Are K&N Filters worth the money?

I have an '88 Cavalier Z24 with the cowl induction. It's a 2.8 multiport 5 speed and I think it's kind of a dog. I know it's only a 2.8 but it's also a very small car. Being a convertible may make it
somewhat heaver. I do have the EGR vacuum line disconnected, as it seems to run better that way. I haven't replaced it because it doesn't have the original engine in it, and there are two different EGR's available for it, depending if it's an automatic or stick -- and I don't know which kind of car the current engine came out of. As a new EGR is expensive I can't afford to buy one without knowing if it's the correct one or not, nor if that's the reason if it doesn't change the performance. It has had new heads about 20K ago, along with plugs, wires, etc, sounds good, idles smooth, etc. and gets 28 mpg on the highway -- it just seems like it should have more power. Would putting a K&N air filter on it give me any appreciable improvement? Also, would it sound any different (you can hear the induction noise thru the cowl -- would that sound be any more pronounced)?.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 23 Aug 2011 20:04:48 -0700, snipped-for-privacy@msn.com (blowout preventer) wrote:

Save your money. It's a 2.8. I had one in my '88 Celebrity and it was a fine engine, but it's not for hot-rodders. Save up for a Camaro or Mustang to get killed in.
--Vic.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It will have some benefits. Your car will be faster because it does not have to haul around the weight of the extra money taken out of your wallet.
The local auto parts store will be grateful since business is down in these tough times.
The guys at the K & N plant will send you a Christmas card.
Another way to increase performance it to take the money you'd spend on the K & N filter and use it as a down payment on a Camero.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 8/23/2011 11:04 PM, blowout preventer wrote:

Personally, I'd not put a re-usable filter on an engine that I owned. I can get into all the arguments why, (not that much more efficient, changes the dynamics of the air-intake tuning which may not be good, allows more 'dirt' into the engine, higher maintenance costs, etc.
--
I'm never going to grow up.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
blowout preventer wrote:

Look at it this way. Does a K&N let in more air. Maybe, BUT they also let in more dirt. Also consider that the air filter that comes standard on that engine flows well over the cfm rating of the carb at WOT. Put into an example: Take a 4" piece of pipe and put it over your nose/mouth and breath through it. Now use a piece of 6". See any difference? NOPE. Neither will your engine.
--
Steve W.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Thanks for the replies. I suspected it would be a waste -- but I still was willing to consider it, in a desperate attempt to extract any last bit of available power I could get from the engine. I guess I was comparing the power I'd expect from this car with that of the '93 Gran Prix we had, which had the 3.1 and had LOTS more power than this '88 2.8. Most people who ride in this car with me think it sounds good and has decent power -- but that's because I tend to rev it up into the powerband during ordinary driving, and it's kind of fun to drive that way. But trying to pass someone on the highway, even dropping it down into 4th, is difficult -- whereas the 3.1 GP we had would walk right around anything just as good as you'd want. Does the fact that I have the EGR disconnected have any bearing on the performance? TIA
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 11:30:40 -0700, snipped-for-privacy@msn.com (blowout preventer) wrote:

My Celebrity with 2.8 had about the same low end torque as my 3.1 Lumina. Never timed them, but they feel similar in power. Plenty of get up and go. Similar to each other in higher speed passing capability too, which is mediocre. But I don't drive 2-lanes where I have to go into the opposing lane, so it never mattered. These 2 engines are almost the same in most power specs. The 3.1 had maybe 15 more horses. Your Cav with 2.8 should go about the same as a GP with 3.1. But I don't know how much weight the ragtop adds. You should be able to find most of the specs for these cars somewhere. A quick look found these numbers. http://www.carforums.net/showthread.php?10251-Stock-1-4-mile-and-0-60-times

I always keep EGR stock and working, so I don't know about that. Try connecting it and see if there's a difference. You said 28 mpg highway, and that's what I got with my Celebrity 2.8 on trips with about 600 pounds of driver/passengers, trunk full and tail low. The Lumina does 1 or 2 better. But you might have something off in your engine that affects acceleration. Timing maybe. Sure your clutch isn't slipping? Could just be your imagination too. Don't waste money on that car trying to make it a speedster. Just enjoy it for what it is. Sounds like you like it, so you're ahead of the game.
--Vic
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.