View Poll Results: Would you get K&N air filter?
Voters: 328. You may not vote on this poll
K&N Air filter: worth it?
12-30-06, 07:19 AM
#46
Lexus Champion
No, 1) when does engineers decide everything? Never 2) I don't know why people assume Toyota will put the best into the car, it put whatever is needed to MAXIMIZE profit, either in selling the car or to reap additional $ off replacement parts.
Just take a look at most factory installed tires, they are cheap ones to get you out of dealers' door.
Just take a look at most factory installed tires, they are cheap ones to get you out of dealers' door.
some of the most expensive tires Lexus could put on my vehicle. I disagree with what you are saying. Toyota/Lexus has a rep. of being a high quality and extremely reliable vehicle and they engineer everything that goes on the car/suv to meet that objective. If you put a high flow filter in your vehicle you better do used oil analysis within the first 3K miles to confirm you are not letting to much dirt into your engine. Then do use oil analysis as needed based on that first analysis. If you don't your just shooting craps with your engine. It's your car do what you want, but don't act like your not taking risks. Others reading this thread need to know that when you start modding your vehicle or using after market "performance" parts you put your warranty and the reliablity of your vehcile on the line and you need to monitor its health. JMHO
12-30-06, 09:18 AM
#47
Mine came with Michelin LTX M&S's some of the most expensive tires Lexus could put on my vehicle. I disagree with what you are saying. Toyota/Lexus has a rep. of being a high quality and extremely reliable vehicle and they engineer everything that goes on the car/suv to meet that objective. If you put a high flow filter in your vehicle you better do used oil analysis within the first 3K miles to confirm you are not letting to much dirt into your engine. Then do use oil analysis as needed based on that first analysis. If you don't your just shooting craps with your engine. It's your car do what you want, but don't act like your not taking risks. Others reading this thread need to know that when you start modding your vehicle or using after market "performance" parts you put your warranty and the reliablity of your vehcile on the line and you need to monitor its health. JMHO
some of the most expensive tires Lexus could put on my vehicle. I disagree with what you are saying. Toyota/Lexus has a rep. of being a high quality and extremely reliable vehicle and they engineer everything that goes on the car/suv to meet that objective. If you put a high flow filter in your vehicle you better do used oil analysis within the first 3K miles to confirm you are not letting to much dirt into your engine. Then do use oil analysis as needed based on that first analysis. If you don't your just shooting craps with your engine. It's your car do what you want, but don't act like your not taking risks. Others reading this thread need to know that when you start modding your vehicle or using after market "performance" parts you put your warranty and the reliablity of your vehcile on the line and you need to monitor its health. JMHO8247 miles on M1 5w20 oil on my RX300, K&N filter
Aluminum 4
Chromium 0
Iron 14
Copper 4
Lead 3
Compare to another RX300 UOA that is posted on BITOG, using paper air filter.
M1, 5W30, 01 Lexus RX300 3800 Miles
Alum: 2
Chrom: 0
Iron: 5
Copper:1
Lead: 5
Adjusting and pro-rating PPM of the paper air filter UOA by 2.17 times to account for miles driven difference, I have the same Al, Fe, Cu, within lab reproducibility margin of error, but K&N + 5w-20 combo gives me far lower on Pb in PPM, which translates into lower bearing wear.
Where is your UOA that shows high metal paricles count in PPM for K&N over OEM paper filter? Please post if you have one.
About taking risk, do you realize every time you throw in a new OEM paper filter to replace a clogged paper filter, are you letting in more particles? Case and point: Those particles must be abrasive and large enough to cause additional engine wear.
I think you should say Toyota/Lexus had a rep. of having high quality and extremely reliable.
There is a difference of OEM quality, which is supposed to have high quality, and OEM parts. OEM parts may not have OEM quality. See this WSJ report, in 2005, Toyota recalled more cars than it made according to NHTSA, talk about cutting corners
Last year in the U.S. -- its largest market by volume -- Toyota recalled 2.38 million vehicles, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. That's more than the 2.26 million it sold. Overall, the company sold nearly eight million vehicles world-wide.
This year, the company has recalled 628,000 vehicles in the U.S., and people familiar with the matter say it may soon recall an additional half-million vehicles. The latest recall would affect the current generation of the Sienna minivan, because of concern that poorly designed locking devices for rear seats may fail to securely anchor them to the vehicle floor.
Recalls also are on the rise in Japan, Toyota's second-largest market, where police and prosecutors are investigating possible professional negligence for shirking recalls for eight years. Investigators are looking at whether a suspected faulty steering part on the Hilux Surf recreational vehicle may have caused an August 2004 head-on crash that injured five people. The Japanese government has reprimanded the company and called for improved recall practices in the wake of the police probe.
This year, the company has recalled 628,000 vehicles in the U.S., and people familiar with the matter say it may soon recall an additional half-million vehicles. The latest recall would affect the current generation of the Sienna minivan, because of concern that poorly designed locking devices for rear seats may fail to securely anchor them to the vehicle floor.
Recalls also are on the rise in Japan, Toyota's second-largest market, where police and prosecutors are investigating possible professional negligence for shirking recalls for eight years. Investigators are looking at whether a suspected faulty steering part on the Hilux Surf recreational vehicle may have caused an August 2004 head-on crash that injured five people. The Japanese government has reprimanded the company and called for improved recall practices in the wake of the police probe.
In Japan this year, for instance, Toyota discovered it had made the rear axle of one sport-utility vehicle with the material used for another SUV. Designs for the two rear axles are almost identical, but the metal materials used to produce them are different enough that mixing the parts up caused concern over the strength of the axle. A Toyota spokesman said there was a question of the strength of the axle but declined to elaborate.
Last edited by TunedRX300; 12-30-06 at 12:07 PM.
12-30-06, 12:52 PM
#48
Lexus Champion
My used oil analysis never reveal any abnormal high Cu, Fe, Al, Pb, don't just assume, suppose your claim with scientific data please.
8247 miles on M1 5w20 oil on my RX300, K&N filter
Aluminum 4
Chromium 0
Iron 14
Copper 4
Lead 3
Compare to another RX300 UOA that is posted on BITOG, using paper air filter.
M1, 5W30, 01 Lexus RX300 3800 Miles
Alum: 2
Chrom: 0
Iron: 5
Copper:1
Lead: 5
Adjusting and pro-rating PPM of the paper air filter UOA by 2.17 times to account for miles driven difference, I have the same Al, Fe, Cu, within lab reproducibility margin of error, but K&N + 5w-20 combo gives me far lower on Pb in PPM, which translates into lower bearing wear.
Where is your UOA that shows high metal paricles count in PPM for K&N over OEM paper filter? Please post if you have one.
About taking risk, do you realize every time you throw in a new OEM paper filter to replace a clogged paper filter, are you letting in more particles? Case and point: Those particles must be abrasive and large enough to cause additional engine wear.
I think you should say Toyota/Lexus had a rep. of having high quality and extremely reliable.
There is a difference of OEM quality, which is supposed to have high quality, and OEM parts. OEM parts may not have OEM quality. See this WSJ report, in 2005, Toyota recalled more cars than it made according to NHTSA, talk about cutting corners
8247 miles on M1 5w20 oil on my RX300, K&N filter
Aluminum 4
Chromium 0
Iron 14
Copper 4
Lead 3
Compare to another RX300 UOA that is posted on BITOG, using paper air filter.
M1, 5W30, 01 Lexus RX300 3800 Miles
Alum: 2
Chrom: 0
Iron: 5
Copper:1
Lead: 5
Adjusting and pro-rating PPM of the paper air filter UOA by 2.17 times to account for miles driven difference, I have the same Al, Fe, Cu, within lab reproducibility margin of error, but K&N + 5w-20 combo gives me far lower on Pb in PPM, which translates into lower bearing wear.
Where is your UOA that shows high metal paricles count in PPM for K&N over OEM paper filter? Please post if you have one.
About taking risk, do you realize every time you throw in a new OEM paper filter to replace a clogged paper filter, are you letting in more particles? Case and point: Those particles must be abrasive and large enough to cause additional engine wear.
I think you should say Toyota/Lexus had a rep. of having high quality and extremely reliable.
There is a difference of OEM quality, which is supposed to have high quality, and OEM parts. OEM parts may not have OEM quality. See this WSJ report, in 2005, Toyota recalled more cars than it made according to NHTSA, talk about cutting corners
You say it increases performance, right If you want more performance get a Porsche
12-30-06, 04:16 PM
#49
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Los Angeles/Vancouver
Posts: 6,231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If that is your perception don't buy Toyota's and Lexus vehicles in the future. If you use non OEM performance parts and fluids and do the tests to confirm their performance then that is great. But most people don't and that's the problem. The Toyota/Lexus 4.7 V8 that is used in my LX using even extended OCI's has the best used oil change analysis seen on www.bobistheoilguy.com UOA section. Most feel it is one of the best engines made and one of the easiest on oil they have ever seen. So why would I want to use a K&N filter??? To improve what??? Maybe dirt getting into my engine?? You say it increases MPG, right You say it increases performance, right If you want more performance get a Porsche
You say it increases performance, right If you want more performance get a Porsche one question for TunedRX300:
how did u come up with the 2.17 number?
12-30-06, 05:11 PM
#50
If that is your perception don't buy Toyota's and Lexus vehicles in the future. If you use non OEM performance parts and fluids and do the tests to confirm their performance then that is great. But most people don't and that's the problem. The Toyota/Lexus 4.7 V8 that is used in my LX using even extended OCI's has the best used oil change analysis seen on www.bobistheoilguy.com UOA section. Most feel it is one of the best engines made and one of the easiest on oil they have ever seen. So why would I want to use a K&N filter??? To improve what??? Maybe dirt getting into my engine?? You say it increases MPG, right You say it increases performance, right If you want more performance get a Porsche
You say it increases performance, right If you want more performance get a Porsche I don't know why, but people on this forum kept using the "Love America or Leave" logical fallacy.
Do you realize there ARE other alternatives, such as using non-OEM parts to achieve OEM quality? This is the topic we are discussing in this very thread, why does one want to eliminate it?
I doubt anyone has financial interest in Toyota, but there is a lot of folks blindly trust Lexus, e.g. anything OEM is God given and anything aftermarket is a piece of junk, without any scientific data.
A filter that gives me 1) lower cost to maintence ($8-9 re-oil kit vs $20 paper replacement) 2) better performance, dyno proven3) better mpg without sacrificing engine wear, is better than another filter, Lexus branded or not, that does not offer these benefits.
Again, I am not the type who lose sleep over using a non-OEM branded product because I got far more bang for less $. Perhaps others do...
Making a claim is easy, having an opinion is fine, but how about substantiate with some scientific data. Why not post a UOA that shows higher metal wear for K&N? Actually hard data, even if showing the opposite result, is of great value to the CL community.
Last edited by TunedRX300; 12-31-06 at 01:22 AM.
12-30-06, 05:32 PM
#51
My mistake, 8247 = 2.23 x 3700. It is a quick and dirty way to project metal wear in PPM from 3700 miles to 8247. Logic is: more miles, more wears on engine, more metal particles found in oil. Make miles of UOAs equal to make apple to apple comparasion.
OT: here is a good link on margin of error on Used Oil Analysis, as you can see Al, Fe, Cu should be within reproducibility error range between mine and the other guys' UOAs.
http://neptune.spacebears.com/cars/stories/margins.html
Reproducibility error accounts for:
Different operator: applies here
Different laboratory: applies here, I used Oil Analyzer, the other guy used Blackstone
Equivalent equipment: applies here, different year but same model/engine
Equivalent conditions: applies here
Identical sample: close since K&N+5w-20 vs paper+5w-30
But I definitely have lower Pb. To be fair, thinner 5w-20 oil makes lubrication better on the bearings but K&N definitely isn't causing more lead coming off the bearings.
OT: here is a good link on margin of error on Used Oil Analysis, as you can see Al, Fe, Cu should be within reproducibility error range between mine and the other guys' UOAs.
http://neptune.spacebears.com/cars/stories/margins.html
ASTM D5185-97 standard:
Aluminum ± 6.8 ppm
Chromium ± 0.8 ppm
Iron ± 3.3 ppm
Copper ± 2.4 ppm
Lead ± 6.9 ppm
Aluminum ± 6.8 ppm
Chromium ± 0.8 ppm
Iron ± 3.3 ppm
Copper ± 2.4 ppm
Lead ± 6.9 ppm
Different operator: applies here
Different laboratory: applies here, I used Oil Analyzer, the other guy used Blackstone
Equivalent equipment: applies here, different year but same model/engine
Equivalent conditions: applies here
Identical sample: close since K&N+5w-20 vs paper+5w-30
But I definitely have lower Pb. To be fair, thinner 5w-20 oil makes lubrication better on the bearings but K&N definitely isn't causing more lead coming off the bearings.
Last edited by TunedRX300; 12-31-06 at 01:17 AM.
12-31-06, 01:14 AM
#52
Even though the K&N does let more dirt into the engine, it's insignificant enough that your engine's longlivity wont decrease by 40,000 miles or so. The car's misc. parts will fail long before the engine dies because of years of contamination.
Which is why I still have the K&N filter in my car. The pros outweighs the cons for me.
Which is why I still have the K&N filter in my car. The pros outweighs the cons for me.
12-31-06, 07:45 AM
#54
Lexus Champion
That is not my perception. It is a report by WSJ, citing NHTSA data.
I don't know why, but people on this forum kept using the "Love America or Leave" logical fallacy.
Do you realize there ARE other alternatives, such as using non-OEM parts to achieve OEM quality? This is the topic we are discussing in this very thread, why does one want to eliminate it?
I doubt anyone has financial interest in Toyota, but there is a lot of folks blindly trust Lexus, e.g. anything OEM is God given and anything aftermarket is a piece of junk, without any scientific data.
A filter that gives me 1) lower cost to maintence ($8-9 re-oil kit vs $20 paper replacement) 2) better performance, dyno proven3) better mpg without sacrificing engine wear, is better than another filter, Lexus branded or not, that does not offer these benefits.
Again, I am not the type who lose sleep over using a non-OEM branded product because I got far more bang for less $. Perhaps others do...
Making a claim is easy, having an opinion is fine, but how about substantiate with some scientific data. Why not post a UOA that shows higher metal wear for K&N? Actually hard data, even if showing the opposite result, is of great value to the CL community.
I don't know why, but people on this forum kept using the "Love America or Leave" logical fallacy.
Do you realize there ARE other alternatives, such as using non-OEM parts to achieve OEM quality? This is the topic we are discussing in this very thread, why does one want to eliminate it?
I doubt anyone has financial interest in Toyota, but there is a lot of folks blindly trust Lexus, e.g. anything OEM is God given and anything aftermarket is a piece of junk, without any scientific data.
A filter that gives me 1) lower cost to maintence ($8-9 re-oil kit vs $20 paper replacement) 2) better performance, dyno proven3) better mpg without sacrificing engine wear, is better than another filter, Lexus branded or not, that does not offer these benefits.
Again, I am not the type who lose sleep over using a non-OEM branded product because I got far more bang for less $. Perhaps others do...
Making a claim is easy, having an opinion is fine, but how about substantiate with some scientific data. Why not post a UOA that shows higher metal wear for K&N? Actually hard data, even if showing the opposite result, is of great value to the CL community.
I agree that someone that does their home work and does UOA like you do will have a financial and maybe a small performance enhancement using some performance vendor parts. Been there done that for myself. Guess at this point in my life and the fact that I drive a big "non performance" SUV using Lexus and Lexus parts is safe and easy. I use to have a Cummins Turbo Diesel, knew a guy that put a Fram oil filter on his and it failed and his engine failed. Found out later that Cummins and Dodge recommended not to use the Fram filter, very cheap poorly made filter. Some people think they can just go in and buy whatever and it will work. You are obviously not one of those people.
12-31-06, 07:48 AM
#55
Lexus Champion
My mistake, 8247 = 2.23 x 3700. It is a quick and dirty way to project metal wear in PPM from 3700 miles to 8247. Logic is: more miles, more wears on engine, more metal particles found in oil. Make miles of UOAs equal to make apple to apple comparasion.
OT: here is a good link on margin of error on Used Oil Analysis, as you can see Al, Fe, Cu should be within reproducibility error range between mine and the other guys' UOAs.
http://neptune.spacebears.com/cars/stories/margins.html
Reproducibility error accounts for:
Different operator: applies here
Different laboratory: applies here, I used Oil Analyzer, the other guy used Blackstone
Equivalent equipment: applies here, different year but same model/engine
Equivalent conditions: applies here
Identical sample: close since K&N+5w-20 vs paper+5w-30
But I definitely have lower Pb. To be fair, thinner 5w-20 oil makes lubrication better on the bearings but K&N definitely isn't causing more lead coming off the bearings.
OT: here is a good link on margin of error on Used Oil Analysis, as you can see Al, Fe, Cu should be within reproducibility error range between mine and the other guys' UOAs.
http://neptune.spacebears.com/cars/stories/margins.html
Reproducibility error accounts for:
Different operator: applies here
Different laboratory: applies here, I used Oil Analyzer, the other guy used Blackstone
Equivalent equipment: applies here, different year but same model/engine
Equivalent conditions: applies here
Identical sample: close since K&N+5w-20 vs paper+5w-30
But I definitely have lower Pb. To be fair, thinner 5w-20 oil makes lubrication better on the bearings but K&N definitely isn't causing more lead coming off the bearings.
12-31-06, 10:13 AM
#56
In short, silicon found in UOA can be 1) additive 2) sealant 3) non-abrasive dirt (most particles <10-15 micron are left unfiltered in today's oil filters) 4) abrasive dirt. Only the last one we worry with K&N.
I do have a little higher Silicon but certainly within margin of error (35 ppm in 8247 miles vs 16 ppm in 3700 miles) but the major wear rates are not affected, similiar to the way engine wear are not affected by silicon additive. Most internet study stop at the dirt injection and called the test complete, I think the test just begins because in order to make claim that "K&N will make your engine die sooner" doesn't one need to show higher engine wear, e.g. metal coming off engine parts?
Last edited by TunedRX300; 12-31-06 at 10:34 AM.
12-31-06, 07:01 PM
#57
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Los Angeles/Vancouver
Posts: 6,231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
how much is the margin of error for the iron and copper count?
cause it seems like ur RX300 still has quite high in ppm when compared to the paper filter car after multiplying that by 2.23 (for 3700 miles) or 2.17 (3800 miles)
for example
K&N:
Iron: 14ppm
Paper:
Iron: 10.85ppm ~ 11.15ppm
its like the K&N took 2000 miles of life away from the engine or something in just 8247 miles
cause it seems like ur RX300 still has quite high in ppm when compared to the paper filter car after multiplying that by 2.23 (for 3700 miles) or 2.17 (3800 miles)
for example
K&N:
Iron: 14ppm
Paper:
Iron: 10.85ppm ~ 11.15ppm
its like the K&N took 2000 miles of life away from the engine or something in just 8247 miles
12-31-06, 10:37 PM
#58
how much is the margin of error for the iron and copper count?
cause it seems like ur RX300 still has quite high in ppm when compared to the paper filter car after multiplying that by 2.23 (for 3700 miles) or 2.17 (3800 miles)
for example
K&N:
Iron: 14ppm
Paper:
Iron: 10.85ppm ~ 11.15ppm
its like the K&N took 2000 miles of life away from the engine or something in just 8247 miles
cause it seems like ur RX300 still has quite high in ppm when compared to the paper filter car after multiplying that by 2.23 (for 3700 miles) or 2.17 (3800 miles)
for example
K&N:
Iron: 14ppm
Paper:
Iron: 10.85ppm ~ 11.15ppm
its like the K&N took 2000 miles of life away from the engine or something in just 8247 miles
Actually 1-2ppm per 1000 mile is pretty normal. Of course, lower the better. But people are concerned if the following range are reached, as you can see both paper and K&N UOAs are far away from these danger levels.
Iron (Fe) 100 to 200 ppm Wear of cylinder liner, valve and gear train, oil pump, rust in system Excessive oil consumption, abnormal engine noise,performance problems, oil pressure, abnormal operating temperatures, stuck/broken piston rings
Copper (CU) 10 to 50 ppm Bearings and bushings wear, oil cooler passivating,radiator corrosion Coolant in engine oil, abnormal noise when operating at near stall speed
I think this thread took a turn to discuss technical details of used oil analysis, it may not be on topic. Please feel free to PM me if you wish to further discuss more in depth stuff.
Last edited by TunedRX300; 12-31-06 at 10:55 PM.
01-01-07, 12:54 AM
#59
Lexus Fanatic
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Los Angeles/Vancouver
Posts: 6,231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
14 ppm is the high range of that margin of error though
and that margin of error is too wide to make any accurate claim in my unprofessional judgment
wouldnt ISO 5011 be a better test than UOA for determining how much abrasive dirt the K&N lets in compared with paper?
unless UOA really captures a good picture of what actually goes on in the engine and how much wear there is
btw it also seems like TRD filter is slightly better than K&N
http://theoildrop.server101.com/foru...e=0#Post780194
and that margin of error is too wide to make any accurate claim in my unprofessional judgment
wouldnt ISO 5011 be a better test than UOA for determining how much abrasive dirt the K&N lets in compared with paper?
unless UOA really captures a good picture of what actually goes on in the engine and how much wear there is
btw it also seems like TRD filter is slightly better than K&N
http://theoildrop.server101.com/foru...e=0#Post780194
01-01-07, 02:03 AM
#60
14 ppm is the high range of that margin of error though
and that margin of error is too wide to make any accurate claim in my unprofessional judgment
wouldnt ISO 5011 be a better test than UOA for determining how much abrasive dirt the K&N lets in compared with paper?
unless UOA really captures a good picture of what actually goes on in the engine and how much wear there is
btw it also seems like TRD filter is slightly better than K&N
http://theoildrop.server101.com/foru...e=0#Post780194
and that margin of error is too wide to make any accurate claim in my unprofessional judgment
wouldnt ISO 5011 be a better test than UOA for determining how much abrasive dirt the K&N lets in compared with paper?
unless UOA really captures a good picture of what actually goes on in the engine and how much wear there is
btw it also seems like TRD filter is slightly better than K&N
http://theoildrop.server101.com/foru...e=0#Post780194
UOA is a direct measurement of engine wear, metal come off the engine will finds its way into the oil. I believe you can get a particle count from ISO 5001 but engine has several exhaust valves, most of particles are puffed out of the engine. I don't know how many > 20 micron particles will cause engine x to wear y rate at z driving style, but UOA answer that.
A better step is to trend a series of samples, instead of relying on two single samples, but who has $ for that? UOA cost $20 a pop, I will be glad to take donations