k&n filters are garbage and don't seal or filter well...go get a napa 6637 filter instead...or put the k&n on anyways

 

I've read many times about K&N filters being bad. However, I've used them for years with no ill effects and I've gained mileage every time. Not a lot, certainly, but a gain nevertheless. Not sure about horsepower or torque though.

My second thought is, if they are so bad why are they now standard equipment on many vehicles?

 

Waste of money, if you want a red "after market, washable" filter get a spectre alot cheaper and do the same thing

 

If you look at the flow data, WIX HP filters flow 98+% of K&N and have a much smoother flow post filter plus excellent filtering, for a fraction of the price!

Testand Corporation conducted an ISO standards test on automotive air filters which can be viewed at this link: Duramax Air Filter Testing * - Diesel Bombers.

“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.”

 

So they put this guy that is against all after market intakes in charge of the Intake and filter forum ? Lol , you must also work for Testland judging how you advertise for them in every post you make.

 

Not quite......my own personal OASIS documented experience with K&N....
I installed an oem replacement unit on our new 1997 Cougar Sport (1 week old, factory special order), the filter was purchased directly from K&N. For those who may not know, the Cougar Sport is essentially a mustang GT with 4-wheel independent suspension except it is build on the MN12 chassis (LSC Coupe) which gives extra stiffness. Within 90 days, multiple intake location specific sensors (paraphrasing here) went bad...throwing codes. After Ford verified and replaced under warranty twice the sensors during this period, when they analyized the parts, they determined oil residue from the K&N caused the component failure. Ford recommended the filter (K&N) be removed...and there has been no other failures to date (2014) on these components (17 years later).

I called K&N and advised them (very nicely) of the issue....back then the K&N filter was around $60 iirr......they stated if you are not happy with the filter and have the original box we will take it back and refund the $. Even with full documentation, K&N never (including multiple visits with their staff at their offices and at conference meetings) would ever take any action and just kept insisting there must be another cause for this with the car...there wasn't. K&N has made repeated references throughout the years on multiple chat sites that this situation has never occurred, yet the oasis documentation is very well established.

But let's take a look at 2 things...basic science & ISO certified testing....

The 5.4 V8 for example if close to stock can only suck in a maximum of 480 cfm and a flat panel filter will flow 500 cfm, there is simply no way any CAI on any relatively stock engine can increase the air flow ...because the engine is not by some miracle going to suck in more air! (unless you have a turbo or supercharger). If you look at the dyno charts from many of these supposed HP/TQ increases, they are typically around 5%-7% at peak rpm ranges…….guess what, 5% is a standard deviation even amongst dyno mfg's!

Now some by way of past comments have said that I just don't understand the K&N publications....and they are right, because most of what I have personally read & experienced simply is not based upon science (IMHO).

Secondly, Testland Corp's history and namesake are above reproach and with the witnessed criteria & processes used to determine without a doubt the validity and comparision of similar products, performance, there leaves little to no doubt that the science (basic laws of physics) still applies and validates the reasoning for such recommendations.

I am also unaware of any other related testing that has occurred at an ISO certified lab that would affirm or invalidate testland's results.

 

K&N makes claims they can't prove. They don't add hp to stock trucks. They add noise. I used K&N filters on carb motors with no trouble. On my 5.4 my FIPK fell off due to bad hoses. K&N sent me new ones but they did the same thing. Plus my maf senser needed cleaning all the time with the K&N I put the stock intake back on. I ran the same times at the track. I would never put a K&N on my diesel. The stock intake will handle 500hp & catches way more dust than a red K&N pos

 

simply put, when you buy a k&n filter, you are buying a name with an inferior to stock product.

 

If, as K&N claims, fuel mileage increases, vehicle manufacturers would have them installed on every vehicle.

 

If the K&N Filter was any good it would be the OEM Filter for all Ford Motor Company Vehicles made.
I have a 95 F-250 460cid. I put a K&N Filter on once. (I was convinced by a friend that they were the best .....better than Bread & Butter) I had problems with the truck, didn't run right. Acted like it was starving for fuel & air. I took the K&N Filter off of my truck. Put a Motorcraft Air Filter back on it. (the one that was on it when I bought it) It went away to the local trash dumpster.

I also put one on my wife's car. It went away in the trash too.

I put one on my 2005 E-450 same problem it went in the trash dumpster also. Factory filter went back on it, also I never noticed or got an increase in the fuel mileage on any of my vehicles.
My advice "Run Forest....Run" I would not put one of those over priced pieces of trash on my ex-wife's vehicle. (on second thought maybe)

 

I've had a K & N on my 4.5 Triton for about a year now. Its a bit of a pavement princess, so in combo with the Flowmaster custom Dual exhaust, I'm running better, but not necessarily faster.I definitely noticed a difference at first, and when its freshly clean.

 

I buy K&N for the economics. One and done with an annual cleaning. In this respect it is far superior to a paper filter.

Been using them for 25+ years and have never had a SINGLE issue.

All of these claims that it lets more dirt in makes wonder if my engine will only go 299k miles instead of 300k. That is the one thing I have never seen quantified. Whoever does the test always has a bias one way or the other so I go by my own experience.

On edit, even though I did use one on my supercharged mustang I would probably not use one in a boosted engine.

 

if you ever saw a turbocharger failure due to dust intrusion through the k&n filter, you would throw every single one away and never use one again. i learned my lesson at someone elses expense thankfully.

 

How did it let that much dust thru? Forget to oil it? Or did you throw it away and forget to reinstall the paper one?

Just messing with you.

 

FYI..........Testand Corporation conducted an ISO standards test on automotive air filters which can be viewed at this link: Duramax Air Filter Testing * - Diesel Bombers.

“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.”