Has anyone used these air filters?

atikovi · August 28, 2017

The K&N in my 93 Silverado was $40. I put over 200k miles on it. Replacing a Fram or equivalent paper filter every 10k miles was more expensive than the K&N.

That's why.

If you keep a vehicle long enough it's cheaper.

Sure, if you keep it that long, but few people do. Most require a change every 30K so it takes 120,000 miles just to break even. That's not counting the time, hassle and mess of cleaning and oiling it. Kinda like why most people use paper towels in their kitchen instead of wash cloths or disposable diapers on their kids instead of cloth diapers.

diyer2 · August 28, 2017

Sure, if you keep it that long, but few people do. Most require a change every 30K so it takes 120,000 miles just to break even. That's not counting the time, hassle and mess of cleaning and oiling it. Kinda like why most people use paper towels in their kitchen instead of wash cloths or disposable diapers on their kids instead of cloth diapers.

Personal choice. Not a big deal to me to clean a filter or change my oil, service the drive line fluids, put on brakes, change plugs, wires, etc.

Personal choice on buying new vehicles every ? years.

sdeeter19555 · August 28, 2017

The K&N in my 93 Silverado was $40. I put over 200k miles on it. Replacing a Fram or equivalent paper filter every 10k miles was more expensive than the K&N.

That's why.

If you keep a vehicle long enough it's cheaper.

I replaced my OE paper at 65k miles, it still looked new. Some of these paper filters offered by GM are also high capacity, take longer to load. The one in the truck has a little over 50k miles on it...still looks new. And it's not like it's a highway queen, it sees offroad and dirt roads from time to time.

So even at 50k changes, in 200k miles I'm at a little more than $40...and I know my warranty is in no way risked (K&N will get your warranty voided by Dodge; and any manufacturer could use it against you).

Don't forget to factor in the cleaner and oil for the cost of a K&N...

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

diyer2 · August 28, 2017

I replaced my OE paper at 65k miles, it still looked new. Some of these paper filters offered by GM are also high capacity, take longer to load. The one in the truck has a little over 50k miles on it...still looks new. And it's not like it's a highway queen, it sees offroad and dirt roads from time to time.

So even at 50k changes, in 200k miles I'm at a little more than $40...and I know my warranty is in no way risked (K&N will get your warranty voided by Dodge; and any manufacturer could use it against you).

Don't forget to factor in the cleaner and oil for the cost of a K&N...

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

Cleaner and oil is cheap IMO.

50k mile intervals is not for me.

swathdiver · August 28, 2017

Paper is more expensive in the long run. And, they're not as free flowing. For one of our cars, I bought a filter 15 years ago and have used it in 3 different vehicles since. My brother still has K&N and Kenne Bell filters that I gave him that are 30 years or so old now.

When they get dirty we clean out the bugs and toss it in the dishwasher. When clean, oil it up and it's good to go.

sdeeter19555 · August 28, 2017

Paper is more expensive in the long run. And, they're not as free flowing. For one of our cars, I bought a filter 15 years ago and have used it in 3 different vehicles since. My brother still has K&N and Kenne Bell filters that I gave him that are 30 years or so old now.

When they get dirty we clean out the bugs and toss it in the dishwasher. When clean, oil it up and it's good to go.

Please specify the parameters that show an oiled filter is better than paper in real world applications. Side by side numbers please...and not the manufacturer provided info, independent testing in the OEM airbox. And please provide filtration beta numbers, so we can see how well the filter actually filters.

I want to see defendable proof they are better, not opinion based on manufacturer literature or seat-of-pants dynometer.

Oh, and not for nothing...I had this same argument fifteen years or more ago, I was in your shoes then. I had a TruFlow and several K&N, was drinking that kool-aid...I don't run them anymore. [emoji6]

Have a nice day, I got no dog in this fight!

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

swathdiver · August 28, 2017

No, not going to do it, don't care to. I did the research way back then when I was a kid and have no desire to change back to paper. I reckon it's on microfiche at your local library in old copies of Hot Rod and Car Craft and such.

If you were with us at the track back then, you would see the time slips too; before and after each run.

It's Tim · August 28, 2017

When they get dirty we clean out the bugs and toss it in the dishwasher.

Yet you wonder why no one ever wants to eat over?

swathdiver · August 28, 2017

Ssshhh, not even my wife knows!

sdeeter19555 · August 28, 2017

No, not going to do it, don't care to. I did the research way back then when I was a kid and have no desire to change back to paper. I reckon it's on microfiche at your local library in old copies of Hot Rod and Car Craft and such.

If you were with us at the track back then, you would see the time slips too; before and after each run.

A daily drive is not a track day...do you drive WOT to and from work?

I did not say they weren't for track, that's what K&N were designed for (dirt circle track, FYI I was racing stock cars on dirt tracks when K&N came on the market)...and in that application a nominal amount of dirt ingestion is tolerable for increased WOT performance since most track engines get torn down and rebuilt periodically.

Again, a daily drive is not the same as a track day...

Again, no dog in this fight...pointing out facts. Oiled filters have a place...in a daily driver it is questionable.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

Former ASE Tech · January 28, 2018

GM has a service bulletin out regarding the use of K&N or similar oiled gauze filters. GM discourages use of these because the oil film can get onto the MAF sensor wires.

I've used K&N on dirt bikes and a street motorcycle and loved how they perform. I've used K&N on a few motor vehicles with carburetors and FI in the past, but never in front of a MAF sensor (hence, no first hand experience in this application).

Based on the number of users here who swear by K&N on their trucks, maybe it's a matter of making sure not to over-oil the filters.

Also, has anyone seen the filter (vacume) indicator on their Chevy truck air box get drawn into the "Replace" zone by a dirty air filter? Personally, I'm still waiting to see that.

Colossus · January 28, 2018

4 hours ago, Former ASE Tech said:

GM has a service bulletin out regarding the use of K&N or similar oiled gauze filters. GM discourages use of these because the oil film can get onto the MAF sensor wires.

I've used K&N on dirt bikes and a street motorcycle and loved how they perform. I've used K&N on a few motor vehicles with carburetors and FI in the past, but never in front of a MAF sensor (hence, no first hand experience in this application).

Based on the number of users here who swear by K&N on their trucks, maybe it's a matter of making sure not to over-oil the filters.

Also, has anyone seen the filter (vacuum) indicator on their Chevy truck air box get drawn into the "Replace" zone by a dirty air filter? Personally, I'm still waiting to see that.

That is correct. most people do not set up their K&N correctly. When done right, the things work great.

Grumpy Bear · January 28, 2018

On ‎8‎/‎28‎/‎2017 at 1:00 PM, sdeeter19555 said:

Please specify the parameters that show an oiled filter is better than paper in real world applications. Side by side numbers please...and not the manufacturer provided info, independent testing in the OEM airbox. And please provide filtration beta numbers, so we can see how well the filter actually filters.

I want to see defendable proof they are better, not opinion based on manufacturer literature or seat-of-pants dynometer.

After reading the entire thread I find this post most interesting. The question it asked is rock solid and yet indefensible. That is one could not provide the required proofs that the factory elements are 'better' either now could they. Not within the framework required anyway. So...what you at left with?

diyer2 has repeatedly given the best answer that can be given. It's a matter of choice and personal preference. That said:

Filtration of any sort is by nature a compromise between filter efficiency and flow restriction given the same filter area in units squared. To get identical flow rate from a more efficient filter media requires more filter area. That's just plain common sense. The questions not often asked is, how much efficiency is enough? How much flow rate it enough?

For my age I would care to bet I have owned fewer car and trucks than most my age which also means I feel pretty confident that I also have a fair number of cars and trucks with more than a 200K on the clock. I use K & N and have almost as long as I've been driving. I'm no stranger to a flow bench or a dyno. While I wont qualify as an independent testing lab my experience confirms, to me anyway, that a properly maintained K & N does indeed filter 'well enough' and that the cost difference between OEM and K & N puts the latter in the cheaper to operate column. I can also say that my father and Uncle Bob have the highest collection of half million to one million mile motors I personally know of and all ran on OEM types; properly maintained. Thus, either will do the job. On the track the story changes decidedly in favor of the K & N. Is that a surprise? Nope, common sense.

sdeeter19555 · January 28, 2018

Actually, there has been independent research done that shows a paper element is better at filtering and also the element typically isn't the restriction, but rather the airbox...so dropping a high flow filter into a restrictive box doesn't gain you much.

I'm not interested in this topic enough any more to go hunt that research up again, but it is available on the WWW. Same goes for bypass filters, coolant filters, transfilters, oil filters, and fuel filters...I won't own said vehicle long enough to ever see the benefit of some super duper filter versus an OE filter. You are only benefiting the next guy by using them...

As I indicated early on (in this old thread), I have no dog in this (could actually care less)...I wasted a lot of time researching this very thing for my last truck, it saved me NOTHING, benefitted me NOTHING.

Steve
2012 2500hd 6.0l

atikovi · January 28, 2018

Mostly marketing. 1 million mile guaranty pulls in a lot of people. Sponsorship of racing teams helps more. But I'm always skeptical about those HP claims. 5-10 or more HP just from using this filter? If that's the case, why not test the car with no filter at all? Should that show 20 HP gains? But of course they never do.