K & N intake worth the money?

[fordtough3521]

My dad mentioned to me that he was thinking about installing a K & N system in his 04 F250 in order to improve gas mileage. He asked me if I knew a rough quesstimate as to how much of a gain he would get, but I really didn't know. With the price of the kit he'd rather not do it unless it's going to give him a noticeable gain. Anyone out there have an opinion as to whether it'll be worth the money or not?

[rsylvstr]

that is the age old question that everyone will debate.
with my mods, i say that i have increased throttle response and CAN get better mileage if i stay off the gas....if i get on it, my mileage drops dramatically.

the one thing he will notice, even without a chip or aftermarket exhaust is the throttle response. i put in the K&N Series 77 kit...love it.

[jimandmandy]

In a word, NO.

Modern EFI engines are carefully designed by Ford and others for power, economy and emissions. K&N can flow more air than stock, if you need to run wide open throttle most of the time in racing or pulling maximum loads, at the expense of more engine wear from the extra dirt that flows with the air. As far as fuel economy is concerned, how is a different air filter going to make a difference when the computer automatically adjusts the mixture? It is just not the same as a 1970's carbed engine. As a special bonus, K&N can cause problems due to oil getting on the MAF wire.

Jim

[rsylvstr]

if you take care of the K&N properly, aka: proper oiling, you won't have to worry about the MAF getting dirty.

plus, the Series 77 just looks so damn nice

[fordtough3521]

this is true, it does look good.

[sir alpha]

i think the older cars truck really did see a diff. i put one on a 83 with a big old 4bbl and it did great for mpg, i have a drop in in my 2000 150
a CAI on a 2005 focus and they didnt do much if anything for mpg on either one with injectors but they do still give better response/ cheaper in the long run for never throwing them away and everything but mpg since the computer now runs the show it will adjust for any change so if u get a flash programer it will help by seting the the computer to do what u want and not adjust eveything out of ur control but the program is something u can go too far with and blow everything up or melt things too so with that said

i would buy another K&N for anything i drive and turn the programing over to a pro

i think anymore mpg is a side affect of a little more power and torque if u stay out of it

[lostin90s]

I did the put small mark of Vaseline on air tube drove out dirt drive 2 miles in the dust and came back . With K&n there was dirt on gob .Then Cleaned up made 2 trips with stock filter and drove for 2 trips mark was clean . Is the K&N better at filtration . Not according to my test . And on a 90 deg day with the dirt flying to point of laying on hood whats a better test. If you are on road get one they K&N is way to go. Good luck I run one on mine in the damp season.

[San Antonio 78]

I had one on my grand cherokee, It gained about 1mpg and more top end power. I don't think the filtration is all that great so I will not be putting one on my powerstroke. I think the AEM and other dry filters are the way to go.

[rsylvstr]

and if you are really worried, you can get a universal cone filter to replace the K&N from Amsoil.

[CaptGuz]

i've had them on some cars and my assumption is... if they really did all that, then by now the manufacturers would replicate it and use it in your new vehicle. as for older carb'd engines - they probably are great... me personally i'll stick with the regular dry filters.

[pfogle]

Cars USED to have oiled air cleaners a very long time ago. There's a reason they got away from it. They're sloppy, and don't filter well.

[christcorp]

You are correct that oiled filters are sloppy. I've had some cars that I've worked on that my father in law collected from the 20's and 30's. Yes they are sloppy. But it isn't true that they don't filter well. Actually, I believe they filter better than most traditional paper type filters. The problem with them is that they require a lot of user intervention to make sure they stay clean. Most people don't want to get that involved. I can't even get my wife to check the oil.

As far as the other assumption that if they worked so well that manufacturers would have installed them on the cars from the factory. Why in the world would you believe that an auto manufacturer would a) Spend 1 penny more on a vehicle than they have to. and B) Want to make a vehicle run better or last longer. The truth is, when a customer has a car that performs exceptionally out of the ordinary or gets extremely good gas mileage, the customer tends to keep that car. Even if it's to pass down to their teenager or as a spare care. The average person with the average car will buy a new one or trade vehicles every 4-5 years. Do you honestly think the manufacturer wants you to keep a car for 7+ years.

Do not trust the automotive industry or the energy industry. This is not a conspiracy belief, this is pure truth in economics. Hell, that's one reason you don't see the auto manufacturer or the oil companies really fighting the ethanol production in the country. It isn't because they care about the consumer and the environment. It's because gasoline with ethanol get worse gas mileage that straight gasoline. The oil companies wind up selling the same amount of gasoline, so they are happy. The politicians pretend that they are making laws with ethanol that is helping the planet, so they are happy. Ethanol in a combution engine is not as good for that engine as straight gas is. Mainly because ALL alcohol bases attract water molecules. Ethanol and water will separate from the gasoline. This separation can cause the water to actually cause problems in the motor. This became very evident with boat motors that naturally are exposed to a lot of water. Gas with ethanol really screwed them up. Car manufacturers definitely like that. Do you think they will mind if you need to buy a new car sooner. Plus, many independent groups have discovered that ethanol hasn't reduced our dependency on foreign oil and has actually made the environment worse. Do not believe the car manufactures are there to look out for you. Here is some good reading.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig7/bothwell1.html
http://www.dailytech.com/article.asp...hold=1&red=619

[pfogle]

All the ones I ever saw the filter media lasted maybe a month or two before it needed to be replaced, and even then it was a huge restriction on flow (talking about the oil bath types). We then progressed to the oiled filter (think K&N or Briggs and Stratton) they work great on a small engine where dirt getting sucked in isn't a huge deal (who really cares if a $150 lawn mower dies after five years), but I've seen a LOT of pitting and scoring on the cylinder walls of used small engines. Most of it was from dust and grit making it through the air filter. I like IDEA behind the K&N filter, but I don't see it doing as good of a job at filtering as it's paper cousin.

[jimandmandy]

Can you even imagine an Iffy-lube type place servicing an oil bath air cleaner? I remember doing it on my old VW's at every oil change. Yes, when serviced regularly, they did work well, but seemed to be very restrictive, but on low-rpm engines, who cared?

Jim

[frty7ford]

There is no doubt that a K&N airfilter flows better than a fram and most others. which can give you a better charge per cylinder ie more power and torque and better millage. if i was running a dirt road every day and it was loose dirt I would run an oil bath fliter. from talking to a friend who has a flow bench most aftermarket filters do not flow as well as the factory ones. running a fram on my 460 is like running with the choke stuck part closed. fresh cold air is what the engine runs on the best .