Is Fram Airhog Air Filter good?

stinkingbob · Dec 4, 2006

Hi guys,
I have been looking over the forum on the reusable air filters and so far, I am getting mixed results on whether or not they are good and will damage the sensor. I recently bought an airhog air filter(this was before I found out about this website) and from looking at the fram website on its product, it seems like it was pretty decent. Basically, if you follow the directions when you go to clean and re-oil it, it should be safe for your vehicle. So, my question is this: If a person who uses the Fram Airhog air fileter follows the instructions carefully when cleaning, drying and re-oiling it, can the filter still cause damage to the sensor? I guess I want to know if I should go back to using the disposable filters.
THanks for your input guys,
B.

The Critic · Dec 4, 2006

I have one on my Saturn as it costs about $3 more than a paper air filter. Then again, I've only had it for a few months, and the filter seems to be somewhat over oiled from the factory. No problems...but then again, my MAF isn't even close to the airbox.

Throckmorton · Dec 11, 2006

I'm wondering the same thing. Right now there is a $20 rebate on them if you buy them from Amazon.com. That works out to a net cost of $6 after the rebate. I just hope it doesn't harm my engine.

I've also wondered about Kool Blue air filters. Supposedly they filter down to 6 microns vs 28 -34 microns for K&N or Airhogs.

Mike_dup1 · Dec 11, 2006

I tried the Accel Kool Blue filter a while back and they are nothing IMO. I threw them out because they did not fit very well.

btw-Its said made in France on the box.

NYEngineer · Dec 15, 2006

I have the Airhog in my GMC Yukon. I haven't experienced any trouble with my airflow sensor. I swear the truck runs a little better.

Trav · Dec 15, 2006

IMHO Airhog,K&N and other so called super duper filters are just a bunch of hog wash,sure they may allow more air but that doesn't automatically translate to more HP.Modern intake runners and injector size are very carefully calibrated by the manufacturer and upsetting that calibration can have negative effects.As far as the loud air intake noise from some of these tube add on units from Fram and K&N etc some folks believe this is the sound of more power when truth is its just loud.Paper filters work very well,i don't see the need to add a wad of surgical cotton gauze soaked in oil to replace them.

Throckmorton · Dec 16, 2006

True. I've alway believed in paper filters, but at $6 apiece after rebate the Airhog seems like a good deal. I've heard that throttle response is a little sharper with K&N type filters. With less restriction in the intake, the few tenths of a second it takes to adjust to the new air/fuel rate for a larger load on the engine may be reduced. That, rather than peak power, is probably what most people sense when they claim improved "power".

road_rascal · Dec 24, 2006

Less restriction in the intake... You've never seen the innards of a late model Ford 3.8 or 3.0 24V lately, eh? More plumbing snakes and butterfly valves you can shake a stick at

.

Mike_dup1 · Dec 26, 2006

The filters like this are more hype than substance. They are just capitalizing on the younger generation need to make noise.

If you think you got more power and more mpg then you are fooling yourself and bought into the advertising hype. I know many will never be convinced but for more air to flow, there needs to be less filtration. All you have is more noise but to some more noise means more POWER. Just look at the airhog commercial, they hype that.

B00SS · Dec 26, 2006

I went to pick up an AHog last night. For my truck they were $50 at Walmart!! The paper filter was $12. I decided the $12 filter was good enough for me.

Lexura · Dec 27, 2006

Quote:

True. I've alway believed in paper filters, but at $6 apiece after rebate the Airhog seems like a good deal. I've heard that throttle response is a little sharper with K&N type filters. With less restriction in the intake, the few tenths of a second it takes to adjust to the new air/fuel rate for a larger load on the engine may be reduced. That, rather than peak power, is probably what most people sense when they claim improved "power".

Then why replace OEM paper filter EVER? dirty paper filter blocks out more dust particles when it is clogged.
Automaker recommendates air filter change interval because flow is also important. If car designers sees air flow as important as filteration, why can't aftermarket designers?
Before anyone makes a claim that K&N, FRAM filter is not followng OEM spec, what is OEM paper spec for your car?

Mike_dup1 · Dec 29, 2006

fyi

I was looking up a Cabin filter and found this link to K&N vs Wix.

WIX vs KN

norseman · Jan 3, 2007

Hard to argue with that

Lexura · Jan 4, 2007

How does X ppm additional Silicon translates into metal coming off the engine components? Got any UOAs?
If one is so concerned about having any dirt into the car, why do you ever want to change dirty paper filter? Heck, why don't anyone put two paper filters in series?

Throckmorton · Jan 4, 2007

Does anyone have any evidence that the minute particles that pass through an air filter actually damage an engine?

norseman · Jan 4, 2007

Quote:

Does anyone have any evidence that the minute particles that pass through an air filter actually damage an engine?

No. But, do you have evidence that they don't? I think I'll just error on the side of; "What if they do?"

Lexura · Jan 4, 2007

"No. But, do you have evidence that they don't?"
This is a logical fallacy
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/burden-of-proof.html
Your logic is exactly same (wrong) logic as in the example 2 shown on link above.

Example 2
Bill: "I think that some people have psychic powers."
Jill: "What is your proof?"
Bill: "No one has been able to prove that people do not have psychic powers."

Throckmorton · Jan 4, 2007

You've got it exactly backwards. I never said it filters out fewer particles. Others, however, are claiming that these small particles which are less than 34 microns (most being less than 15 microns) harm an engine and they offer no proof that it does.Considering that car manufacturers don't caution vehicle owners against using these, and that no such disclaimer is offered by the filter manufacturer the burden of proof that these are harmful falls squarely on the person making such a claim.

norseman · Jan 4, 2007

Quote:

"No. But, do you have evidence that they don't?"
This is a logical fallacy
http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/burden-of-proof.html
Your logic is exactly same (wrong) logic as in the example 2 shown on link above.

Example 2
Bill: "I think that some people have psychic powers."
Jill: "What is your proof?"
Bill: "No one has been able to prove that people do not have psychic powers."

Comparing dirt particles to psychic powers

You're effin' kidding right?

And you're questioning my logic?

Lexura · Jan 5, 2007

No, please read, that is an example. An example makes people understand the logic better.
About your logic, your response proved my point already.
Thank you for making the most intelligent reply that you can post

Is Fram Airhog Air Filter good?

Similar threads