i understand that. but because the filter isn't trapping as much dirt as it suppose to, and the oil is gonna get dirty sooner, so isn't changing oil more often will keep it more clean.

 

If you're really bored with life, go over to a site like bobistheoilguy. Look at the used oil reports for cars that had been running K&N's and then went back to a stock filter as a test. You'll be shocked how the silicon in particular (read: DIRT) moves downward over time.

K&N and the like does perform better, but nothing is a free ride.

 

I'm not following why the engine's oil would get dirtier. If dirt particles made it past the filter, through the intake, they would enter the engine head via the intake ports and in to the cylinder chamber when the valve opens. At which point they are either burned up or expelled through the exhaust port. The piston rings, which seal for compression won't allow dirt particles to pass through them in to the oil pan below. Am I missing something???

 

You're missing the part in which ALL motors have some amount of blowby and other vectors in which air enters the engine (IE: the PCV breather system, etc). If the engine were as hermetically sealed as you described, why would there even be an oil filter?

 

Things like the PCV breather system aren't pushing a great deal of air around the engine, but yes, I did miss this and most of the emissions system. Thanks. ( I promise not to post till after my morning coffee)

 

Over the course of 5000-6500 miles they push enough around the motor though. Like I said in an earlier post, go examine used oil reports.

The amount of insoluables, silicon, metals and other contaminants floating around the oil in a "well maintained" engine will surprise you. Start adding aftermarket filters and the like and you almost guaranteed see an increase in contaiminants. One of the worst being silicon because it acts like sandpaper on your internals. You'll often see higher levels of copper (bearings), iron (sleeves) etc.

ALL THAT BEING SAID, I run aftermarket filters I usually kill an engine before it'll go 100k so its not a big deal to me. I know I'll be inside the motor at some point.

 

I just wanna know where all you K&N Naysaysers are driving that you have to worry about dirt THAT much?...I mean if you live where there's nothing but gravel/dirt roads...then yeah I'd be worried...but us day to day city/highway drivers don't really have much to worry about.

 

This is really an exercise in futility posting on this site, but even on the highway your car ingests a large amount of crap.

 

True...but those microparticles you're car is ingesting on the highway will go through a paper filter as well. Every test I've seen videos on involves handfulls of dirt being thrown into a fan at filters through a tube...when the hell would my car ever undergo that kind of torture?

Hundreds of thousands of cars go through hundreds of thousands of miles with K&N filters with no problems...I'll enjoy my extra power

 

They sell millions of filters every year, so how many miles is that ?

i'm guessing trillions of miles have been logged.

 

I like how you guys ignore things like oil analysis (or never bother to scratch the surface and o your own research) and instead rely on videos of K&N throwing dirt at an intake. This tells me I should come up with a product for the Cobalt and just post a video it working... because the camera doesnt lie.

I also like how everyone glazed over the fact I own K&N filters on every performance vehicles I own. I like the small bit of extra performance too, but I realize that it DOES come at a price. Thats all I'm saying: there is no free ride.

 

This thread keeps going and going...

The ISO 5011 proves that the GM filter IS the most restrictive to air flow, hence the lowest in providing power too.

I see a simple answer to this thread. Buy a K&N filter and don't let an ISO 5011 tester stand in front of your car and throw hands full of dirt on your filter...

 

Drive it in a sand storm too.

 

Eh charts and graphs ... i'll stick with my real world experience from the past 7 years of using k&n on my cars with no problems . yes its a $50-60 filter but a replacement delco filter is 20- 26 bucks, so so in the past 4 years iv saved 300+ bucks.

 

Well I was actually referring to videos done by 3rd party that are trying to prove that K&N is garbage. And I suppose the extra airflow can come at an expense to your engine...but like I said...when am I ever going to be driving in a sand storm?

 

I have 2300 miles on my engine and will be putting a K&N when it's time to replace my stock paper filter. I am going to try and get 200k out of this engine, so we'll see what happens...

 

...and what would this third party be doing this for? The fact that millions of cars have had K&N filters but no known class action suits and the fact that magazines have tested them -- including flow tests and dirt tests -- proves they are not "garbage". Even the ISO 5011 airflow test you posted proved K&N provides the best airflow.

Please provide hard evidence/facts that engines have been damaged by use of the K&N filters

If you don't like K&N fine, but your attempts to rationalize your hatred aren't working...are you a union GM worker that makes AC filters by chance?

 

Clearly you did not read ANY of my other posts...I'm ALL FOR K&N...All the tests and studies done do not provide REAL world testing and many of them simply involve some gobs of dirt basically being thrown at filters to prove that K&N is harmful to your engine. When on earth would my fender well, where my engine's air is sucked from, be succumbed to that kind of torture?

I don't buy into ANY of the testing that is done to put down K&N...Like I said before...I love K&N products and have never had a complaint about them what-so-ever and I'll enjoy my extra power.

 

Your engine isn't going to blow up using a K&N filter, but keep in mind modern fuel injected vehicles COMPENSATE for filter restrictions or minor variations in flow. Bottom line is that the K&N isn't necessary.

 

Go try to tell some of the main LNF tuners on this site (BadBlueberry and Terminator2) that information...I'm sure that they would be able to quickly explain how poorly the stock paper filter flows and how much more power was made using the K&N over the stock filter.

 

Yeah ...they compensate by delivering less fuel due to less air flow = less power.

 

Are they using a conical filter for their kits? If so, that makes a big difference. Notice that the Ford Bullitt conical filter and the GT500/KR filters from the OEM (not aftermarket) are not K&N style oiled cotton gauze filters. They are a special fiber media that offers the same filtration as a paper filter, but in a conical shape to increase airflow.

Bottom line is that yes, a conical filter will allow better airflow over a panel filter mainly because panel filters are used in restrictive airboxes that dampen/reduce NVH, prevent ingestion of hot air or water, and help reduce contamination of the element.

 

A cone filter almost always has more surface area than a panel filter as well. More surface area means (usually) less restriction for the same amount of air flow. But less restriction almost always means less filtration as well, no matter WHAT kind of filter you use.

 

Yes, that's why Ford uses a fiber media. You get the increased surface area, reduced restriction of an open conical filter, but with the filtration efficiency of paper.

 

Well for the LNF application..the curent highest flowing, least problematic setup involves the "restrictive airbox" with a K&N filter soooo...until there is a company that comes up with an intake where I can use a cone filter that doesn't skew my fuel trims, throw codes, cause idle/surging issues and outperform the modded stock airbox...I'll stick with the modded stock setup...and even if a company comes out with a better intake in all those categories...I'll probably stick a K&N cone filter on it.