K&N Filter? Yes or No

[nextime]

On a few of my cars I have well over 100k with K+N filters installed, no engine problems and no burning oil.

 

The oiled filter catches the bigger particles of airborne dust.

 

The K+N filter Simply outflows stock filters.

 

Now for getting engine oil dirty... My oil is as clean as it is with or with out a stock filter. I even went purposely and installed my stock filter back in for 1 oil change.... Oil looked just as dirty as with the K+N.

 

I believe the postings of K+N filters letting big chunks of dirt through and all the other stuff is just rumors... Never saw a hard fact yet. You would think that the makers of stock type filters that do advertise on TV would go out of their way to let people know Oiled filters can damage engines if it was true just to sell their products!

[flyerjmr33]

:beatdeadhorse:

On a few of my cars I have well over 100k with K+N filters installed, no engine problems and no burning oil.

 

The oiled filter catches the bigger particles of airborne dust.

 

The K+N filter Simply outflows stock filters.

 

Now for getting engine oil dirty... My oil is as clean as it is with or with out a stock filter. I even went purposely and installed my stock filter back in for 1 oil change.... Oil looked just as dirty as with the K+N.

 

I believe the postings of K+N filters letting big chunks of dirt through and all the other stuff is just rumors... Never saw a hard fact yet. You would think that the makers of stock type filters that do advertise on TV would go out of their way to let people know Oiled filters can damage engines if it was true just to sell their products!

So, other than making more noise and gaining a small HP increase at wide open throttle, there is no benefit. It wont hurt anything in the normal course of the engine's life, so if it makes you feel good, go for it! For me, I've found that spending an extra 50 bucks for something that I have to wash and oil, just isn't in my agenda. I gave up washing and oiling air filters when the first papaer filter came to market back in the late 50's--- It takes 2 minutes to change a paper filter and 30 minutes to wash and oil the K&N if you include the time it takes to find the oil and the bucket that you need for the cleaning solution. Then you have to dispose of the cleaning solution--- More bad news-- I'll stick with my paper filters, thank you very much!

:beatdeadhorse:

[Crstfr]

yeah but that 30 mins you say...... ..dude..thats at least 2 brews, and good convo while you wait!..... thats all that is.....

 

and 50... with oil and stuff.. vs 25 i'm guessing on paper filters every 10k....hhmmm....its worth the time i think..

 

but i like your dead horse icon... nice!!!! lol.. :beerchug:

[nextime]

You will gain more MPG cause the K+N flows better all around.

 

I know the mass air and blaa blaa blaa but explain why my 1998 Windstar and 1998 Explorer both gained approx 2 MPG with the K+N switch? Both have mass air and are fuel injected.

 

Remember the engine is really an air pump, the more efficiently it can pump air the easier it is to spin. Now with a restrictive stock filter and a high flowing K+N the engine can breathe better with the K+N so the engine works not as hard via the stock filter.

 

Now the only reason why I dont have a K+N yet in my Edge is cause I only have 4400 miles on it and the engine is still new. This summer when temps stabilize I will drop in a K+N and post the results.

 

And If stock filters flow so much better and get the same MPG why do all aftermarket Turbo or Supercharger kits come with Oiled Filters? I know my Paxton was shipped with a K+N.

[akirby]

You will gain more MPG cause the K+N flows better all around.

 

I know the mass air and blaa blaa blaa but explain why my 1998 Windstar and 1998 Explorer both gained approx 2 MPG with the K+N switch? Both have mass air and are fuel injected.

 

Remember the engine is really an air pump, the more efficiently it can pump air the easier it is to spin. Now with a restrictive stock filter and a high flowing K+N the engine can breathe better with the K+N so the engine works not as hard via the stock filter.

 

Now the only reason why I dont have a K+N yet in my Edge is cause I only have 4400 miles on it and the engine is still new. This summer when temps stabilize I will drop in a K+N and post the results.

 

And If stock filters flow so much better and get the same MPG why do all aftermarket Turbo or Supercharger kits come with Oiled Filters? I know my Paxton was shipped with a K+N.

 

Please show me anywhere that K&N claims an improvement in MPG. If it was there and could be quantified with testing then they would be touting it all over their website.

[nextime]

No need to show it on K+N I have my own proof that I experienced, I also never stated K+N claims this but they do give a Gain in HP in the intake systems and all they are is smoothed out tubes that do not restrict air flow however some people say it is impossible to do this with mass air systems http://www.knfilters.com/cold_air_intakes.htm . If I did state this anywhere please direct me to the post.

 

You can read FAQ #1 if you wish.

http://www.knfilters.com/faq.htm#1

[akirby]

Now if your engine can suck filtered fresh air in faster, smoother and easier you will gain HP and better fuel economy and dont even try to tell me I am wrong. If your engine has a restricted type OEM filter it has to work harder to get that air in.

 

That is simply not true. The engine doesn't "work harder". In fact the engine doesn't know the difference between 80% throttle with a very dirty clogged air filter and 20% throttle with a K&N. It only knows how much air is allowed to enter the engine during the intake phase and it adjusts the fuel accordingly. It does affect the MAXIMUM amount of air that can be drawn in at WOT which would affect power, but the amount of fuel used is determined by the amount of air drawn in and it doesn't matter whether that air comes through a paper filter, K&N filter or a diaper. In fact one person actually put a diaper in their airbox and got 1 mpg increase. They had absolutely no power but they certainly didn't see a drop in fuel economy.

 

Remember the engine is really an air pump, the more efficiently it can pump air the easier it is to spin. Now with a restrictive stock filter and a high flowing K+N the engine can breathe better with the K+N so the engine works not as hard via the stock filter.

 

The flaw in your argument is that the engine works harder. It doesn't. It doesn't know the difference.

 

I know the mass air and blaa blaa blaa but explain why my 1998 Windstar and 1998 Explorer both gained approx 2 MPG with the K+N switch? Both have mass air and are fuel injected.

 

Simple - it's anecdotal evidence under non-controlled testing conditions. You either fixed some other co-existing problem or you simply changed your driving habits unknowingly (using less throttle due to improved throttle response e.g.).

 

No need to show it on K+N I have my own proof that I experienced,

 

You can read FAQ #1 if you wish.

http://www.knfilters.com/faq.htm#1

 

That is nothing but marketing double-speak to try and imply a fuel mileage improvement where they can't prove one exists.

 

I guarantee you is there was ANY test ANYWHERE that proves a MPG benefit then K&N would have it plastered all over their website. It's such an easy test - run 2 identical vehicles the same way or run one vehicle twice and compare the results. If the test is that easy to run and verify - why haven't they?

[nextime]

Again we agree to disagree.

 

I am assuming you have never personally used a K+N filter or any top end oiled filter for a long extended period of time?

 

K+N cant post results just on the filter alone cause everybody drives differently, in a perfect world we would all drive the same.

 

And nope I just installed a K+N filter, driving habits stayed the same. Actually a tuneup was done 3 years after the K+N install but the MPG stayed the same, my bad I did a break job right after that is what gave me the 2MPG gain I guess along with the car wash (sarcasm). Oh and yes there was a clean new filter in my Windstar when I replaced it, I actually still have it cause I use this between Cleanings if I ever have to drive it.

 

Oh and in the Explorer my Wife never knew I changed the filter with a K+N, she probably still doesnt know or care it is in there. When I rarely drive it I do check the MPG when I fill it up. How do you explain a gain in MPG on a vehicle where the driver does not know any changes were done? The Explorer averages only a 1MPG gain and rarely hits 2MPG gain. Still a 1MPG gain does save gas in the long run.

 

Oh and the Windstar was owned for 1 full year before the K+N was installed. The Explorer was owned appox 2 1/2 years before the K+N was installed and was delayed due to buying a new House and a Child Birth. My reasoning's is I never stick addons or unnecessary cash into a used vehicle till it has proved its worth for a year or so. I didnt even mod my 1992 Mustang or 2001 Corvette for over 1 year.

 

So was the 2 MPG increase just in my imagination then even though after every fill up I check the math just to make sure nothing is wrong with my vehicle? And yes I do check the MPG after every single fill up just to make sure everything is working properly.

 

I suppose you also think this is BS too even though it has a guarantee. They even state it gives a 1-3MPG increase.

http://vararam.com/b2.html

[akirby]

http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/how-to/4264939

 

Myth No. 2: The Clean Air-Filter Swap

The Lie: "If there isn't enough air, a dirty cleaner will make your engine burn more fuel!"

 

The Truth: Back when cars had carburetors, changing your air filter could have helped. Today, the on-board computer injects exactly the amount of gas your car needs. A small restriction in the air flow won't make the engine run too rich. The pleated-paper air filters used today are very large, and can hold a lot more dirt than you might think before they start to choke the engine. An oily filter--the result of blow-by fumes from the crankcase--can make a filter plug up pretty fast. Modern crankcase ventilation systems are far less prone to oil them up than they used to be.

 

Still, that filter probably won't affect mileage until it's so plugged that it makes the Check Engine light come on. But if you have an older car or truck, or any equipment that still uses a carburetor, it is important to keep an eye on the air filter, to make sure its free-flowing.

 

Popular Mechanics also tested all of the usual mpg improvers like the tornado, diy hydrogen fuel cells, etc. If Popular Mechanics figured out how to do a controlled scientific test on these then why can't K&N do the same test? And BTW - all seven of these actually make claims that they improve MPG - and they're all lying. The fact that K&N doesn't even bother to advertise any actual mpg improvement really says everything.

 

http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/alternative-fuel/gas-mileage/1802932

 

But hey - you can believe whatever YOU want to believe, but if you want to post it here claiming that it's a FACT then you need some unbiased test results to back it up.

[shiggins]

The simple fact comes down to if there was as easy and simple of a way to throw in a K&N filter on a car and get a 2 mpg increase in fuel economy, every manufacturer would do it. It's that easy and not really even debatable. MPG is that huge to car makers - CAFE standards and all.

 

And don't even bring the argument about they don't do it because Joe Sixpack can't be bothered to do the extra maintenance in cleaning and oiling the filter. K&N recommends cleaning the filter at 50k miles so it would be easy for a car manufacturer to say air filter changes are required at 50k intervals and the filter costs $50 per time. That's way longer than the standard recommended interval anyway. Not one single person would complain for a 2 mpg increase if they had to pay $50 every 3 years for a new air filter versus $12 every year or every other year.

 

Like everyone has said, MAF sensors negate the MPG increase due to a minor increase in flow, not to mention no one has yet to prove on this forum that the stock filter is actually restrictive enough to choke the engine off from the amount of air it needs to run at peak efficiency.

 

How about this analogy - by the same argument many are using about restrictive flow, putting a piece of regular window screen in place of your air filter will flow great, but a piece of chicken wire will even flow more air.....does that mean your engine will make more HP and MPG with chicken wire for the filter over window screen? No, because both are capable of flowing more air than the engine requires. Same for stock filter versus K&N....neither is a significant restriction in airflow for what the engine requires.

 

Stock disclaimer:

High performance, tuned, or racing engines are likely a different matter.

[flyerjmr33]

yeah but that 30 mins you say...... ..dude..thats at least 2 brews, and good convo while you wait!..... thats all that is.....

 

and 50... with oil and stuff.. vs 25 i'm guessing on paper filters every 10k....hhmmm....its worth the time i think..

 

but i like your dead horse icon... nice!!!! lol.. :beerchug:

 

Ford says to change the paper filter every 30,000 miles--so--- when you change yours at 10,000 miles, would you please send the discarded filters to me. I can then use them for another 20K and save the 6 bucks that a new one costs--- If you pay 25 bucks for a paper filter, I'd sure like to be your supplier! :yup:

[flyerjmr33]

http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/how-to/4264939

 

 

 

Popular Mechanics also tested all of the usual mpg improvers like the tornado, diy hydrogen fuel cells, etc. If Popular Mechanics figured out how to do a controlled scientific test on these then why can't K&N do the same test? And BTW - all seven of these actually make claims that they improve MPG - and they're all lying. The fact that K&N doesn't even bother to advertise any actual mpg improvement really says everything.

 

http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars/alternative-fuel/gas-mileage/1802932

 

But hey - you can believe whatever YOU want to believe, but if you want to post it here claiming that it's a FACT then you need some unbiased test results to back it up.

 

I believe that I stated in a previous post that if anything would improve gas mileage, the OEM's would jump on it like a Duck on a June Bug. There's a certain percentage of vehicle owners who, when they spend a buck on something that is all smoke and mirrors, have to attempt to justify the buck! You can't confuse them with facts--their mind is made up!

[nextime]

Like I said explain why the Explorer got a constant gain in MPG when the wife did not even know I did anything to the vehicle?

[nextime]

I doubt any MFG would use an oiled filter because the consumer based market is all about throwing away or replacing parts, people would simply complain they would have to clean it and most people couldnt even do an easy task like cleaning a filter, heck most cant even change a tire!

[flyerjmr33]

Like I said explain why the Explorer got a constant gain in MPG when the wife did not even know I did anything to the vehicle?

 

AS soon as you explain why the vehicle manufacturers haven't switched over to them-- and the use of oil has nothing to do with it. Everyone wants better gas mileage. Most of all, the vehicle manufacturers.

The computer sensors control the gas mileage on all the current crop of vehicles. They measure air flow and exhaust gas and adjust the fuel mixture accordingly.

If wasting money on gas saving gadjets makes you feel good, go for it-- get enough of them and you'll have to drain the gas tank to keep it from overflowing.

[Feirstein]

The US Government has run tests and recently issued a news release that states that claims that a new air filter will improve fuel economy are not suppported by tests on modern vehicles. Belive it or don't.

[akirby]

Like I said explain why the Explorer got a constant gain in MPG when the wife did not even know I did anything to the vehicle?

 

It's not a controlled test. Any number of things could have changed including ones you didn't know about. That's why you need controlled tests where the only variable is the filter. The fact that such a published test can't be found and hasn't been performed by K&N says all you need to know.