COMMANDER370

Are they worth the money and do they help performance?

80TexasC3

Have not dyno'ed or read any articles.. but the "seat of my pants" dyno says it helped.

page62

I saw a dyno of a Dodge Ram 1500 with a 4.7L V8 the other day. They did 3 runs: one with stock air filter, one with no air filter, and one with a K&N filter.

No difference between the 3 runs. Draw your own conclusions.

AlwaysWave

For what it's worth, I see about a 1 mpg improvement highway driving. Perfprmance and around town mpg seem's the same.

Larry B.

If your Air cleaner is open then you may not notice any improvement in performance . I like the fact that you can clean them ad re-oil them so you never need to replace it.

L79vette

On the chassis dyno I picked up 2HP and 3lb-ft, which is within the repeatability limits of the machine. You would have to average several runs both ways to know if there was anything there at all.

But, I have a 14x3 open element, so it isn't surprising. If you have a very low profile filter, you might see a significant (or at least measurable) gain.

Jughead

CHP did a simlar test with other filters a year or so back. K & N offered no real advantage other than re-usability.

Stewart's74

I also added MSD Super Conducter wires and a MSD Blaster coil. All said there was a NOTICEABLE increase in performance.

Robert N

[QUOTE]I saw a dyno of a Dodge Ram 1500 with a 4.7L V8 the other day. They did 3 runs: one with stock air filter, one with no air filter, and one with a K&N filter.

No difference between the 3 runs. Draw your own conclusions.

CHP did a simlar test with other filters a year or so back. K & N offered no real advantage other than re-usability.[/QUOI have a Dodge Ram 1500 with the 5.9L and a K&N filter charger. I will tell you that my MPG increased.
That makes the filter worth it when you add gas prices and filter replacement costs over the years.

mrcorvette79

Like most everyone else has stated, Slightly noticable in the seat, great for maintenance, decent looking and worth the one time cost.

PRNDL

I have one and I don't think they are worth the money. No difference that I can tell, and they are expensive. Even more expensive if you buy the equipment to clean and recharge it so I can use it "forever" Air filters are cheap. And one more thing - if you are going to use it continuously, it is possible that the K&N allows more dirt into your engine.


[Modified by PRND21, 8:39 PM 6/24/2004]

QuickVet

No

NJ 76 Project

I have always put them in my daily driver's and toys and been satisfied. Small MPG improvment and a few HP (especially when done with the open element instead of the airbox). However... for $4.95 for a purolator toss-away I will stick with that on the Vette. Just my 2 cents

427V8

LAvetteman

I disagree. How can a K&N filter allow dirt to pass anymore than a stock filter?

I agree that in some vehicles you won't see any performance or efficiency gains, BUT in some applications you will see a gain. Just depends.

The main reason I use them is for the reusability. Some stock air filters cost between $20-30 each. The most expensive K&N drop in replacement filter I have seen is about $80. You do the math.

Harley uses K&N filters in the hi perfomance air cleaner kits available for all models. Factory specified, warranty friendly.

Sigforty

I am with Vetteman on this one. The reusability is the key factor in using a K&N filter over regular filters.

LT1driver

kn lets more air in thus more dirt also, but that is the purpose of the oil to catch the dirt, ever wonder why GM quit the use of this on the 427-435 67-69 cars ??? save your money and just replace with quality filters like you should and you will run just as fast and cleaner.

rob75383

I've seen some scary websites devoted to this very arguement... In fact I got 'em from this exact forum, about a year ago...
Some ricer kid went out and set up a comparison study using his version of the scientific method.
One of us actually had a great comeback to the K&N re-usability arguement. He had a table showing the cost comparison between a k&n and a plain pep-boys or napa air filter.
He showed that buying the reuseable filter was expensive, and that the cost of buying the filter cleaners and oils and oiling the filter once a year, made them resuseable filter more expensive than the throwaways. This was shown over a 10 year period, and I don't doubt his logic or math. I do doubt how often he was estimating that people need to purchase new oil treatments, though.

One other thing the ricer kid showed with his tests, is that a plain paper element filter, given X many ounces of fine dirt to catch, still flowed well. As for the K&n filter, this kid's tests showed that the filter's performance was greatly reduced when the filter was clogged with the same amount of fine dirt given to the paper filter.

I've had my K&N 14x3 filter for about 5 years now with no problems, and I've had the x-treme flow lid for maybe 2-3 years.
I think this debate will never truly be settled, but either way, if I go with paper or cotton, I'm still gonna keep that x-treme flow lid on top.

Twin_Turbo

One advantage rarey mentioned is looks. When the K&N becomes dirt it still looks relativly good. When a paper filter becomes dirty it looks like crap, discolored paper, stains. Nothing worse than a car with one of those filthy looking paper filters.

SpyderD

If he oiled it once a year than his study was flawed, but that's a ricer for you. According to K&N instructions you only need to re-oil it every 50,000 miles or so. I've had one on my Mitsubishi for about 30,000 miles without cleaning. I've heard it actually flows better the dirtier it gets.