Hi guys,

Please don't grill me if this has been brought up before and I'm sure it has... I Did do a search but did not find what I was looking for... So apologies in advance...

In short, which is better? Paper cone filter (BMC, K&N etc) or foam (ALTA). I currently have K&N which seems to do the job but I noticed most guys on this forum using foam filters... Will it be worth it if I change to foam?

Thanks!
Esham

 

Whoooosshhh (sound of floodgates opening)

Choice of filter material divides many people. I am personally not convinced that the performance differences are measurable. I have a foam filter (the ALTA), and it is easy to clean and re-oil. That is not to say that the K&N or similar style paper filter is any less easy to clean...

I don't have experience with them.

Let the debate begin!

 

LOL!

Let's really open it up for some fun!

Both paper and foam are inferior to the hybrid dry element filters from AEM.

Oh man, here it goes…

 

move over russell

 

I like the foam filter for reusability.

 

... and then there's the dry AMSoil Nanofilter.... which is lifetime, easy to clean, needs no oil, very efficient at trapping tiny particles... and good enough for me and PGT...

 

What do you want to use it for? Paper filters dirt while foam lets more air in.

FWIW. AMSOIL!

 

Okay, besides the ease of cleaning and reuseability.. Performance wise... Has anyone tested each on a dyno?

 

I'm confident that the difference between ANY two clean filters in the same enclosure/airbox with the same tubing, etc. is less than the margin of error between two dyno runs.

 

I'll +1 on that.

 

Thanks guys.. So what u guys are saying is.. don't bother changing to foam as there will not be any significant difference...

Thanks again!

 

If you are already running a reusable filter, then there is no point in swicthing to foam for performance' if you are running paper you can do it if you dont want to keep buying new filters. When it comes down to filtering ability, the jury is still out.