Air filter? Everybody's choice?
03-19-14, 08:39 AM
#1
Driver School Candidate
Thread Starter
Air filter? Everybody's choice?
Getting ready to replace the 30,000 mile factory air filter in my 2010 ES350. Should I buy a Lexus/Toyota replacement or Wix, Fram... or?... What is the best or what does everyone recommemnd? Thanks, Dave
03-20-14, 09:58 AM
#5
not a stupid question
I highly recommend the K&N 1 million mile air filter...That is all I use in my cars...It will go 50,000 miles before it has to be cleaned and reoiled...Very easy to do...K&N sells a reoil kit for about $11.00...The filter cost around $45 and it does a great job...HAVE A GREAT DAY ROLL TIDE
03-20-14, 12:15 PM
#6
Do not use the K&N or any other "oiled" filters.......they can be overoiled at new production, or later when someone cleans and reoils them and the oil can contaminate the MAF sensor.
Last edited by oldgrump; 03-20-14 at 01:14 PM.
03-20-14, 12:31 PM
#7
I have nothing against K&N. I use them in a couple carburetor hot rods. But for modern newer street cars, I just don't think they're worth the money. I don't think they clean the air any better. And if anything, they tend to provide more restriction of airflow.
Cost wise, it's a wash. A traditional Fram or STP is about 1/4th the cost.of a K&N filter up front. Assuming a typical fram/stp/oem filter is replaced every 12,000 miles, you're looking at approximately 5 years for a break even payback. (4 years for the cost of 4 filters and the 5th year to make up for the additional $12 for the rejuvenation kit for the K&N).
My other concern with K&N is similar to "Synthetic Oil". While the K&N says it can go 50,000 miles in between cleanings, I would NEVER do such a thing. Just like I would NEVER go 10,000 miles in between oil changes just because it's synthetic oil. I do use synthetic oil, but I do so because it has better lubricating properties than traditional dyno oil. (In my opinion). But I still do oil changes at 5,000 miles. The extra $15 in oil is ok with me for synthetic over dyno. But when it comes to an air filter, I would NEVER go 50,000 miles. I might go ever 24,000 miles instead of 12,000 like a traditional filter. That means 2 extra times of cleaning/oiling the K&N filter. Thus, a break even point of 7 years vs 5.
Bottom line; I just don't think the K&N is worth the money for a traditional car. Especially the newer cars. I've actually tested K&N vs paper filters and personally, the K&N doesn't clean the air any better. In some cases it's even WORSE at cleaning the air. Again, I do use K&N air filters, but only on performance cars with carburetors. Nothing with a newer fuel injected computer controlled car.
Cost wise, it's a wash. A traditional Fram or STP is about 1/4th the cost.of a K&N filter up front. Assuming a typical fram/stp/oem filter is replaced every 12,000 miles, you're looking at approximately 5 years for a break even payback. (4 years for the cost of 4 filters and the 5th year to make up for the additional $12 for the rejuvenation kit for the K&N).
My other concern with K&N is similar to "Synthetic Oil". While the K&N says it can go 50,000 miles in between cleanings, I would NEVER do such a thing. Just like I would NEVER go 10,000 miles in between oil changes just because it's synthetic oil. I do use synthetic oil, but I do so because it has better lubricating properties than traditional dyno oil. (In my opinion). But I still do oil changes at 5,000 miles. The extra $15 in oil is ok with me for synthetic over dyno. But when it comes to an air filter, I would NEVER go 50,000 miles. I might go ever 24,000 miles instead of 12,000 like a traditional filter. That means 2 extra times of cleaning/oiling the K&N filter. Thus, a break even point of 7 years vs 5.
Bottom line; I just don't think the K&N is worth the money for a traditional car. Especially the newer cars. I've actually tested K&N vs paper filters and personally, the K&N doesn't clean the air any better. In some cases it's even WORSE at cleaning the air. Again, I do use K&N air filters, but only on performance cars with carburetors. Nothing with a newer fuel injected computer controlled car.
Trending Topics
03-20-14, 01:12 PM
#8
I have nothing against K&N air filters either......I used one for years in my '92 Beretta 3.1 V6, but it used a MAP sensor (it's nothing but a static air pressure sensor) as the primary sensor to determine the amount of air reaching the cylinders. Oil in the intake upstream of the MAP sensor couldn't hurt it. This is the warning that Ford put in the '96 Ford Taurus Owner's Manual re air filters. I used to maintain this car for a lady friend.
It used a standard hotwire/hot film MAF just like the ES350 and all modern gasoline powered vehicles, at least that I'm aware of.
"NOTE:
Do not use oil-impregnated air filters.
Filters other than the ones specified in
this Owner Guide can cause engine
damage. Your warranties may not
apply if your vehicle is damaged
because you used the wrong air filter."
It used a standard hotwire/hot film MAF just like the ES350 and all modern gasoline powered vehicles, at least that I'm aware of.
"NOTE:
Do not use oil-impregnated air filters.
Filters other than the ones specified in
this Owner Guide can cause engine
damage. Your warranties may not
apply if your vehicle is damaged
because you used the wrong air filter."
03-20-14, 03:49 PM
#9
Driver School Candidate
Thread Starter
Thanks guy's! I think I am just going to buy an OEM filter from Toyota for $18.00. I have never bought a K&N filter for any of my daily cars nor have I bought one for my 69 Dodge Superbee. I just don't believe it makes a difference in air flow. And with today's fuel inj. cars and computer controlling fuel and air flow. It can not possibly allow more air in than fuel the computer will see that as running lean and probably send a code to the computer.
I could be wrong though!
I could be wrong though!
03-21-14, 06:15 AM
#11
I have nothing against K&N air filters either......I used one for years in my '92 Beretta 3.1 V6, but it used a MAP sensor (it's nothing but a static air pressure sensor) as the primary sensor to determine the amount of air reaching the cylinders. Oil in the intake upstream of the MAP sensor couldn't hurt it. This is the warning that Ford put in the '96 Ford Taurus Owner's Manual re air filters. I used to maintain this car for a lady friend.
It used a standard hotwire/hot film MAF just like the ES350 and all modern gasoline powered vehicles, at least that I'm aware of.
"NOTE:
Do not use oil-impregnated air filters.
Filters other than the ones specified in
this Owner Guide can cause engine
damage. Your warranties may not
apply if your vehicle is damaged
because you used the wrong air filter."
It used a standard hotwire/hot film MAF just like the ES350 and all modern gasoline powered vehicles, at least that I'm aware of.
"NOTE:
Do not use oil-impregnated air filters.
Filters other than the ones specified in
this Owner Guide can cause engine
damage. Your warranties may not
apply if your vehicle is damaged
because you used the wrong air filter."
03-21-14, 09:48 PM
#12
Driver School Candidate
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: VA
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Always K&N...just look at the thing compaired with those stock blocks of foam they put in. Car is definitely breathing more air. But wouldn't the auto engineers put these oil foamed types like k&n in all of the vehicles if it could breathe better and get higher mpg?? Hmm
03-22-14, 12:04 AM
#13
K&N and Foam filters are better if you drive in situations where your filter could get wet. That's why a lot of off roaders use K&N and Foam type. Traditional paper filters will break down and collapse if they get wet.
As for airflow, the only time the K&N would be better is if you were driving at extremely high speed/RPM's. Under any normal driving, even highway speeds, your air system will provide more air than your intake can take in. So there's no airflow advantage at all. And if you don't clean the K&N properly and over oil it, you can actually reduce air flow. I've actually tested this with paper after the filter and before the intake. After about 50 miles, you can see oil residue on the paper.
Modern computer controlled fuel/air/ignition systems will compensate for any changes you make to the air/fuel/ignition; so you aren't accomplishing anything. Like I said, I do use K&N filters, but they are on carburetor cars with very high HP ratings and computer controlled cars where the computers have been modified and manually adjusted.
Not saying a K&N filter is bad. And after 5-7 years, it will even start saving you money. Just saying that you aren't going to gain any MPG, increase HP, or improve airflow having one. So I personally just stay with the standard FRAM filters.
As for airflow, the only time the K&N would be better is if you were driving at extremely high speed/RPM's. Under any normal driving, even highway speeds, your air system will provide more air than your intake can take in. So there's no airflow advantage at all. And if you don't clean the K&N properly and over oil it, you can actually reduce air flow. I've actually tested this with paper after the filter and before the intake. After about 50 miles, you can see oil residue on the paper.
Modern computer controlled fuel/air/ignition systems will compensate for any changes you make to the air/fuel/ignition; so you aren't accomplishing anything. Like I said, I do use K&N filters, but they are on carburetor cars with very high HP ratings and computer controlled cars where the computers have been modified and manually adjusted.
Not saying a K&N filter is bad. And after 5-7 years, it will even start saving you money. Just saying that you aren't going to gain any MPG, increase HP, or improve airflow having one. So I personally just stay with the standard FRAM filters.
03-22-14, 06:08 AM
#14
Lead Lap
Same here. Hard to beat the price @ Walmart, and the Frams I've been using appear to be of the same/similar level of quality as OEM filters (although that's just a visual inspection--maybe they don't filter the air as well--who knows?) at a fraction of the cost.
03-22-14, 07:35 PM
#15
Driver School Candidate
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: VA
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
K&N and Foam filters are better if you drive in situations where your filter could get wet. That's why a lot of off roaders use K&N and Foam type. Traditional paper filters will break down and collapse if they get wet.
As for airflow, the only time the K&N would be better is if you were driving at extremely high speed/RPM's. Under any normal driving, even highway speeds, your air system will provide more air than your intake can take in. So there's no airflow advantage at all. And if you don't clean the K&N properly and over oil it, you can actually reduce air flow. I've actually tested this with paper after the filter and before the intake. After about 50 miles, you can see oil residue on the paper.
Modern computer controlled fuel/air/ignition systems will compensate for any changes you make to the air/fuel/ignition; so you aren't accomplishing anything. Like I said, I do use K&N filters, but they are on carburetor cars with very high HP ratings and computer controlled cars where the computers have been modified and manually adjusted.
Not saying a K&N filter is bad. And after 5-7 years, it will even start saving you money. Just saying that you aren't going to gain any MPG, increase HP, or improve airflow having one. So I personally just stay with the standard FRAM filters.
As for airflow, the only time the K&N would be better is if you were driving at extremely high speed/RPM's. Under any normal driving, even highway speeds, your air system will provide more air than your intake can take in. So there's no airflow advantage at all. And if you don't clean the K&N properly and over oil it, you can actually reduce air flow. I've actually tested this with paper after the filter and before the intake. After about 50 miles, you can see oil residue on the paper.
Modern computer controlled fuel/air/ignition systems will compensate for any changes you make to the air/fuel/ignition; so you aren't accomplishing anything. Like I said, I do use K&N filters, but they are on carburetor cars with very high HP ratings and computer controlled cars where the computers have been modified and manually adjusted.
Not saying a K&N filter is bad. And after 5-7 years, it will even start saving you money. Just saying that you aren't going to gain any MPG, increase HP, or improve airflow having one. So I personally just stay with the standard FRAM filters.