cars). It cost ~$50 and the cleaning kit was $15; the cleaning kit should last as long as I have the car. So I am in $65. I have cleaned it twice now at just over 100K per K&N's recommendations at 50K. Assuming a stock paper filter changed every 20K/once a year for me and the cost for a Ford filter is $17 that $85-$65 so I saved $20. Who @#$#@ cares. Over time, it will increase but even at another 100K service life you are talking a max savings of $100 over ~10 years. Again, who the @#$#@ cares. I like my K&N. It's a performance product that I like. On my car, there was some, in my opinion, scientifically sound (variables controlled, repeatability) testing done over on our Focus forum that showed that the K&N drop-in filter improved dyno numbers when combined with another intake modification. It's why I decided to run one. It certainly gave the intake a little louder tone (again, when combined with another mod). The K&N site/YouTube videos on the MAF sensor issues reported, in my opinion, shine light on the fact that this is basically urban legend and that MAFs fail for a variety of reasons, not just b/c you are running a K&N. They test the $hit out of their products and don't see that the oil comes off at the very low flow rates you get in a stock intake. They back their products and will go to bat for you if you have a warranty issue with the manufacturer. Check it out, it's very interesting. Yes, I get it, K&N is obviously going to have pro-K&N bits on their site but if these things were hosing motors/MAFs they wouldn't be in business. I need to do some UOAs on my Focus to see how it shakes out w/r to silicone/wear, I haven't done any mainly b/c in my application (normal driving in the city/highway), I just can't for the life of me imagine that the small percentage drop in filtering ability will make f-all difference in this application where dirt entering the filter is so minimal…at 50K the filter looked nearly new. Finally, the graphs in the famous testing linked are misleading as they are all over 95% so they show that last 5% only making the AC Delco look like it so much higher than the others…it's a few percent difference and the author's follow up visit to K&Ns facility to observe their testing shows a bit better numbers but certainly in-line with them overall - obviously a paper filter will have better filtering ability than the K&N…it has to. The question really is, do you need that small bit of extra to have a long engine service life? It's like oil changes. Sure, it can't be a bad thing to change your oil every 3K or even less but at some point, it just doesn't improve the wear on your engine enough to make it worth the extra cost/waste of materials. Believe what you want and use what you want. Mods, even as simple as a drop-in air filter, are part of the fun of owning a car and most of them are some compromise over OEM and the K&N is no different. BITOG is a site for nerds (I'm one!) obsessed with the minutia and as such, tiny differences mean a big deal to folks here so I get why some don't like them/don't recommend them but as I will always hold, a slight drop in filtration (much like I will hold that the slight differences in oil quality between various brands) won't make ANY difference over the normal lifespan of these cars b/c the thing will fall apart well before that filter (or XYZ oil) even gets close to doing it in.

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbth...Filtration_Stu

https://youtu.be/gE6moItrZNg
 
Last edited:
Ouch. Jeez that hurt, but I did read it.

Just a couple of points:

1. I could actually care less what K&N filters do in a lab. In the real world, they are completely awful in dirty environments. The real world is not a "coarse dust test". Anything at all will come at the filter whenever it feels like. It's not going to regulate feed and size in order to generate results. Pictures of K&N "performance" in a dirty environment (filthy intake tract) have been posted again and again.

2. The amount of companies that make inferior oil inappropriate for use in a motor vehicle has been documented too many times to count on here. PQIA and the government have to force these companies out of business. K&N stays in business for the same reason they do: "Prove it", consumer ignorance, and HUGE marketing dollars. If an oil company can stay in business selling oil not fit for use in a 1920's Hupmobile, why should I believe a company mismarketing an inferior air filter will suddenly result in people shouting J'ACCUSE!!! and ending in them going out of business?

3. The Arlen Spicer test was of a diesel truck filter. These are the only filters K&N sells with 7 layers of media. Everything else is 5 layer. How do you suppose a 5 layer K&N stacks up to paper?

The entire reason for K&N criticism is because of their claims and misapplication. It may not blow an engine in 10 minutes, but it's still a scam.
 
I'm just curious but K&N claims their diesel filters are 7 layered? I thought they used 4 layers of cotton gauze/screen mesh. Or is it their regular flat panel filters are 4 layers?

They probably did that because AFE having a 7 layered and S@B having an 8 layered filter BLEW them away with actual filtration.
 
Wow...I had to google "TL;DR"..hahahaha. Sorry about that. I agree with you guys, filtering is less, K&N has done some marketing in the past that seems a bit hyped i.e. "more hp!". I note that one of the filters I bought recently was marketed more on the box to the "reusable" end of things which, as I said in my long-@ss post, is part of why I like them. I also agree if you operate your vehicle in extremely dusty enviros..this isn't the filter for you. But for me, I just drive to work on a normal road and as I pointed out, after 50K paper, gauze, magic whatever, they are all basically clean looking for me. I just like to offer the alternate view that a decrease in filtering won't, for most people, grenade their motor or reduce it's useful life b/c as I read on some forums..that's somewhat how they are portrayed. I'll have to grab an oil analysis from my 3 cars next time around have a real look at MY data and see if I'm getting numbers that could indicate too much dirt passing.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

O
My new favourite thing: k&n air filter spray
Replies
15
Views
2K
ZeeOSix
SubieRubyRoo
Not all oiled filters are similarly bad to K&N...
2 3 4
Replies
75
Views
7K
ZeeOSix
G
210,000 miles with K&N air intake system
5 6 7
Replies
127
Views
11K
pocketchange
E
Air filter choices for a 98 Dodge Viper
Replies
4
Views
1K
TiGeo
O
How to improve air filters that appear to be made out of used clothes dryer sheets?
2 3
Replies
54
Views
5K
Kantaro
Back
Top