Second thoughts about K&N

[DAVIDO49]

If you're dead set on a reusable filter get an AEM dry flow. Seriously though, air filters are like $15, you're not saving a meaningful amount of money by having a reusable one.

True. Have an AEM or AFM whatever it is dry flow filter in my '20 Ranger. Truck has the excellent gen2 2.3L TGDI motor. Like the long service life.. but doubtful it makes any performance difference! They do claim 2-3hp from dyno results ..will you ever feel that? No. Next filter is the thick well built OEM Motorcraft! 'Nuff said.

 

[gtical]

i think people are overthinking oiled filters. Current honda's comes with oil'ed engine air filters.

Here is my uoa with a PRL intake system on my civic type-r that uses a KN oil'ed filter.

This dyno shows a KN filter change produce an additional 6hp/2tq on this platform.


Im not an advocate for k&n(former K&N hater actually) and actually prefer paper however these data sets show K&N products are effective.

 

[kschachn]

i think people are overthinking oiled filters. Current honda's comes with oil'ed engine air filters.

Do the two products have the same filtering efficiency?

 

[ZeeOSix]

^^^ I'd bet a big efficiency difference between an oiled paper filter (non-cleanable) vs a cleanable oiled gaze filter like a K&N.

 

[TiGeo]

^^^ I'd bet a big efficiency difference between an oiled paper filter (non-cleanable) vs a cleanable oiled gaze filter like a K&N.

Has to be. The whole point of the K&N is to flow more air/less restriction and to achieve it, you get less filtering efficiency. The oil acts as a filter across the large voids in the cotton gauze. So round and round we go....a trade-off analysis of how much less is the efficiency for the added flow and does it make any meaningful difference in your engine's performance and wear. There is no reason for average drivers to use one of these over throw-away OE-style paper filters that you may change 3-4 times over an average ownership run.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Has to be. The whole point of the K&N is to flow more air/less restriction and to achieve it, you get less filtering efficiency. The oil acts as a filter across the large voids in the cotton gauze. So round and round we go....a trade-off analysis of how much less is the efficiency for the added flow and does it make any meaningful difference in your engine's performance and wear. There is no reason for average drivers to use one of these over throw-away OE-style paper filters that you may change 3-4 times over an average ownership run.

For sure. As has been said many times in these threads, a drop-in low restriction air filter (like a K&N) is only good for added HP when the throttle is 100% wide open - "racing" type of use conditions. On a fuel injected engine, anything below WOT will be taken care of by the ECU - unless it's a strictly fuel mapped ECU and not O2 feedback. In that case, a tune is really needed to take full advantage of the better air flow. Going a step farther and installing a complete low restriction intake system will add even more air flow in most instances at wide open throttle.

On a carburetor engine, a better flowing air filter can make a difference throughout the throttle opening, if the jets have been tuned for optimum A/F to the new better flowing filter/intake system.

 

[Revving2Redline]

As we get into winter, I always wondered at what point the air filter oil from AFE and K&N would become solid on the media and really lower the ability to filter. I recall the diesel guys having lots of issue with oiled filters but I never followed up on it. The new dryflow is the way to go. No oil to buy, no worries about too much or too little oil. I had the Cattman/Monster flow foam filter and used the Amsoil oil and it was a tacky mess. Don't miss those days. Happy Thanksgiving everyone!!