Ditto

I am going to remove my K & N filter after reading this article (google searching.) In my experience, I see no noticeable performance increase from using the K&N Filter on my GS400 as opposed to the the factory air filters. (Even though K &N states there is an increase of 10Hp or so.) Even if there is a perfomance increase or a reuseable filter benefit, it's not worth the trouble on a $9,000 engine. After cleaning my MAF sensor when using K & N, this article is believeable. What do you all think?


I was responsible for evaluating re-usable air filters for a major construction/mining company that had hundreds of vehicles ranging from large earthmovers to pick-up trucks and salesmen's cars. This study was embarked upon due to the fact that we were spending upwards of $30,000 a MONTH on paper air
filters. Using them one time then throwing them away.. I inititated the study in that I was convinced that a K&N type filter or oiled foam would save us many dollars per year in filter savings, man hour savings, and of course engines as these would filter dirt better than paper. (yes, I had read the K&N ads and was a believer) Representative test units were chosen to give us a broad spectrum from cars right through large front end loaders. With each unit we had a long history of oil analysis records so that changes would be
trackable. Unfortunately, for me, every single unit having alternative re-usable air cleaners showed an immediate large jump in silicon (dirt) levels with corresponding major increases in wear metals. In one extreme case, a unit with a primary and secondary air cleaner, the secondary (small paper element) clogged before even one day's test run could be completed. This particular unit had a Cummins V-12 engine that had paper/paper one one bank and K&N/paper on the other bank; two completely independent induction systems. The conditions were EXACTLY duplicated for each bank yet the K&N allowed so much dirt to pass through that the small filter became clogged before lunch. The same outcome occured with
oiled foams on this unit. We discontinued the tests on the large pieces almost immediately but continued with service trucks, formen's vehicles, and my own company car. Analysis results continued showing markedly increased wear rates for all the vehicles, mine included. Test concluded, switched back to paper/glass and all vehicles showed reduction back to near original levels of both wear metals and dirt. I continued with the K&N on my company car out of stubborness and at 85,000 miles the Chevy 305 V-8 wheezed its last breath. The top end was sanded badly; bottom end was just fine. End of test. I must stress that EVERYONE involved in this test was hoping that alternative filters would work as everyone was sick about pulling out a perfectly good $85 air cleaner and throwing 4 of them away each week per machine... So, I strongly suggest that depending upon an individual's long term plan for their vehicles they simply run an oil analysis at least once to see that the K&N or whatever alternative air filter is indeed working IN THAT APPLICATION... It depends on a person's priorities. If you want performance then indeed the K&N is the way to go but at what cost??? And no, I do not work for a paper or glass air filter nufacturing
company nor do I have any affiliation with anything directly or indirectly that could benefit George Morrison as a result..

Lexusfreak

Intresting findings. This is my 3rd vehicle I've used a K & N filter on & I've never experenced a problem (even after re-oiling). I think the "10 hp gain or so" that you mentioned is not accurate. Depending on the vehicle, they state it not uncommon to have up to a 4 hp gain overall. I never really purchased the filter for power gains, just to trap more dirt & allow the engine to breathe better which I feel it does over the paper applications. I also noticed a slight (VERY slight) increase in my overall fuel economy, maybe not enough to justify the cost of the filter but I will buy another one for my next car when the time comes unless there is something else that's much better. i haven't heard too much about the TRD air filter so I'm not sure how it measures up to the K & N.

jrfiero

There's a K&N response to that study floating around somewhere - the gist of it is that K&N doesn't even make a filter to fit the diesel described in the story.

The 'study' story is years old, and won't die.

I have K&Ns in everything I own that they make filters for. I keep vehicles for a long time, run them hard, and don't wear them out.

I'd leave yours in if I were you.

Ditto

K & N's website states, "Our replacement air filters are designed to provide up to a 4% increase in horsepower and torque."
Pepboy's item description on their site states, 'Horsepower improvements vary, but as you can see from the dyno chart, a 5 to 10 horsepower increase is common."

SC400-V8

iTrader: (1)

The TRD performance air filters are just K&N filters made by K&N for toyota company.
Virtually every company makes performance air filters now. I was in walmart the other day and noticed that FRAM now offers the "Air Hog" series. Substantially more expensive, but look and feel just like a typical K&N. I do not recommend using any filter than what the factory designated. Trust me... if they could have gotten 10 more horsepower out of the car safely by using this type of filter, they would have done it.

VSsc400

iTrader: (1)

this would be a good time to start taking a poll.
I've used a KnN filter for about 6000 miles out of 103k miles...
Because many people talk about cleaning the throttle body I've opened up my throttle body to clean it but it was spotless clean.....
for all those that needed to clean their throttle bodies... how many had alternate filters on?

mburnickas

I would not use a oil glazed in any car or diesel I own, period! To many problems in the past. Never mind high silcate readings on oil tests. I have in the past and they are poor and oil sensors.

My parents car 2002 taurus and fathers 2004 exploder have sticker saying, "Using an oil glazed air filter will void warenty." It is also stated in there car manuals.

keep the $35 for air filter, $8 for the cleaner and another $8 for oil and you have $51. That is a few years of "no worry paper filters". It is about 5 years if you change once per year.

Lexmex

I have been using a K&N for awhile due to the difference in elevation. I need the air badly. However, I use a regular Toyota filter when going back to the states.

I wiped off the oil on both sides, and then reapplied oil only to the front facing the air flow. I had on MAF sensor problem before this, easily taken care of, but nothing since. The regular Toyota filter will literally choke my air flow at 7,700 feet and the MPG dropped down to 10.5, whereas I get 15 to 17 depending on whether I am driving hills or flat streets.

At sea level, I have noticed no difference whatsoever between a K&N and a standard Toyota filter.

Lexusfreak

There are no warnings in my 01 ES owners manual saying not to use a K & N type filter. As I mentioned, I've used the K & N filter in 3 of my vehicles & put close to 90,000 miles in total on the cars without a single problem & that includes re-oiling. I don't beleive everything I hear & read.......I've personally used them & will continue to do so unless told otherwise by the vehicle manufacturer. It's intresting that K & N makes the Toyota TRD air filter as well.

RA40

iTrader: (6)

Took my K&N out for the same reason...higher than average silicon results. I'll be doing the next oil analysis in 1.5K miles and will see what the readings are.

HarrierAWD

I used K&N on my last car. Big mistake. The K&N let thru some much dirt, it gradually wore out my engine. The throttle body needed to be cleaned twice a year. PCV got clogged. Oil got really dirty at 1000 miles. Look thru the filter with your own eyes, you'd find holes as big as ball point pen tip. That's unacceptable. The oil doesn't catch all the dust and dirt.

I would never put it in any of my vehicles again.

Ditto

You're absolutely correct. I looked at the K & N thru a light and it looks like I can possibly pass a thin spaghetti noodle right through the filter. It makes absolute sense and I'm no rocket scientist, but the only way to increase airflow passively on the same size opening is to increase the size of the holes on a filter,and thus there is more airflow while decreasing filtration rate.

cliffud

iTrader: (3)

I have a 1998 GS300 with 60k miles....

I too removed my aftermarket intake because the risks far outweighed the rewards. Screw up my $350+ MAF sensor for 6-10 hp more?? No thank you.

Just had my 60k service. Timing belt replaced (just to be cautious), swapped oils, tranny fluids, radiator fluids, plugs, filters, and other crap.

830 dollar later... Yikes!

Oh well- it's all preventive medicine.


c.

HarrierAWD

My owner's manual doesn't say not to put Jack Daniels in my gas tank, either. Doesn't mean that I could do it.

An average of 30,000 miles per car isn't long enough for the engine problem to manifest itself. I put 70,000 miles on my last car with K&N, it got really bad.

Check TRD's USA website www.trdusa.com. They stopped offering the K&N performance filter after the 2000 model year for the RX.

doodles714

iTrader: (1)

You might want to check out this link.
The thread is informative and amusing (and long!)


http://www.turbodieselregister.com/f...opic/5221.html