K&N air filters, do they really work?

this is just my opinion... but I suspect they do work, in the sense that they will give you slightly less restriction to airflow and therefore slightly more power. However, I also suspect that this reduction in airflow ability comes at the expense of allowing more dirt to pass, especially small, dust type particles. Some people with cars that tend to build up oil in the intake have reported that they have found what appears to be dust in the intake tract downstream of the filter when using a K&N.

My personal car does not have a K&N in it, I just stick to Wix, Mann or Mahle pleated paper.

nate

The K&N will give you increased airflow, but poorer filtration. In a racing application, that might be good. In an offroad application, it is a total disaster.

--scott

Do they work for what? I've had a K&N in my Vette since probably 93 or 94... same filter. I oil it once in a while, but I'm hesitant anymore because I seem to putt too much oil, which soils the MAF sensor, and it takes a few starts until that crap burns off from the wire.

I have a book from TPS which they do dyno testing of various things you can do to your car. However, they didn't even bother to test with or without the filter.

If you have a turbo car, absolutely not.

If your car has a MAF sensor, the oil can kill the hot wire kind.

I doubt you'd be able to tell any difference. Nate's suggestion is the one I follow for all my Audis.

E.P.

I ran a K&N in my mustang for awhile. I inspected the intake tube one day and it wasn't as clean as I thought it should be in the folds. Nothing really bad but it made me nervous enough to go back to motorcraft paper filters. When I've looked in there since it hasn't been that way. Just my personal experience. There wasn't enough difference in feel with the K&N to say if there was any difference at all power wise.

Depends on what sort of competitions you run in. For street driving, you rarely get into situations where it will make a difference. Because of the way modern induction systems are metered, a somewhat restrictive air filter will NOT richen mixture- that is a myth, though true many many years ago with float carburators vented to air.

What a clogged or restrictive air cleaner does today is alter the max airflow entering into engine, as if the throttle were not opened quite all the way, or as if you were a few thousand feet higher up a mountain. Thus the effect is only at wide open throttle, high rpms where volumetric efficiency is important. If you often run the engine wide open, full throttle at high rpms you may notice a small improvement in power. Most people will not.

It will not improve fuel efficiency. However, if you drive your car that way, you are likely not to be worried about efficiency anyway.

1970's,1962 six cylinder Ford Falcon car,Kentucky.Durn straight Air Filters work. cuhulin

Rather than continually repeat myself, I created a web page to share my opinion of K&N Airfilters - see

or . Ed

Good read, thanks

$10 for a mustang paper air filter? Fram crapola? (walmart doesn't carry motorcraft air filters, only fram) The motorcraft ones are considerably more. An evap purge valve is $10, and I remember the filter is more than the purge valve...

I am confident that a "crapola" Fram air filter is a better "air filter" than the K&N "air filter."

The web page is a little old, but at one time Wal*Mart did carry Motorcraft Filters (at least the one close to my house did). I just looked at Rock Auto and they are quoting these prices for the cone style air filters used by a 2001 Mustang GT:

PRO-TEC Part # 329 {Air Filter}- $8.05 FRAM Part # CA8039 { Cone-Shaped, Conical}-$10.20 WIX Part # 46418 {Air Filter} - $12.68 ACDELCO Part # A1517C {#25311974}- $14.29$0.00$14.29 MOTORCRAFT Part # FA1632 {#F5OZ9601BA}- $15.34 FRAM Part # PRA8039 {AirHog Cone-Shaped, Conical}- $31.99

I cannot see much difference between a FRAM air filter and a Motorcraft air filter. However, because of FRAM's reputation for quality, I'd probably stick with the WIX or Motorcraft filter. Maybe I should go back and use the current NAPA price for their Mustang Air Filter ($14.99) and the NAPA price for a K&N filter for the same Mustang ($61.99). If you use these figures my original comparison is "rewritten" as follows:

"Savings" based on reusing the K&N Filters are highly exaggerated. A new K&N Filter for a 2001 Ford Mustang costs $61.99 from NAPA. The cleaning/oiling kit, good for 3 cleanings, is $10.50. K&N claims you only need to clean the filter every 50,000 miles. For normal conditions, Ford specifies a 30,000 mile replacement interval for paper filters. In order to compare costs, I am going to assume you change/clean the filters at the manufacturer's recommended interval (replace the Ford filter at 30,000 miles or clean and re-oil the K&N every 50,000 miles). A new paper filter will cost you $14.99 from NAPA (sometimes less at Wal*Mart). So in 150,000 miles you will spend 5 x $14.99 = $74.95 on paper filters or $61.99 + $10.50 = $72.49 on K&N Filters (sales tax ignored). So if you follow the manufacturer's recommended replacement/cleaning intervals, using a K&N will cost you $3 less than changing the standard paper filter. This does not include the extra time you are spending cleaning the K&N or make an allowance for the possibility of damaging a MAF sensor because excessive oil was applied to the K&N filter (I know we would all be careful). It also assumes you are willing to wait 50,000 miles to service your K&N.

Which filter do you suppose flows better - a K&N filter after 25,000 miles of use or a paper filter after 15,000 miles. How about a K&N at

50,000 miles and a paper filter at 30,000 miles? I suspect that if you actually follow the recommended filter servicing intervals, there is likely to be very little difference in the average air restriction of the two filters.

Ed

I dunno. read my post about going back to motorcraft paper... I wouldn't trust a fram to even remain in one piece.

Oil filters, but not air. I do get oil filters there as they usually have the lowest price on mobil 1.

So all of this to agree with me... BTW, that rockauto price seems particularly low. I don't remember what I paid for the last filter at murray's as I only replace them about every 2 years or so.

How about murray's price for motorcraft vs. KN as they are the only ones that sell both?

Who is currently making the Motorcraft air filter? A few years ago they were made by Champion labs or Fram depending on application.

The fram filters in the photos at rockauto do not look like the motorcraft one. The Wix one is close other than color.

sameMustang($61.99). If you use these figures my original comparison is

If you haven't used a K&N then don't judge them I Have on in my Mustang GT, one in my Mazda 3 and the cold air on on my Grand Cherokee, and I'll tell you at 50000 miles the filters are very clean not nasty like a paper filter is at 10000.

sameMustang($61.99). If you use these figures my original comparison is

That is not exactly a ringing endorsement. If the filter is not nasty, where is the nastiness in the air ending up?

nate

sameMustang($61.99). If you use these figures my original comparison is

I was thinking the exact same thing.

I want the air *filtered*. Especially on my turbo car.

E.P.

If you REALLY want it to stay clean, then don't put any filter in at all. Now you don't have to worry about nasty at all!

In other words, a DIRTY filter is a WORKING filter.

sameMustang($61.99). If you use these figures my original comparison is

That's kinda like oil that never gets dark and dirty looking even after 20K miles. What job is it not doing?

Lugnut