airaid oiled or dry

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Oct 15, 2010
Messages
51
Location
NY
anyone who is familiar with Airaid, please chime in. im trying to decide whether to go with an oiled or dry filter for the CAI on my hemi. airaid customer service is telling me there is no difference in filtration or performance and that either still works better than the paper filters. After reading on the issues with K&Ns, Im still reluctant and would like to hear from people who have used these and have sampled the oil. thanks guys.
 
Since when are paper air filters bad? They often filter better then oiled media foam counterparts. K&N's at least.
 
I use Spectre air filters, filters just AS good as a paper one,
honestly, if youre not heavily modded, or what not, an AF isnt going to make a big difference Paper vs Reusable.
I just like not having to replace it every 10K, (I drive ALOT of limerock roads, and Florida Road construction/dust)
 
Originally Posted By: dparm
http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/showthread.php?t=117009

The only legit/independent test I've ever seen. Draw your own conclusions, but I decided to keep my OEM paper one on.


Ahhhh the Spicer test! Good for sure but now dated (2004). The general trends are accurate, though most of the products have changed now.

Overall, my recommendation would be for a dry element but whatever your choice, compare the specs... which requires a little knowledge. You may or may not see the efficiency specs listed, or what specs you do see are highly filtered (pun intended) by marketing people.

What you want are tests done under ISO 5011:2000. Next, find out whether the test was done with fine or coarse test dust. You cannot compare tests on coarse and fine, as the fine dust challenges the filter much more. Real Example: A test that delivers 98 percent efficiency on coarse dust might only be 92 percent on fine dust and vice versa (you can see something similar in the Spicer test). If you find a filter that does 98-99 percent on fine dust, you have a good filter from the efficiency standpoint.

When comparing filters, make sure you are comparing the same tests. I have seen biased (or ignorant) comparisons that cite the coarse spec for the favored filter and the fine spec for the non-favored. Virtually any filter better than mom's old panty hose will do 98+ on coarse dust. Any filter worth a modecum of consideration should do 99+ on coarse.

All the preceding presupposes efficiency is the main goal. If airflow/performance is, then lower efficiency is often the price. In a few instances, you can have both. Some CAIs have oversized elements that offer an increase in airflow but because the media is so much larger, the media can be efficient as well. The only one I can point you to that I know 100 percent in all areas this is the case, is the AEM Brute Force with the Dryflow element. Very efficient media... 99+% on fines.
 
thanks guys. I actually havent been able to find any tests that included either of the Airaid filters. The customer service rep said that "SynthaFlow and SynthaMax both filter down to approximately 2 microns and flow within 5% of each other". not sure that that means. How does 2 microns relate to efficiency? They claim that the oiled filter flows a bit better but also recommend it in extremely dustry environments over the dry filter. thats something i did not expect. the construction of both filters seems pretty sound: " The SynthaFlow oiled filter has 4 layers of cotton gauze and combined with an additional layer of a synthetic material that together provide superior filtration. The SynthaMax “no-oil” filter kit has two distinct layers of our proprietary synthetic filter media that was developed to be run dry with no oil". which one would you guys pick?
 
Good info, Jim. Thanks.

With a SC motor, I am always interested in making sure the car can breathe. Most of the aftermarket intakes for my car are making 15-18hp because the stock airbox chokes at high RPM. But I want longevity and good filtering like a paper filter.
 
Any air filter can "filter down to 2 microns" at some percentage. Might only be 10 percent, but it can catch some. The only Airaid tests I have on file show the following under ISO 5011:2000

Airaid Fitler# 700-469 Synthmax: 99.18 % using fine dust

Airaid Filter# 700-470: 98.43 % using fine dust


AEM Filter tested in Same conditions:

AEM Dryflow # 21-3059 (grey style) Filter: 99.47 % on fine dust When tested after clening, showed same result)

AFE Filters:

AFE Filter # 72-40035 (oiled cotton): 98.54 % on fine dust

AFE Filter # 21-40035 (dry): 96.76 % on fine dust


Incidentally a K&N tested under the same conditions

K&N Filter #RE0870: 96.13% on fine dust
 
thanks Jim, awesome info. I looked up the part numbers on AIRAID.com. Both of these are oiled. It looks like synthamax filters start with 701- or 721-, versus 700- or 720- for oiled.
I wonder why such a difference between the two: 99.18 to 98.43. 700-469 is a bigger filter, dont know if that affects anything. either way though,from your previous post, both of the numbers mean that both filters are pretty good, is that correct? just wondering, what efficiency would a paper filter be at? (Mopar)
 
The difference between 99.18 and 99.43 is negligible and likely due to various testing and manufacturing tolerances. Over 99+ is good but you always want the highest number you can get if efficiency is your game. Efficiency generally follows the media. Capacity (which I didn't show) is based on the amount and type of media.

Look at the Spicer test referenced above for some typical paper filter efficiencies. Many better brands are 99+ on fines but because they are a surface loaded media, their capacity is relatively low, meaning they will plug up sooner (you should install a filter restriction gauge BTW). The synthetic dry media with a lot of loft (thickness) has the efficiency but more capacity becasue it is a depth media and holds dirt both on the surface and internally.
 
Last edited:
I've been using Airaid Synthamax (dry) for ~ 6 months now. Before that, I was using aFe Pro Dry S. I will never go back to oiled gauze unless that's the only thing available.
 
I love the Pro Dry S I'm using currently.
banana2.gif


I do hear great things about the AEM Dryflows, as well.

I'm also done with oil cotton gauze filters, aside from perhaps the Pro Guard 7 by aFe.
 
Finally took the time to cross-reference an Airaid filter that should fit my stock airbox.

Can anyone comment on SC or heavily modded cars getting extra benefit from low-restriction filters? I have read this elsewhere. My car is using a stock airbox but generating about 30% more power than stock. 3.0L DI V6 with an Eaton TVS supercharger.
 
Cannot tell you anything except that ages old adage about how any good filter has some restriction. It has a lot to do with the design of the airbox as well. Most quality manufacturers will add plenum volume and air filter size to reduce the restriction.

Just no real Audi experiences here.
 
Originally Posted By: dparm
Finally took the time to cross-reference an Airaid filter that should fit my stock airbox.

Can anyone comment on SC or heavily modded cars getting extra benefit from low-restriction filters? I have read this elsewhere. My car is using a stock airbox but generating about 30% more power than stock. 3.0L DI V6 with an Eaton TVS supercharger.


As Steve said above. A real 30 percent more power (you know this from dyno tests or is this a guesstimate?) needs substantially more airflow. Unless you make some objective evaluations on actual airflow, you are just making guesses. There are ways to calculate intake airflow. You could do so but then you'd need to know how much your stock system flows to compare. Forced induction drastically increases intake airflow needs and if you are running 20-25 % more air thru the stock airbox, it's very likely you will need more than just a filter. The ducting is often the most restrictive part, so that could be holding you back from realizing the modified engine's full potential. The biggest losses will be at the upper rpm range.

Research specifically on your application for sure, because it's likely this road has been charted but one way I see you could find out quickly how much restriction you have, is to buy an air filter restriction gauge. Filterminder, Donaldson Informer or whichever... just so long as it has a scale on it that reads kPa or inches of vacuum and one that reads from 10 inches up to 25 or 30 inches of vacuum (4.2-7 kPa). Install and go for a few full bore acceleration runs. If you see anything near 25 inches of vacuum (6.2kPa) with a clean filter, odds are good that you are running with too much intake restriction. You could then experiment with ways to bring that figure down as low as possible. If asked to guess, I would tell you that a full intake system is going to be in order to match the increased airflow the SC requires.
 
The factory rubber intake tube (accordion tube with a Helmholtz resonator) was removed and replaced with a smooth carbon fibre tube. Throttle response did improve as a result. Unsure if it helped with power.

It is making 30% more power than factory. This is the "v1.0" tune. I have their new "v2.0" which makes even more.


S4%20B8%203.0T%20Exh%20Flash%20Dyno%20Sheet%20-%20V.jpg
 
That's an awesome engine! Forgive my almost total lack of knowledge onAudi (even though I was a dealer tech on them in the '80s... though I am trying to forget.... they were NOT fun to work on). Is it a SC engine or did you add the Eaton blower? If it's factory, then some extra airflow is factored in. If not, then you are likely woefully under your optimal airflow. Like I said, I think a restriction gauge will help tell the tale.

If you don't mind a cherry to apple comparison, I installed a restriction gauge on our 200 hp (whoopeee! are you underwhelmed yet?) Honda Accord and even though it has about 30K (and 5 years) on the air filter, it doesn't even generate 10" of restriction on fullbore runs from 0 to 100 mph. Tells me I got enough filter to do what I need to do.

Along the same line lines, I finally got around to installing one on my '86 F250 diesel (6.9L w/Banks turbo kit) and even with a rather large K&N style filter (I have no options in this unless I change airboxes) I was rather surprised to see 15-16" with a clean filter. Engine generates about 13 psi average maximum boost. Might see some improvement with an airbox upgrade, who knows.

Keep us posted, eh?
 
The Eaton TVS 1300 is a factory part. This is an S4 after all! The extra power is NOT factory, obviously. The factory air filter is a conical paper element about 6" long, 6" diameter, with a 3.625" ID inlet. It sits inside a pressurized box. You can see the accordion tube I removed in this photo, too.


ag_10s4_engine2.JPG



Accordion tube replaced by this:

carbonio_intake_b830t_stage_2_pipe.jpg





I'm a bit confused on how and where those restriction devices get installed. They appear to be targeted at the professional market so there's not much info for a DIY guy like me. Would you care to clarify?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top