I just read in a post that there were findings that the k & n filters performed worse than the stock paper filters in filtering out particles... is this true? is this the reason why the k & n "breathes" more since it lets more dust particles in? I have it installed on my MC and was hoping to get a few opinions before I pull it out.... thanks.

 

"When all else fails, manipulate the data" :smile:

The K&N or oiled cotton filter is a lousy filter to begin with but gets better with age (like wine?). It filters lousy and flows lousy initially but for whatever reason, it supposedly becomes more efficient after so many miles. You even see some references to this on the box. Seem odd to me and Im not buying a filter that I have to "break in".

Depending on which side of the fence your on depends on what data you publish (new versus used), so think about who is saying it before you believe it. There are tradeoffs to every variety of filter, I'd rather have less flow and better filtering than the other way around.



--
Cheese

 

Don't lose sleep over it. They are more porous than paper filters, but if you keep it oiled like you're supposed to, it will be just fine. I use them on both of my motorcycles. In fact, a buddy of mine has a bike with about 150,000 miles on it and he has only ever used K&N-type filters. No problems. You should probably worry more about your car being destroyed by a meteor...

 

According to K&N theirs filter just as fine particles as stock paper, and increase their filtering ability with age. I think the main reason they have greater air flow is not so much because of the material, but because of the surface area (deeper channels).
this will have less airflow
vvvvvvvv
than this
VVVVVVV
_________________
[img]albums/album25/agv.gif[/img] VinceAndJessica.com

Einstein said E=MC2, I say S = MC2

 

I finally figured out that when people mention efficiency they're talking about ability to filter. I recall that foam filters more efficiently once dirty--I don't know about K&N.

I don't *think* they flow better when dirty, only improve efficiency. But we're talking metric dust, right?

Here's a link that contains some info on 'em. What I'd do is search on J726C (the # of the SAE test for air filters, apparently) & see what kind of fun nighttime reading you can dig up. If you find any good tests post back, eh?

Jeff

 

I knew I had this link lying around somewhere. Independent testing by the folks at Neuspeed. Click it

They've done some really good articles about Ducati products, and this is one in that series.

HTH,

Jeff

 

OK- nice article about Fram, K&N and multiFoam filters compared when you clog them up with dirt.
But how do they really do when you drive them around on the street or on the track. What changes do you see in MPG?
And are there positive/negative changes in any of them over time as some suggest.

Obviously K&N thinks that their filters are good and deserve your attention. They have a good name that is easily recognized and a following for many years. Others are equally loyal to foam filters. Arguments are made back and forth and the great debate continues.

If you are risk averse then try a stock uni-filter and see how it works for you. Nothing to really change except drop in the filter and see what happens to your perfomance and mpg. Fairly low cost option at $39
see http://www.mini-motorsport.com/intake-mc.php
Do you have a drop in filter or a Moss intake? You might not need to remove it due to being worried about damaging your engine. I ran a drop in K&N filter on my Dodge caravan for 11 years (same old filter) and 125,000 miles with no major engine repairs and good gas mileage of 22 mpg. I would clean it and re oil every 1 to 2 years. It did great.

 

I have some good overhead slides that show how they pass dirt especially on vehicles that have air restriction guages. When they use oil wetted gause the guage never reads a restriction.

But all you have to do is a oil analysis and you will see the silicon levels elevated when you use this type of filter.

I sell oil analysis for $18.95. Check out my site at http://www.syntheticwarehouse.com. We sponsor MCO. Try ordering through me or using the fund raising program for your club!

 

We ran K&N filters on our offroad cars for years. We never cleaned them. We would leave them on the car until the VVVVVVV was completely smooth from dirt at which time a new one would be installed with no noticable performance gains.

On the cars (non Mini) I have now, it's a constant battle when the wifie takes them in to get the oil changed. They always insist on changing or cleaning the filter at which time we have to tell them to leave it alone. I have the BMP on my Mini, which is a gause type also. When it dies (about 1,000,000 miles from now) I'll replace it with a K&N, no worries.

 

I have been running them on my Jeep for a while. I'm switching back to Fram. Why? Last time I took my K&N off to clean it, there was dirt in my intake tube. I pulled the tube and there was black gunk in my throttle body.
Now, this is a Jeep running trails in AZ where the dust is pretty fine. On-road, it may be just fine. Some people tell me "just oil it". When you clean and oil it is when the small particulates get in. It is only after they are "gunked up" that they stop letting the fine stuff in. Then they are no more efficient, flow wise, than a K&N. I'm still trying to decide if my new Cooper (July delivery) will get a K&N or something else or just stick with stock. I never really noticed a difference with the K&N over stock.

Unfortunately, this Mini thing may be dangerous for me. My Jeep is modified "a bit". See:

http://www.arizonatj.com

I have a feeling my Mini will get modded too.

Chris

 

>>I have been running them on my Jeep for a while. I'm switching back to Fram. Why? Last time I took my K&N off to clean it, there was dirt in my intake tube. I pulled the tube and there was black gunk in my throttle body.

Hello Chris (aka AZMini. Welcome to the MCO!!

I hope your not right about the air filter situation. I put one in my old Sentra I gave to my sister. I must have drove it 30k miles here in AZ before turning it over to her. She's in So Oregon so there's quite a bit less dust than we tend to get here in the Valley of the Sun. I'll be sure to tell her to keep an eye on the intake area.

 

>>Unfortunately, this Mini thing may be dangerous for me. My Jeep is modified "a bit". See:
>>
>>http://www.arizonatj.com
>>Chris

Hey, where's all the twisty-axel action pics?

Rocketboy_X

 

>>I finally figured out that when people mention efficiency they're talking about ability to filter. I recall that foam filters more efficiently once dirty--I don't know about K&N.
>>
>>I don't *think* they flow better when dirty, only improve efficiency. But we're talking metric dust, right?
>>
>>Here's a link that contains some info on 'em. What I'd do is search on J726C (the # of the SAE test for air filters, apparently) & see what kind of fun nighttime reading you can dig up. If you find any good tests post back, eh?
>>
>>Jeff

That's an interesting link, but this statement on that page
"2. The factory filter pulls cool air from outside the engine compartment,
while the K&N will pull warm air from the area behind the radiator. Warm air
is less dense than cold, so this can cost 6-13 HP!!"
is not true for the panel filter replacement or for the typhoon since it has a heat shield.

 

Orbhot,

I like the 2nd link that I posted better (by Neuspeed.) They did an independent test at what sounds like a reputable facility. They've done a lot of product evals for Ducati aftermarket stuff, always with good objective opinions, so I trust their work.

Looks like gauze (K&N) flowed about 6% better, and foam about 2% worse, than the original paper. Note that the foam is a multi-layered design in this test.

Foam, however, held about 2/3 more dirt than the paper, about 40% more than the K&N. Point being that as they load up the foam will flow better than either. If you want absolute power, it sounds like gauze is a winner.

I want protection first, as the filter isn't the most restrictive part of the intake tract, as Andy has pointed out with his pressure drop tests. Just one more data point, and if you find more independent tests post 'em here.

Jeff