Picked up 3 mpg with just filter change.
04-13-03, 02:12 PM
#1
Picked up 3 mpg with just filter change.
I waited until I had gone through 4 full tanks of gas to post this.
Recently I replaced the stock Denso air filter in my '02 ES with a K&N drop in air filter.
After driving my standard daily routine for the past four tank fulls, the average mpg has increased.
I was getting an average of 21 mpg.
With the K&N filter change, I have averaged 24 mpg on the last four fill ups. (fill ups were at least 14 gallons each)
I am impressed.
K&N filter for 02-03 Lex ES 300, #33-2260.
steviej
Recently I replaced the stock Denso air filter in my '02 ES with a K&N drop in air filter.
After driving my standard daily routine for the past four tank fulls, the average mpg has increased.
I was getting an average of 21 mpg.
With the K&N filter change, I have averaged 24 mpg on the last four fill ups. (fill ups were at least 14 gallons each)
I am impressed.
K&N filter for 02-03 Lex ES 300, #33-2260.
steviej
04-13-03, 06:38 PM
#2
now where have i seen this before. 
lol great to see such great increases in gas mileage.
but question... is there any noticeable performance or noise increase?
lol great to see such great increases in gas mileage.
but question... is there any noticeable performance or noise increase?
Last edited by zexen; 04-13-03 at 06:39 PM.
04-13-03, 08:54 PM
#5
I don't know if cross club quoting is allowed so I'll just paste my rebuttal here.
skp, I totally DON'T agree with you on this.
If your were publishing an article in a mechanics trade magazine and I were the publisher, I would have to ask for your data to back up your statement of "the K&N is crap". Is your conclusion drawn solely from your personal experience?
In support of a K&N filter.
Previous experience:
The only reason I consisdered the K&N was because of a similar past experience. I had a very small increase in gas milage with an SSEi, but an increase nonetheless. It couldn't hurt.
Monetary savings:
1. For the price and mileage warranty, I never have to buy a filter AGAIN for the life of this car. That would be a savings about $150 in filters alone if I changed every 30k with Denso from the Lexus parts counter (calculated for 180k miles). A Denso filter is $28.41/ea at my dealership.
2. At an average of $1.85/gallon, that comes out to a savings of $4.00 per tank full that I will save from the increase of 21 to 24 mpg. Not much when paying at the pump each time, but this comes out to close to $300/year. Now multiply that by the expected life of the filter/car (let's say 10 years for easy math) and you get $3000.
Financial findings: ($150 parts savings + $3000 gas savings) = $3150 return on a ($35 filter + $8 cleaner/oil + $7 shipping) = $50 investment
Previous filter being dirty and replaced with new filter:
I think not, The Denso filter was changed on the 15k service at my request. So that means the filter that was changed out only had 5k miles on it. I would have changed to the K&N at that time, except the #33-2260 filter was not available until the middle of March 2003.
Actual data:
The total mileage driven on each tankful divided by the amount of gas pumped = 24.1 to 24.3 mpg on each tankful since the filter change.
The total mileage driven on each tankful divided by the amount of gas pumped = 19.9 to 21.8 mpg on various tankfuls from 9/7/02 and 10,500 mi to 3/2003 and 20,000 miles. Keep in mind, new Denso filter midway at 15k AND no change there.
There was no change in the way I drive or the conditions or locations that the car was driven in either.
Performance
No change in acceleration times that I can tell, but then again, I never measured them. It ain't a Viper or a Vette. It's a Lexus ES, its built for comfort and quality, not speed.
Sound
No change....nor did I expect there to be any, it was only a filter element change
Stickers
Wasn't displayed/attached to the car, don't believe in them. I know what I'm packing.
Bottom line,
Try it on your next filter change, if you don't see an increase in mileage then go back to the Denso filter. In reality, the Denso is only $8.00 less than the K&N.
skp, you didn't shoot me down.....your shot missed.
My data and experience speak in favor of a K&N filter if one so chooses.
have a good evening all.
steviej
skp, I totally DON'T agree with you on this.
If your were publishing an article in a mechanics trade magazine and I were the publisher, I would have to ask for your data to back up your statement of "the K&N is crap". Is your conclusion drawn solely from your personal experience?
In support of a K&N filter.
Previous experience:
The only reason I consisdered the K&N was because of a similar past experience. I had a very small increase in gas milage with an SSEi, but an increase nonetheless. It couldn't hurt.
Monetary savings:
1. For the price and mileage warranty, I never have to buy a filter AGAIN for the life of this car. That would be a savings about $150 in filters alone if I changed every 30k with Denso from the Lexus parts counter (calculated for 180k miles). A Denso filter is $28.41/ea at my dealership.
2. At an average of $1.85/gallon, that comes out to a savings of $4.00 per tank full that I will save from the increase of 21 to 24 mpg. Not much when paying at the pump each time, but this comes out to close to $300/year. Now multiply that by the expected life of the filter/car (let's say 10 years for easy math) and you get $3000.
Financial findings: ($150 parts savings + $3000 gas savings) = $3150 return on a ($35 filter + $8 cleaner/oil + $7 shipping) = $50 investment
Previous filter being dirty and replaced with new filter:
I think not, The Denso filter was changed on the 15k service at my request. So that means the filter that was changed out only had 5k miles on it. I would have changed to the K&N at that time, except the #33-2260 filter was not available until the middle of March 2003.
Actual data:
The total mileage driven on each tankful divided by the amount of gas pumped = 24.1 to 24.3 mpg on each tankful since the filter change.
The total mileage driven on each tankful divided by the amount of gas pumped = 19.9 to 21.8 mpg on various tankfuls from 9/7/02 and 10,500 mi to 3/2003 and 20,000 miles. Keep in mind, new Denso filter midway at 15k AND no change there.
There was no change in the way I drive or the conditions or locations that the car was driven in either.
Performance
No change in acceleration times that I can tell, but then again, I never measured them. It ain't a Viper or a Vette. It's a Lexus ES, its built for comfort and quality, not speed.
Sound
No change....nor did I expect there to be any, it was only a filter element change
Stickers
Wasn't displayed/attached to the car, don't believe in them. I know what I'm packing.
Bottom line,
Try it on your next filter change, if you don't see an increase in mileage then go back to the Denso filter. In reality, the Denso is only $8.00 less than the K&N.
skp, you didn't shoot me down.....your shot missed.
My data and experience speak in favor of a K&N filter if one so chooses.
have a good evening all.
steviej
Last edited by steviej; 04-13-03 at 09:01 PM.
04-13-03, 09:31 PM
#6
Lexus Champion
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Mississauga,Ontario,Canada
Posts: 3,488
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
sorry stevie i didn't mean to sound like i was trying to shoot you down at all in any way shape or form
i think that last answer was just splendid
with absolutly no sarcasim implied
i guess i am not anywhere to as detailed as that to posting
not really trying to make an article
just a quick thought
i really just base the filter on k&n from my experiance with my previous cars
and other shop owners who sell there products
it is better for economical reasons period
by the reduction of replacment costs of reg filters to me it stops there
if you are looking for performance gains there is none
which is what it is marketed as mainly
and that is what i meant to say
when i read you first post it made it seem to anyone who may not have alot of experiance with k&n that it is the main reason for the increase of milage , i still don't belive in drop in's
i gave away mine to my cousin,he saw no difference ,then i got a free replacment of it
and still no difference ( he does have a 3jz though)
a cai is much better for flow still can be washed and increases the gas milage by 10%+ if made correctly for the right car
i went from 475km a tank to 550km
and i am trully sorry if you saw my comments as an attack in anyway
just my opinion on a product that i feel fleeces people for performance gains
but atleast gets gas milage with yours
it usually takes 1/2 to all of the (recharger kit) app depending on size and imbedded dirt
so you would add almost the price of a stock filter each change or cleaning
i think that last answer was just splendid
with absolutly no sarcasim implied
i guess i am not anywhere to as detailed as that to posting
not really trying to make an article
just a quick thought
i really just base the filter on k&n from my experiance with my previous cars
and other shop owners who sell there products
it is better for economical reasons period
by the reduction of replacment costs of reg filters to me it stops there
if you are looking for performance gains there is none
which is what it is marketed as mainly
and that is what i meant to say
when i read you first post it made it seem to anyone who may not have alot of experiance with k&n that it is the main reason for the increase of milage , i still don't belive in drop in's
i gave away mine to my cousin,he saw no difference ,then i got a free replacment of it
and still no difference ( he does have a 3jz though)
a cai is much better for flow still can be washed and increases the gas milage by 10%+ if made correctly for the right car
i went from 475km a tank to 550km
and i am trully sorry if you saw my comments as an attack in anyway
just my opinion on a product that i feel fleeces people for performance gains
but atleast gets gas milage with yours
it usually takes 1/2 to all of the (recharger kit) app depending on size and imbedded dirt
so you would add almost the price of a stock filter each change or cleaning
04-14-03, 10:41 AM
#7
That's a sizeable MPG increase! I'd say how effective the K&N filter is in increasing the MPG can vary quite a bit based on the car model and how the air intake is set up. It seems to do quite well for the '02/'03 ES.
I used a K&N drop-in filter in a Honda Accord once. I had removed the restrictive resonator that was sucking hot air from under the hood, and the paper filter was just too noisy. The K&N quieted things down. Sound reduction was the main reason I went to a K&N filter...I never did check for MPG differences. While it's less restrictive than a paper filter and allows the engine to "breathe" easier, it also lets in more contaminents. A new (or cleaned/reoiled K&N filter) allows the most air flow at the expense of its filtering abilities. K&N itself says the filter needs a layer of dust to work more effectively as a filter. This is opposite from a paper filter, which performs the best when new. So I'm guessing you'll see the biggest gains in MPG when going from a used paper filter to a new K&N filter.
Does the decrease in filtering capability really matter? If you don't plan to keep your car for an extended amount of time, I doubt it. The potential cost savings from using it has the upper hand. Although if I were the buyer of a used car, I'd rather the previous owner have stuck with paper filters. But there's no way of verifying this. Keep your paper filter so you can swap it back in when you trade in or sell your car.
Some random thoughts:
$28.41 for the Denso OEM filter is a rip-off. You shouldn't have to pay more than $13 for it (part # 17801-0H010). Being a luxury car dealer is like an excuse to sell parts and service for well over what it's worth. I don't think i could wait 30K between air filter changes. The air filter on my '91LS was absolutely filthy after 30K.
K&N recharging kits (cleaner/oil) only cost $10, and K&N claims you can go 100K miles before cleaning it. I'd probably do it at 50K max, while checking the filter element for larger items trapped on the outside. It's definitely not something you want to clean as often as you'd change a paper filter, as the K&N relies on a layer of dust for its filtering ability.The recharge kit would've easily lasted 4+ times on the K&N filter for that Accord, but I assume it's quite a bit smaller than the ES air filter (haven't looked at it yet).
I used a K&N drop-in filter in a Honda Accord once. I had removed the restrictive resonator that was sucking hot air from under the hood, and the paper filter was just too noisy. The K&N quieted things down. Sound reduction was the main reason I went to a K&N filter...I never did check for MPG differences. While it's less restrictive than a paper filter and allows the engine to "breathe" easier, it also lets in more contaminents. A new (or cleaned/reoiled K&N filter) allows the most air flow at the expense of its filtering abilities. K&N itself says the filter needs a layer of dust to work more effectively as a filter. This is opposite from a paper filter, which performs the best when new. So I'm guessing you'll see the biggest gains in MPG when going from a used paper filter to a new K&N filter.
Does the decrease in filtering capability really matter? If you don't plan to keep your car for an extended amount of time, I doubt it. The potential cost savings from using it has the upper hand. Although if I were the buyer of a used car, I'd rather the previous owner have stuck with paper filters. But there's no way of verifying this. Keep your paper filter so you can swap it back in when you trade in or sell your car.
Some random thoughts:
$28.41 for the Denso OEM filter is a rip-off. You shouldn't have to pay more than $13 for it (part # 17801-0H010). Being a luxury car dealer is like an excuse to sell parts and service for well over what it's worth. I don't think i could wait 30K between air filter changes. The air filter on my '91LS was absolutely filthy after 30K.
K&N recharging kits (cleaner/oil) only cost $10, and K&N claims you can go 100K miles before cleaning it. I'd probably do it at 50K max, while checking the filter element for larger items trapped on the outside. It's definitely not something you want to clean as often as you'd change a paper filter, as the K&N relies on a layer of dust for its filtering ability.The recharge kit would've easily lasted 4+ times on the K&N filter for that Accord, but I assume it's quite a bit smaller than the ES air filter (haven't looked at it yet).
Last edited by kreativ; 04-14-03 at 10:54 AM.
Trending Topics
04-16-03, 12:12 PM
#8
Lexus Connoisseur
Yes K&N drop in by far a great bang for the buck.
33-2145 for 97-01 1MZ-FE
33-2052 for 94-96 1MZ-FE
Not sure what it is for the 3VZ and 2VZ models. But yes the 33-2052 will work with the 97-01 if the 33-2145 filter is not available.
I swapped out my Injen intake from my 99 Solara SE V6 5spd for the K&N 33-2052 that used to be in my Avalon. Definitely a world of difference i torque and noise.
33-2145 for 97-01 1MZ-FE
33-2052 for 94-96 1MZ-FE
Not sure what it is for the 3VZ and 2VZ models. But yes the 33-2052 will work with the 97-01 if the 33-2145 filter is not available.
I swapped out my Injen intake from my 99 Solara SE V6 5spd for the K&N 33-2052 that used to be in my Avalon. Definitely a world of difference i torque and noise.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
ls430lover
LS - 3rd Gen (2001-2006)
1
09-13-14 06:44 PM
