Maybe you saw this test but I found it interesting and maybe it can save you a few bucks.
It was a 4 part test at K&N's dyno.
The results show that a 14X3 K&N filter was actually 1 HP less and 1 less ft. lb of torque than a standard 14X3 paper filter. Only with the addition of the K&N filter with the filtered lid was there a gain of 2 hp and 1 ft lb. of torque. The lid assembly is $142.95. It seems unless you buy the lid assembly you are not gaining a thing by adding a K&N filter.
The test is a little confusing because they claim a 4 hp gain but that was against a taller filter test that they even admit could have had a power loss due to tuning and turbine changes during the test.

FWIW.
Dave

 

So in other words the test results are null and void because there was no consistancy in the testing? And here is how I look at it. A K&N saves you money by being reusable.

 

This is not a big surprise. Also, many well documented tests by off-road equipment companies have shown that K&N filters pass a LOT more abrasives (ie, sand and other particles) than regular paper filters. I pay $4 for a paper filter at Wal-Mart.

 

For that price you could buy 35 four buck filters at The Wal-Mart and just flip the lid over for more air flow.

 

and for that musical 4BBL HOWL!!

 

I buy the FRAM air filter because it is orange.

 

Now thats music I like to listen to!

 

CORRECT! i do know this first hand. without no doubt, A K&N will filter less dirt out of the air. i have many years of atv experience and built 100s of atv engines and a good way to ruin an atv cylinder is to run a K&N. the older air cooled engines are more forgiving than the new liquid cooled engines but i will not run one on them either.

 

Ill take my K&N .............Testing by me for me produced a .10 diffrence from a K&N to a regular paper filter.......More dirt let thru? I ll blow it up before i wear it out and its better than running no filter like alot of guys do...........Jerr

 

yes you are also correct. even for a street cat that will never be driven in dust would likely be fine. we put our off road stuff through a torcher that most can't imagine. that is where it really becomes noticeable. from my experience they do increase performance on every ATV i ever tested them on. the biggest thing is mentioned above. if you use a K&N with stock air intake plumbing you will gain minimal performance.

 

That's a big issue on the diesel boards I'm on, K&N lets more fine dust in, coating the intake tubes, sensors and turbo blades with a fine coat of dusty oil. I had one on for about 6 months before I heard that and took it out after I looked inside my turbo and intake. I got an Amsoil eA filter and never had a problem since.

 

Seeing the stuff that my K+N catches... can only wonder what it lets through

 

lol good point!

 

Kind of a sad story... my friend had a 79 (i think that was the year) firebird, we turned it into a dirt track car. Day before the race we go for a few practice runs. Im checking tires/fueling him up.. he checks the engine compartment and declares everything good. After about 3 laps he declares something is seriously wrong with the motor. I pop the hood.. the air filter is gone... nowhere to be seen.. needless to say he gave up that idea.. had the car crushed and the motor is being rebuilt for a 70 chevy pu atm... I would definately take a k&n over nothing

 

I remember seeing that test 4/5 years ago. Speaking of "filters" cut a Fram oil filter apart and compair it with a NAPA (Wick) filter. I buy NAPA Gold filters.

 

I was comparing K&N filters with Fram, STP and others at Auto Zone a few days ago and I could definitely see a quality difference (material wise) between them. The K&N filters won hands down (in my opinion). Your observation on the hp issue is keen and blows away some of the increased hp hoopla for sole air filter contribution. However, I think I still prefer the K&N filter...but its got me thinking, if I only use my classic on weekends, why spend the $ for one. There is also the problem of getting an 18 1/2 inch air filter for a J2 Olds Rocket 88, and K&N is the only one I can find after extensive searching on the web - it's about $50.00.

 

It sounds like the filters are more poreus and thats where the extra flow comes from. After reading about the issues with the dirt track racers and the extra cost, I don't think I'll be buying a K&N soon.

 

Interesting that the sponsor ad at the top is K&N!! I guess the ad changes every time you look at the forum. I think I saw a test a few years ago in Car Craft and they tested on a 500hp engine. They tested something like a huge 14x6 K&N all the way down to a tiny 11x2 and there was no difference on the dyno. Makes me wonder how bad a paper 14x3 inch is when an 11x2 K&N was just as effective as a 14x5 K&N? Maybe these engines dont need as much air as we think?

I also heard from a friend of mine that is an ASE tech that his dealership received a memo about sensors going bad under warranty and to check to see if the customer has a reusable filter. He said the reusables tend to foul the sensors because some of the oil from the filter gets past the filter at higher rpms or when theres more airflow.

 

FYI I have run a K&N since the my motor was fresh..........7 years ago