K & N.........junk!!!!!!!!!

[Sled Puller]

Powerwagon,

Help me out here, how is the chart above compare to a turbocharged engine?



Is their test worse or easier on a filter as far as flow goes?

 

[Phil Rauch]

No matter how you put it all filters are going to let some dirt by. With the K&N it has oil and if you are like me you oil it a little heavy and some is pulled through, so dirt will stick to it unlike the stock one where it will just keep on going and you don't realize it. Look at the conditions that tractors and constuction equipment run into, I wonder how much dirt are in those motors. I like my K&N's.

 

[Cummins Corvette]

I'm starting to think powerwagon's mom is a K&N filter. Just joking around! Seriously, by the way he defends that 70 dollar investment, you might think he owns the company or something. I guess I wasn't considering a cheap paper filter as an option to compare to a K&N. Now that I am thinking that way, maybe it would be proper to say that a GOOD paper filter, such as a top end Wix, is better than a K&N. I CANNOT see any light through a good Wix filter, however I can remember noticing that the cheap paper filters are much thinner when I compared two a long time ago. A good Wix filter has very dense filter media that looks like an excellent way to trap dirt. Go get the BHAF Wix 42790 and tell me you can see ANY holes by holding it up to the sunlight. You won't see any. Hold a K&N up and do the same thing. You will see what I mean.

 

[Power Wagon]

actually, I paid more than that for a 1st gen K&N. But that's not really relevant. I don't really need to "defend" them, as correct misconceptions.



As far as seeing "light" through it. Well, the proof is in the SAE standard testing. Argue with that, not me. IT's been done, it works, end of story.

 

[SS]

The K&N may be a superior filter. Then again, maybe it's not. The problem with referring to a single SAE test is that it doesn't tell the whole story or define the end of story. A filter has to perform from -50 to 130 degree F ambient conditions as well as handle snow ingestion, sand, dust, mud, fog, high humidity, etc. under a variety of engine loads from extended idle to GCW towing.



Mopar used to sell K&N filters as late as 1995 (maybe later). They have since stopped - did they find it to be inferior? I don't know, but it's probably more likely that they found they were not being properly maintained or even more likely that they had a financial falling out with K&N so they stopped selling them.



Again, I don't know if it is a superior filter, but the problem with facts is that they can be used selectively to certain advantage. Real life testing is probably a better indication of performance.



JMHO - Steve

 

[C Schomer]

I like the real life test! I used to tune lots of 4 cyl motorcycles - that's when I first saw K&Ns and the dirty carbs inside. The K&N on my truck did the same no matter how it was oiled and the seal greased. I've also seen how believable mfgr tests are after testing many filters myself! Craig

 

[NVR FNSH]

PW,

Was the flat panel K&N part number the correct one for a 2nd gen truck? I don't have a real problem with the K&N media but I do wonder how the K&N fares in a stock intake system.



Anybody know how the 240 scfm test case compares to the actual airflow capability of the CTD?



Brian

 

[Power Wagon]

I do not know what precise filter that is. I suspect it is some standard size that was universally available from all brands, so it could be tested.

 

[bschmidt]

Great Thread... But back to the comments of Briar and LSMITH about K&N "missing the mark" with how difficult they are to PROPERLY seal on the stock box. YEAH!!!! I think Powerwagon's posting of test results demonstrates the superiority of the K&N filter MEDIA, but if the method by which this MEDIA is applied is inferior, then the complete package is at a lost. Personally I had a K&N GEN II on my old 5. 9 Magnum and never had a problem, but that complete package was COMPLETE! But here, your required to be an over-experienced K&N "installer" to ensure that everything is SEALED properly (according to specs) to keep from losing sleep at night, and that type of design just isn't superior.



-Brandon

PS-You can probably tell it doesn't take much for me to lose sleep at night, guess I'm over paranoid about the investment, I mean TRUCK!!!!

 

[Steve M]

EXTENT OF WARRANTY:

Any defective Filtercharger® element properly returned to K&N will be replaced by K&N. (((K&N will not be responsible for any other expenses incurred by the customer under the terms of this warranty, nor shall it be responsible for any damages either consequential, special, contingent, or otherwise; or expenses or injury arising directly or indirectly from the use of the Filtercharger® element. ))) Any Filtercharger® element returned to K&N must be sent at customers' expense along with a completed Warranty Claim Card and proof of purchase. K&N reserves the right to determine whether the terms of the warranty, set out above, have been properly complied with. In the event that the terms are not complied with, K&N shall be under no obligation to honor this warranty.

 

[sbiel]

sealing a K&N

For the happy users of a K&N filter, please comment ...



What is the proper / best way to 'grease' the filter so it seals correctly around the edges of a stock intake ??



What grease to use ? Vasoline ? Axle grease ? "Special stuff" ?



Grease the top OR top & bottom OR top & bottom & sides ???



Additionally, how often do you clean out your filters ?? Mostly highway / city driving here . .



thanks, steve

 

[Mel Fuelling]

I've been a satisfied K&N filter customer for the last 33 years, first

on 2 stroke singles and twins on scrambles tracks and flat tracks where we got excellent results using a single layer of a ladies nylon as a prefilter.



I purchased my 93 with 162k on the clock with a K&N installed.

I've just encountered my first K&N defect. I spray a thin layer of white grease on the outside radius of the two turns in the rubber connecting tube between my air cleaner housing and the turbo inlet to let me know if its ingesting dirt, when I check it at each oil change. (I believe that this is effective only on the outside radius of turns in air inlets. The grease has to be inspected on

a regular basis to see if time and heat is drying it out, rendering it

ineffective. ) Two months after my first cleaning and oiling with the K&N cleaning kit, at the 200k oil change(5k intervals), I noticed what looked like grit caught in the grease. Close examination showed it to be spalled off pieces of galvanizing compound that flaked off of rusting welds in the expanded metal

inner core of my K&N filter. It looks as though maybe the white

grease caught all 7 pieces that flaked off.



I have no record of how long the filter has been on this truck or

how it was maintained, so I don't expect any warranty of this

defect. I've never seen this defect before, but I will purchase

and use another K&N(and monitor it carefully just like I am the

substitute NAPA paper filter).

 

[illflem]

Steve, since K&Ns seem to work best when you follow their instructions I use the type of grease they supply, but can be bought anywhere. Think it's called Super-Lube. Use on the dirty air side of the gasket. On mostly highway but with a mile long dusty driveway I service my K&Ns every 75k, they say you can go 100k. I don't open the airbox even once between servicing, that's how you lose the seal. Removing the intake tube to access the oil filter at every 5k oil change and using the white rag test for dust is enough to show me the filter is working along with a filter minder that hasn't moved.

 

[C Schomer]

Here's some information that the filter mfgrs don't want you to know because it would ruin the fantasy. They use a mixture of particle sizes in their test dust and they don't have to report how well they do with any one size - just the averages. Then the dust holding capacity that is reported is made up of the big stuff that's easy to catch. Do you get the picture? Where does the fine stuff go that they don't have to measure? They can twist the numbers many ways just like any statistical figures. Yes, they all get to play by the same rules but there is a LOT of room to bias the tests. Here's a real life story! Our purchasing dept started buying much cheaper ASHRAE 25% prefilters - 'point of use' filters in the returns in the production rooms. Just this prefilter brand change will save the plant $105K annually. All purchasing sees are the specs - similar to what PW posted for K&N. Suddenly the ASHRAE 85s in the airhandlers only last half as long. But the cheap filters show the same specs as the more expensive filters we used to use! Purchasing wouldn't believe me when I told them how mfgrs can make their cheap products look just like the expensive stuff, so I sent both products out for side by side independent testing, at $800/filter. THIS IS THE KEY - side by side testing. When the filters were tested at real system velocities and identical test procedures on BOTH, the results weren't so equal anymore! The arrestance, dust holding, initial and final efficiencies and every other parameter was considerably higher for the more expensive filter. Especially the dust holding capacity, which was almost double. How'd they make the cheap stuff look so good? MARKETING! Craig

 

[CumminsPower98]

On the fence

Well I am personally on the fence. I feel a little afraid of the K&N filter myself. I installed a flat filter in my stock '98 12valve filter box and after under 10,000 miles I did my first oil analysis which showed a silicone content of 51 PPM!!! That is high so I pulled the filter to check things out. I did grease it up good and could not see any leakage around the edges. I did however see a fine dusting on the first few ribs of the intake tube with the correct dust color for this area. This filter had not been serviced yet at the time I checked it out. I just don't know. Right now I am trying to decide what to do because I want more air flow then the stock box can provide to lower EGT's a bit. I am leaning towards a BHAF at this point.

 

[Vaughn MacKenzie]

My K&N RE-0880 was JUNK

Back to the proper sealing subject:



When my truck was new I jumped on the K&N RE-0880 bandwagon. Rob Hanson helped me cut a 4" diameter ring 1" wide to provide good support and my installation was sealed very well. Over the course of a few thousand miles I discovered a considerable amount of dust inside the intake hose. After cleaning the intake and resealing it, I gave it 2 more chances. Again it failed me. I carefully examined the circumference of the sealing surface and clearly it was completely airtight and the dust was visible on the inside of the filter. There was so much dust it was disgusting.



It was clear my preoiled RE-0880 with a lightly oiled red foam prefilter was NOT cutting it. I called up K&N and they replaced it, but I sold the replacement to KatDiesel.



I've said this before (and I'll say it again), I believe most of the K&Ns out there are good filters but there are definitely some bad ones out there, so beware! It is prudent to check up on whatever air filter you are using. For now I am running the Amsoil which has done way better than the K&N although I don't think it is the best flowing filter available. The AFE Megacannon is my next filter

 

[GLASMITHS]

Vaughn:



I just installed the AFE megacannon. What have you heard about it? Is it better than K&N? I wanted a BHAF, but also a factory set-up. This thing is made to go on a main-battle tank! Little pricy though. SmokinDiesel has the best price that I could find.

 

[C Schomer]

The tests that PW posted were interesting. I take it, 10" is the clean or change point because they refer to 10" in both the tests. When I put the Banks kit on in 98(and the K&N), it pulled 11". It looks like the K&N stock panel is a bad application in a turned up 5. 9 CTD. Since then, I've done a lot more! I put the stock paper back in and it pulled 17" but at least it stopped the dust in the hose. I set out to find the biggest, least restrictive SOB possible! I got Donaldson and Fleetguard master catalogs and made a list of all the possible fits - 12L x 10. 5Dia. Then I called and checked out the specs on all the possibilities. The AF942M won. The M is the Fleetguard Magmun(long life). They put more media in it for longer life and less resistance than the regular AF942 and the initial efficiency is 98. 5% and final is WELL over 99% - I forgot what the exact figure is. It is rated about 500cfm. The BHAF is 12" overall(including the neck) and the AF942M has 12" of media alone and I built a 4 3/16" neck to glue on the open end. The resistance dropped to 2"WC - less than 1/5th the K&N. Not only is there advantage to less resistance but efficiency goes WAY up as velocity goes down. There's no exact figure but they are roughly inversely proportional, according to the hotshot filter people I deal with. Velocity KILLS paper and K&Ns. If you're going to use a K&N, at least get one big enough! Craig

 

[John_P]

Dodge Torque Wagon said:



"Mopar used to sell K&N filters as late as 1995 (maybe

later). They have since stopped-did they find it to be

inferior?"

____________________________________________



Apparently this is not the case with all Dodge/Mopar

dealers in the U. S. "Hendrick Dodge" in Cary, N. C. not

only sells them for our trucks but has them in a display

case in their parts department.



I have used the K&N filters in my both my Dodge CTD

pickups (92' & 96'). My 92' had 94,000 miles on it

when I sold it in 96' to buy the one I have now. No

engine problems ever! My 96' has almost 150,000

miles on it with no engine problems @ all. I have

never had the "oil or accumulation of dirt" mentioned

on my turbo blades or anywhere inside the air intake

system.



The problem I see with these filters is "improper oiling"

by the buyer. I do agree with what some of the other

members have said about the "stock" airbox sometimes

not sealing good, although I personally have never had

that problem either.



This is definitely one of those "controversial" subjects

on this TDR website!



----------

John_P

 

[Pit Bull]

Originally posted by Power Wagon



In normal service, is your Cummins going to wear out from the dirt that passes through the paper element anytime soon? Absolutely not. Users of both paper and K&N have driven the engines well past 1/2 million miles and still be in good condition. Can servicing damage a K&N and make it dust your engine? Absolutely.

.

Thanks Power Wagon. This is very interesting. For my application (stock truck driven 20K miles per year, on road, and will trade for a new one before I hit 150K miles) would there be any advantage for me to install a K&N air filter?