Hello all,

My '95 3.0L has a K&N filter in it from the previous owner. I've never used one of these resuable filters in any of my vehicles before.

My first choice for filtration is Fram then NAPA Gold if I'm having a hard time locating a filter size from Autozone or Checker. I've heard the oil used on K&N type filters can hurt the MAF sensor. I've always wondered if there really is a performance gain.

When I took a look at it, I discovered it's ready for cleaning & re-oiling. I would assume that as the filter begins to load up with dirt, that chunks of the dirt/oil would break free an enter the intake over time no matter how many times it's cleaned and reoiled, building up in the intake.

My first instinct is to just replace it with a Fram disposable, but I wanted to get a few opinions on resuable vs disposable air filtration before I decide.

Thanks!

Redstar95

 

I would agree, the K&N needs to go. I do not recommend Fram either however. They work, but they plug quickly. I recommend Wix, Purolator, or Motorcraft filters, with Motorcraft being the best. While you are replacing the filter, clean the MAF element by just spraying some throttle body cleaner liberally into there, then let it dry completely.

 

Here's an interesting read regarding air filters.

http://home.stny.rr.com/jbplock/ISO5011/SPICER.htm



Graham
'94 Aerostar (382,000 km and counting)

 

Hey, I'm glad you found that. I had read that before, but didn't bookmark it.

 

Thanks Wylde1. I think I'm pulling that K&N out tomorrow for a Fram. Huge amounts of airlflow on a stock intake aren't going to be that noticable for me to justify the dirt blow-by.

To each his own- I'm going to be installing a Fram or equivalent tomorrow. Adios K&N.

Thanks!

 

Yup. There's nothing like sandblasting the inside of your engine thanks to K&N. Ok, maybe not quite that bad, but I bet engine life is greatly reduced. I've got a '71 Dodge Demon 340 (can I mention that here?) that runs low 11's in the 1/4 mile. I use a paper filter and refuse to use a K&N (mainly 'cause I'm a cheap s.o.b.).


cheers,
Wylde.

 

I've used a K&N in my Mustang for about the last 18 years/120k miles, and I have not noticed any problems with oil burning that's worse than stock. (Low tension piston rings allow plenty of oil to blow by.) Of course, I haven't noticed any major performance gains either, because I haven't really modified the engine. But one thing I did notice which made me worry a lot about the Frams.

Once I took a Fram filter out to do periodic check, and I was shocked to find its foam surround had disintegrated, leaving a huge gap that allowed unfiltered air into the engine. It was the first check after it was installed a couple thousand miles earlier, but I recall driving through particularly dusty roads in that period. And I remember taking the air box out so I could install it properly before putting the entire assembly back in. I scrubbed out the air passages as best as I could and installed a new filter.

The K&N air filters all use silicon rubber surrounds that are much tougher than the foam surrounds of more conventional filters. Mine has not shown any signs of breaking down from many cycles of use and washings and re-oilings. Maybe it won't trap dirt as well as a well made paper filter, but it certainly works a lot better than leaving a gap open.

 

Wylde1 my first car was a Blue '71 Dodge Demon...$800.00...I loved that car, got rid of it the day before I left for boot camp...still kick myself for that!


M

 

I like K&N filters and have used K&N filters in every one of my vehicles. It's probably another holdover from my Sports & European car days when we put HI-Po filters, shocks, oils into all our cars. (I also put Bilsteins and Synthetics in my Aero.)

I changed to a K&N shortly after bought my '94 Aero 3.0 @ 70k miles and gained an immediate power increase (as well as an audible intake moan on acceleration). They're similar to the older redline racing filters and similar ones been around for decades.

I think most people spend too much time 'maintaining' the K&Ns tho.. all that washing etc cant be good for the cotton gauze. I decided to check mine every 50k, miles but thats the dusty-severe duty service interval. 100k is the normal interval.

My van now has 254k hard use miles (tho well cared for) and the filter is still in there. I've checked the filter at least twice and it wasn't dirty enough to clean either time. I tap any loose dirt off and reinstalled it.

The intake system is very clean & the truck seems to run a little stronger than it ever has. Probably finally got broken in after the old man who owned it before me.

I've used synthetic engine oil of about 40 weight usually with Zero or 5 winter rating, and semi synthetic trans fluid changed yearly.

The van is just now showing any age. Just bought a '97 4wd with 100k miles to replace it.

Ted the Handyman

 

I take it you didn't look at that study that was done. I have been through the K&N route, and found that none of them gave any power increase unless compared to a plugged filter. I think you are mistaking an increase in volume for an increase in power.

I have a truck with over 500,000 miles. It of course consumes some oil at this point, but it got to last that long without a K&N. My dad has another truck, and it is much newer, and it has a K&N. It needs a new engine. It has worn rings on multiple cylinders, and in fact, we just barely got it through emissions this year for that reason. It had the filter since it was new, and the rings began going out around 140,000 miles. Compared to what we are used to, this is a new motor. I have my Aerostar and it is approaching 150,000 miles, no special filters at all. Care to guess what my oil consumption is? Over the course of my 10,000 mile oil change interval, the oil level does not change noticabley on the dipstick. So as compared to having to add half a quart or one quart every 3,000 miles, which some consider to be normal, I don't have to add any over 10,000 miles.

Now maybe I'm not really proving anything here, but if you loose one engine from a K&N filter because it lets dirt through, how many miles is it gonna take to pay it back? From all the power K&N claims, from the increased fuel economy K&N claims, at todays gas prices, and the savings on not buying disposable filters? I'll tell you this right now, your engine will not last long enough to realize any savings. If it wipes out one MAF sensor, it will take a long time to justify it, MAF sensors are spendy. You should try wiping down the inside of your intake to check out the scum that most of which is going through your filter.

If you have a K&N filter already, I highly recommend you get rid of it. If you want a performance filter, use Motorcraft, or any other brand that came in strong in the above listed study. FRAM is as bad as a half plugged filter when new, which is why K&Ns comparison studies are usually matched against the FRAM.

If you really want a performance filter for your vehicle, I suggest you check out AFE's new Pro-Dry washable filters. They claim in addition to easy cleaning and reusability, that they have very high filtering efficiency, certainly higher than K&Ns. They don't use any oil, and they use an ultra fine weave synthetic fiber.

 

I have three K&N filters if anybody wants them. One for a 3.0 in an Aerostar and two that fit a '95 F150 4.9L or a 90 460 V8. They seemed fine at first, but the first time I tried to clean and re-oil one I got fed up really quick and switched them all to paper filters.

 

You know, how much money is your time worth. Thats a good question, because cleaning a K&N is not a quick simple thing. I have been down that road. I used a K&N in both my parent vehicles, and later ended up swapping back after I found out how bad they were. The above linked site was all I needed to see. What more do people want. Independently funded non-profit tests with no monetary incentive. And it doesn't even focus on the issue of the filter giving any performance increases. I have seen plently of independent studies showing performance gains were much less than claimed, sometimes no gains were measured at all. The only vehicle I have that hasn't been switched back is going to get AFE's Prodry. I can't go back to stock, since the original intake was damaged. MY custom system is more powerful anyway, I had it made smaller than the factory intake and noticed a power increase across the entire powerband especially between 2000 and 2800. It has smoother bends than stock, and is a longer run of smaller tube. This causes increase velocity, without being restrictive.

 

For the sake of argument, how does K&N get away with the claims they make if there isn't any truth to them? I just want the cool stickers for my van



http://www.knfilters.com/air_filter_testing.htm

 

Yeah I've read that test page now. it sounds bad but I'd sure like to see that single test corroborated or refuted because so many put so much weight in it.

My K&N did add much power feeling to my Aero 3.0, but didn't notice as much on '98 Dodge Diesel, '99 F-350 Diesel, '91 Chevy 3500 5.7, etc..

They may be bad but they shouldn't publish those lies if they're not true.. like they filter better as they get dirtier. (not clogged, just used)

We used to wash those type filters in gasoline or the clean parts washer sink, then oil them with motor oil. K&N markets their maintenance kit partly to keep income coming in. (Same reason Micro$oft came out with Vista!).

Ted

 

Here's a start to study the subject of air filter performance: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q...=Google+Search

Ted