When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I have bought 2 K&N filters in the past 2 years. Since I'm too lazy to clean them and re-oil, I'm wondering how many guys here are running K&N and how you clean them.
Like to know how many are using paper filters as well.
Not sure how to take a poll here.. K$N or paper
I think I figured out how to post a Poll.
Thanks
Eric
Last edited by 76olds; August 18th, 2016 at 05:40 AM.
Reason: Post in a Poll
I know the K&N oiled filters can cause issues with a MAF due to the oil. I have run the AEM dryflow, developed with K&N, in a couple of vehicles. They worked fine and did make a very slight difference in power for the Challenger, actually set a code that went away. I did open up the air box inlet on the Dakota as well, so hard to judge the improvement.
I've never cared for K&N filters, due to repeated published reports of poor filtering performance. Apparently the reason why K&Ns flow more is because they also let in more dirt. Paper filters are cheap and painless.
I have a huge amount of air filter experience in the off road world. I can say for an absolute fact that the reason K&N flow more air is because they filter less. In the on road world I think it is not something that is as big of a worry but it don't change the fact that they filter less. I do use one on our Jetfire because there are only three options. One is to make your own foam filter, two is to have K&N custom build you one or three, do without. I also clean them with the K&N cleaner kit but that is because of old sponsors from my racing days stock piled it and give it to me. Many in the off road world use Oxyclean laundry detergent.
I use paper, they're cheap and work fine. IMO K&N really not worth the expense and trouble.
X2, I had the K & N filter on my 02 Bravada and I was wondering why Im wasting more gas. So I cleaned and oiled the filter. Again, Im getting terrible gas mileage. So I switched it to paper. What a big difference, Im getting better gas mileage and when I was passing a car on the highway I heard a big howling sound from the engine. That's from a clean paper air filter. I never heard that from the K & N.
I use paper, they're cheap and work fine. IMO K&N really not worth the expense and trouble.
+2.
I'm sure that for some high-performance applications, the increased potential air flow delivers some benefit (with the tradeoff of less filtering), but not for anything near stock.
Location: I moved to pittsburgh so I can be near Primantis
Posts: 405
I use paper on the olds cuz 212CW replacements in the K&N world are pricey. The boat, kids truck, bus, and Tdi all run K&N and I tend to hang a quarter mil or so on my vehicles before I dispose of them. Damage due to filtration issues between the filter types is non existent.
FWIW, a piece of plywood would filter more than a paper air filter and the performance would be correspondingly less. And lest we forget, for those old enough, the OLD way of filtering was oil bath metal gauze. just about every old tractor known to man uses this to this day and are oft on the original bores with 20-30K hours....
Put-r-ther !!!!! Thanks for the Feedback and taking the poll guys!!
I have a the paper one that came with the edelbrock breather I bought back when. Since I'm too lazy to clean the K&N ones, plus getting too cheap to buy another one, I will put the paper one in and be done with it for the duration of the summer.
I hope the poll keeps going!!
The Dodge diesel 4x4 community was big on K&N for a while until they started having internal engine and turbo issues. I don't know if anything has changed. I just change my paper one every 2 years.
I had a look at the links that Joe P posted about particles etc getting past the K&N, interesting read. Then my throat was getting kinda dusty n dry, so of course I had to splash a shot into that. Then I googled the K&N deal, and it does seem it a mixed bag on likes and dislikes. But most do say don't waste money on their filters haha, I'm only 2 years late on that one.
I use paper on the olds cuz 212CW replacements in the K&N world are pricey. The boat, kids truck, bus, and Tdi all run K&N and I tend to hang a quarter mil or so on my vehicles before I dispose of them. Damage due to filtration issues between the filter types is non existent.
FWIW, a piece of plywood would filter more than a paper air filter and the performance would be correspondingly less. And lest we forget, for those old enough, the OLD way of filtering was oil bath metal gauze. just about every old tractor known to man uses this to this day and are oft on the original bores with 20-30K hours....
As a retired farmer, I've owned dozens of tractors, none use the old antiquated oil bath air filters anymore and haven't for years. The oil bath filter efficiency is not near as good as a paper filter, in my opinion.
I had one on my 99 jeep cherokee. I liked it. I ended up with a little better mileage, about 1.3mpg. That was the difference from the average of the 10 fill ups before and the 10 after. Then got lazy and didn't clean as recommend. Then got cheap and just use paper filters on everything else. The cherokee is gone so don't know how it is any more.
I had one on my 99 jeep cherokee. I liked it. I ended up with a little better mileage, about 1.3mpg. That was the difference from the average of the 10 fill ups before and the 10 after. Then got lazy and didn't clean as recommend. Then got cheap and just use paper filters on everything else. The cherokee is gone so don't know how it is any more.
Could it be that your old filter was dirty and you would have gained that 1.3 regardless of what filter you put on as long as it was clean?
Railguy
I use paper.
I have a huge amount of air filter experience in the off road world. I can say for an absolute fact that the reason K&N flow more air is because they filter less.
That was my exact experience with a K&N in my Jeep Wrangler. The desert trails are very dusty and with the K&N there was dust all through the air intake all the way to the throttle body. I ditched it and went back to the factory paper filter and the intake system stayed clean. For on-road in a regular, non desert environment I didn't have any issues.
I use the K&N's in both Oldsmobiles. I bought them because they are long term ownership vehicles. Almost 20 years on the 70 and 13 on the Alero so it made sense.
The DD are getting better with the paper elements from the factory. The last one was 50K with paved roads. And that was the manuals recommended interval.
Location: I moved to pittsburgh so I can be near Primantis
Posts: 405
Originally Posted by Fun71
That was my exact experience with a K&N in my Jeep Wrangler. The desert trails are very dusty and with the K&N there was dust all through the air intake all the way to the throttle body. I ditched it and went back to the factory paper filter and the intake system stayed clean. For on-road in a regular, non desert environment I didn't have any issues.
For an off road experience you would not use either - you would use oiled foam
I am astounded at the full third of responders who use the K&N.
Considering the contrast between a -- What? $40? $50? -- filter that requires time consuming regular maintenance regardless of mileage, and a $5 filter that takes seconds to change, and, with the amount of use the car sees, needs to be changed about once a decade, I am absolutely amazed that so many people choose the former option.
The Dodge diesel 4x4 community was big on K&N for a while until they started having internal engine and turbo issues. I don't know if anything has changed.
That's interesting. The folks with Ford Powerstrokes preach Motorcraft only for air and oil filters. I gather that filtration is much more important for a diesel when your using hi pressure engine oil at 500 to 3000 psi to control your injectors.
I suppose the Olds OE filter would be AC Delco, right?
Could it be that your old filter was dirty and you would have gained that 1.3 regardless of what filter you put on as long as it was clean?
Railguy
I use paper.
It is possible, I did it shortly I got it. I was younger and a little more naive in falling for the hype. I don't know if I would do it today.
The oil or dirt (whatever) screwed up my MAF sensor on my Duramax. I used a spray cleaner on it and switched back to paper (Fram) and got better fuel mileage again and no codes. K&N are crap IMHO.
For an off road experience you would not use either - you would use oiled foam
Very few off-roaders here in Arizona use oiled foam - maybe on dedicated sand rails, buggies, and such. Most everyone with a daily driver 4WD uses factory paper filters and replaces them frequently.
Now that I know the K&N filters don't do much for gains in stock form, I'm putting the paper filter in tonight. I will listen for the 4 barrel to open up and see if ther is a sound difference like someone mentioned earlier in the thread.
Lots of great feedback!!! I thank-you all.
Be good to see others take the poll here.
Cheers to all
Eric
Location: I moved to pittsburgh so I can be near Primantis
Posts: 405
Originally Posted by Fun71
Very few off-roaders here in Arizona use oiled foam - maybe on dedicated sand rails, buggies, and such. Most everyone with a daily driver 4WD uses factory paper filters and replaces them frequently.
every rally I have ever been to in baja, cali, az, nm, nv, ut etc it looks like a damn uniflow convention inside the airbox. In fact, for most ORVS, nay, nearly all, there is not even a paper part available. off road, paper is asking for trouble. hit a few puddles and it swells shut, drive down a dusty road and it clogs...... all 3 orvs I still own have factory oiled foam. everyone I have ever owned since my first 73 was the same...
now Im not talking someone who crosses a dry gulch and declares themselves an offroader. Im talking the people who JUMP the dry gulch...
Location: I moved to pittsburgh so I can be near Primantis
Posts: 405
Originally Posted by 76olds
Now that I know the K&N filters don't do much for gains in stock form, I'm putting the paper filter in tonight. I will listen for the 4 barrel to open up and see if ther is a sound difference like someone mentioned earlier in the thread.
Lots of great feedback!!! I thank-you all.
Be good to see others take the poll here.
Cheers to all
Eric
more sound means more air which means you were capable of using it. Its well known and proven that on the old EECIV ford 5.0s, car, truck, stang, the K&N was worth an immediate 5hp. with another 2-3 available if you saw off the silencer in the air box intake. K&N are apparently not for the timid...
btw - you have to take care when using an oiled ANYTHING air filter in front of a single wire MAF the oil insulates it and renders it useless. granted, not very many old's here have to worry about that but in turbo diesel truck where they double or triple the boost and quaddruple the fuel pressure....bitching about an air filter is sorta a waste of time. Ive yet to see a 10 yo mopar/cummins without its injectors tore up because of lack of fuel filtration....
[QUOTE=quaddriver;946220]more sound means more air which means you were capable of using it. Its well known and proven that on the old EECIV ford 5.0s, car, truck, stang, the K&N was worth an immediate 5hp. with another 2-3 available if you saw off the silencer in the air box intake. K&N are apparently not for the timid...
I never heard of a K&N filter giving 5HP +2-3. If that were the case. I may have gotten my wife in the back seat, with or without her full cooperation after I stomped on it.
Ahhh well paper seems good.
Put-er-ther!
Its well known and proven that on the old EECIV ford 5.0s, car, truck, stang, the K&N was worth an immediate 5hp. with another 2-3 available if you saw off the silencer in the air box intake....
And I was still blowing there doors off with my stock W-41 Quad 4 with a paper filter... They would install K&N filters, under pulleys, and other little so called bolt on HP and they could not stand up against a W-41.
Location: I moved to pittsburgh so I can be near Primantis
Posts: 405
Originally Posted by jensenracing77
And I was still blowing there doors off with my stock W-41 Quad 4 with a paper filter... They would install K&N filters, under pulleys, and other little so called bolt on HP and they could not stand up against a W-41.
I lived back then, the bone stock W41 was tested a 0-60 in 7 flat and 14.7@95
the gt with the 2.73 stick ran 6.4 14.4@98, the 3.08 optional axle was slightly better/ So you were in the ballpark.
However, W41 WAS the uprated engine. (and congrats on having one of the rarest olds made) GM didnt introduce any good parts for it until AFTER it was gone. The 5.0 however....
Jon Bennett (mic drop) I knew him online when he was a kid making his bones then I knew him professionally when I demoed the Centroid CNC cyl head cutback machine/process to him and his chief engineer - he was and is that prolific that its unlikely too many clueless racers out there with ineffective 5.0's. there are armies of (now adults) who were kids then running 13's with the heads and cam from the factory. chump change today, but a big deal back then when the true scourge was the gnx (5.4 0-60, 14@105 from R&t mag, off the dealer floor) which got into the high 12's with a simple alteration....
I lived back then, the bone stock W41 was tested a 0-60 in 7 flat and 14.7@95
the gt with the 2.73 stick ran 6.4 14.4@98, the 3.08 optional axle was slightly better/ So you were in the ballpark.
However, W41 WAS the uprated engine. (and congrats on having one of the rarest olds made) GM didnt introduce any good parts for it until AFTER it was gone. The 5.0 however....
Jon Bennett (mic drop) I knew him online when he was a kid making his bones then I knew him professionally when I demoed the Centroid CNC cyl head cutback machine/process to him and his chief engineer - he was and is that prolific that its unlikely too many clueless racers out there with ineffective 5.0's. there are armies of (now adults) who were kids then running 13's with the heads and cam from the factory. chump change today, but a big deal back then when the true scourge was the gnx (5.4 0-60, 14@105 from R&t mag, off the dealer floor) which got into the high 12's with a simple alteration....
The guys I raced must have sucked then. I raced 5 of them that I can remember and never lost. 2 of them were stick cars with the traditional add on's. When the new engine cam out (what ever was after the 5.0?) they said I was now going to loose. I only raced one of them and it was a stick and beat it worse than the 5.0. I am not a good drag racer at all and the W-41 was not built for drag racing but I had no problem with the 5.0's. Now on a curvy road I beat them so bad it was embarrassing for them.
And I was still blowing there doors off with my stock W-41 Quad 4 with a paper filter... They would install K&N filters, under pulleys, and other little so called bolt on HP and they could not stand up against a W-41.
Eric, I had a 97 Poncho Grand Am GT that had one 'O them little Bastid
4 cly dbl. overhead cam units with a 5 speed that was stupid quick for
a 4 banger. Had it about 6 months and the oldest downshifted from 5 to 2
coming off I-10 in Houston some years back. Needless to saw, the towing Co. owned it after that explosion.
August 18th, 2016, 05:33 AM
