K&N vs OEM Paper Airfilters

[Hazmat Ranger]

I like to compare it to a Respirator - they use filters right. Well depending on the filter, one will be harder to breathe through than another. Specifically if I am using a P100 Organic Acid Vapor Cartridge (Filter) it will be harder to breathe through than a N95 Filter because of the density of the filtering media (pleats and tightness of the weave). A P100 would be comparable to the OEM filter in that it has more material to filter out smaller particles. I respirator terms this cartridge is referred to as a HEPA (High Efficiency Particulate Air) cartridge and will filter out 99.97% of particulates down to o.3 microns. The N95 then would be equal to a K&N (need to change mine back LOL) Filter in and has an efficiency of a minimum 95% of the particulates.
Yes this is dealing with breathing protection - but the comparison is similar regarding the amount of air that can be moved in regards to how much power is expended to much said volume of air. Them OEM is more restrictive but provides better protection where as the K&N is less restrictive and less protective . . . just a different approach to it.

 

[Bob Ayers]

The paper filter has 5 1/2 times the surface area, must be some big ass holes (do not want) in a k&n to flow more.

It sure does!!!

 

[Hahnsb2]

Typical marketing BS from K&N!!!!

Check out this "independent" air filter test:

http://duramax-diesel.com/spicer/index.htm



Let's make an assumption,lets say the K&N does flow more air!

It does flow more according to that test... I can see why now by seeing the closeup of the filter media.

In 60 minutes the AC Filter accumulated 574gms of dirt and passed only 0.4gms. After only 24 minutes the K&N had accumulated 221gms of dirt but passed 7.0gms. Compared to the AC, the K&N “plugged up” nearly 3 times faster, passed 18 times more dirt and captured 37% less dirt.

One more reason for me to never own a K&N...

 

[Will]

This is not a product review so I'm moving this to General Disagreement.

A product review is:

1) you buy it
2) you use it
3) you tell us about your experience with it.

 

[Sevensecondsuv]

My experience with K&N's is that you can take a 70,000 mile 4.0L, install a K&N, run it for 100,000 miles, only clean it three times, then tear the heads off the engine after 100,000 miles and find the cylinder walls, piston tops, and valves in pristine condition. So I'm not very worried about the "huge particles" it's letting through. They obviously aren't causing any harm. The biggest problem is the stupid pcv valve being hooked up to manifold vaccuum and EGR which together allows all sorts of combustion byproducts and oilly residue to end up in the intake track.

If they made nice round cheap paper filters that you can clamp on the end of a pipe (or MAF or VAM) I'd use them and just replace 'em instead of jacking around with cleaning a K&N. The problem is they don't make them, and using the stock airbox just ain't an option on some engine swaps like my turbo ranger. A round clamp on filter is all that will fit.

 

[feellnfroggy]

Anyone ever drive without a filter at all to prove that even the paper filter is useful? I have. It is useful for preventing cylinder wall scoring over time, and keeping out large items that may do further damage. Most people swap cars long before they ever need to worry about cylinder wall damage. Those of us who keep them for years beyond that are so busy swapping, boring, honing, and planing engines that scoring doesn't matter to us either.

I prefer the K&N, I dont bash those who prefer paper. If K&N wasnt at least a tiny bit better I doubt they would be a major multibillion dollor corporation and have products in every Autoparts store around.

If paper was as sucky as some people say it is, then it wouldnt still be used by manufacturers. If someone figures to replace air with nitrogen in tires, then I think paper would be replaced by now if it sucked so bad.

K&N or Paper. Two different ways of beating the same dead dog. Is one more efficient? Who cares the dog is still dead. Apples and Oranges.

 

[Captain Ledd]

I'm glad someone finally made a thread on this!

I've always shy'd away from K&N and other similar filters. It always seemed to me that there was some basic physics issues, the filter being the same size as a regular paper one, but flowing a bajillion times more air. And I couldn't figure out how it could possibly flow more air, without A) drastically increasing the amount of filter media or, apparently the case, B) making the holes a ton bigger.

Now I have my answer and my fears were indeed justified and correct. Now I have some proof to several of my friends/acquaintances.


Thank you for posting this

 

[BeaterMan]

i think those k&n's are fine for an older vehicle without a MAF but i've had a good amount of trouble with always cleaning my mass air flow due to the oiling factor. I stick with a regular paper element filter now and trashed my K&n. I never thought there was much to them and after seeing that cut up picture, i'm quite certain i wont be buying any ever again.

 

[LearjetMinako]

OMG! Any air filter will do its job. Just a matter of how well it does it. I use to run the K&N filter until I had an oil analysis done and showed high levels of silcon. Swithed to a good old Fram paper and the silcon levels have been dropping since. Now not to say a K&N filter is bad, but if it doesn't serve the purpose. Why use it?

 

[shadetree]

I'm convinced. I'm going to throw away my Motorcraft filter and go buy a Delco. Hopefully it will do as well on a Ford as it does on a Chevy. Same air flowing thru the same system, right. Guess I'll keep my Fram tho as it wasn't tested, so I guess it is ok.

This thread is like a political argument. A lot of bluster, and fluster that doesn't change anyones mind.

One poster with some kind of vendetta against K&N, goes to the extreme of purchasing filters to tear apart to show they are different, which most already knew. Discounting the bricks, not very scientific at all.

K&N filters are made for the high performance market for engines inhaling huge amounts of air. A common filter would not work for this application.

Being that they are used in the high performance market, hot rodders see this as a possibility to help modify their daily drivers. Now, is K&N as a for profit company going to discourage this huge market for their product? They would be fools to do so. So, they make the product available in different forms for the marketing public.

As long as they don't mis-represent their product, they have a perfect right to do so. And the feds will slap them hard if they get out of line.

Most know that the filter isn't of benefit powerwise, or mileagewise for a stock engine. However, it is a huge benefit in parking lot pissing contests, and the wow factor when it is placed on the end of a piece of chrome pipe with flourescent rubber connectors. As they toke their joints, drink their beer, they pass around stories of huge power gains, and the bitchin sound these things make. That big ass black box and plumbing simply isn't cool.

If you ever attended one of these parking lot meetings, you would be astounded by the information passed around, much of it false. That is why you see some really off the wall posts in this and other forums.

But it doesn't matter how truthful any of this, or how any argument tries to disuade those from using the product, they are going to do it anyway due to the factors stated above.

So save your long disertations, product displays, links to tests, etc., it doesn't matter to these youngsters. The wow factor is what it is all about. Plus, it's their money, and they can spend it any way they want, and their engine isn't going to explode if they experiment with it.shady

 

[Will]

I don't really have an opinion, but I do have a K&N. It's sold in the kit for my aftermarket turbo on my diesel and there is no paper replacement because it's an aftermarket cast aluminum airbox. It does require oiling, which the paper one does not so I don't know that rolling out the element really means anything. It's a pain to clean so I wish it had a paper one, but I trust that Gale Banks and crew knew what they are doing when they went with K&N.

 

[Blackdog455]

i love K&N filters. they've never let me down in the vehicles ive put them in. They last a lot longer and i for one (probably the only guy in here) have noticed better performance when putting one on.

 

[85_Ranger4x4]

I got one for my turbocharged Laser, I couldn't feel a difference and being a car it didn't get much stuff in the filter anyway.

Tornado's are found in every parts store as well, not a real good standard to measure somethings effectivness...

 

[Hahnsb2]

Anyone ever drive without a filter at all to prove that even the paper filter is useful?

Actually I discovered my Dakota was missing the air filter after I bought it, I threw a standard paper filter on it, I felt no difference at all between no filter and filter. Hopefully it wasn't run too long without a filter, it doesn't smoke at all so that makes me a feel a little better.

 

[BeaterMan]

I don't really have an opinion, but I do have a K&N. It's sold in the kit for my aftermarket turbo on my diesel and there is no paper replacement because it's an aftermarket cast aluminum airbox. It does require oiling, which the paper one does not so I don't know that rolling out the element really means anything. It's a pain to clean so I wish it had a paper one, but I trust that Gale Banks and crew knew what they are doing when they went with K&N.

+1 on trusting Gale Banks but i think that diesels do not have a MAF sensor to get crudded up by air filter oil. correct me if i'm wrong though.