[Cloud9...68]

I should add that the person who did my oil analysis, Terry Dyson, who has been in the oil analysis business for thirty years, and has therefore seen literally tens of thousands of samples, told me that in his experience, K & N filters do a great job of keeping damaging particles out of the engine - as long as they are cleaned and oiled at regular intervals. When I provided him my sample, he asked me, among about a dozen other questions, what type of air filter I used, and when it was last changed. Oil analysis gives a direct indicator of the level of damaging particles in the engine that can be directly attributed to dirt passing through the air filter, so I view his data as conclusive enough to declare the case closed.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ds968]

<!--quoteo(post=77183:date=Aug 8 2009, 11:08 AM:name=Cloud9...68)-->QUOTE (Cloud9...68 @ Aug 8 2009, 11:08 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->I should add that the person who did my oil analysis, Terry Dyson, who has been in the oil analysis business for thirty years, and has therefore seen literally tens of thousands of samples, told me that in his experience, K & N filters do a great job of keeping damaging particles out of the engine - as long as they are cleaned and oiled at regular intervals. When I provided him my sample, he asked me, among about a dozen other questions, what type of air filter I used, and when it was last changed. Oil analysis gives a direct indicator of the level of damaging particles in the engine that can be directly attributed to dirt passing through the air filter, so I view his data as conclusive enough to declare the case closed.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

from what we have so far, i think the oil analysis results and conclusions from a highly respected and credible industry source ( Terry Dyson ) is indeed
sufficient to close this case

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[S_Cal968]

<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->since NOBODY has EVER had a problem<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
[caps - not necessary, my eyesight is fine thank you...]
This seems to be more of an assumption than logic. With all due respect we all realize you're well connected, but your scope is relatively limited when considering the bigger picture. Of course your input [as is everyone's] is valuable, but in no way conclusive. Without research & data, it's all just a big assumption.

Just for grins I did a little more digging and found it interesting how the same debate [right down to the same points made] is found on many other auto blogs for a variety of cars. So I'm definitely not alone in my scepticism.
Also, the same links to independent testing came up - one that was listed earlier and this one:
Air Filter Test
This test appears to have been performed in a professional lab in controlled environment [read credibility]. And, the data clearly defines the filtering capabilities of a variety of filters. From what gathered, particles in the 5 - 20 micron range have been known to cause engine wear. Keep in mind even the best oil filters only filter down to 30 - 40 microns. Perhaps in my spare time I'll look for info specifically addressing what the variables of engine wear.

re: service; a few have mentioned increasing the service interval of the K&N. Please keep in mind there's a balance between filtering & performance. It filters better as it collects dust/dirt, [as stated by K&N] and the porosity decreases. So with filtration inversely proportionate to performance, the best results can be had with a balance between cleaning and dirt retention. It's up to the owner to determine at what point that occurs.

As I've said before, for my application, the relatively small advantage of the K&N doesn't justify it's use. If I drove in a cleaner environment, I'd reconsider it's use.

BTW, look up the definitions of paranoia, scepticism and cautious, there is a difference and I'm what most would consider cautious. I don't appreciate being considered delusional, [especially coming from an admin/moderator]..

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

you keep saying that, yet assumptions of the successful multitudes in the presence of no other evidence is acceptable - sometimes you just don't need to question the obvious

it is conclusive when there is no other evidence after 35 years of use with NO KNOWN FAILURES - if it was going to happen it would have by now

the canton oil filter goes down to 8 microns - as i remember, the k&n oil filter goes down to 11 and the mahle goes down to 12

i've seen that link before - it's an interestingly spun article - very much a case of taking insignificant data and making it seem like more than it is - i love the way the make the column charts "look" like there are huge differences between things - there is no scale to the variance - they also drew some inaccurate conclusions based on speculation that all intakes are created equal - obviously they are not - on the E46 M3 for example, gains are negligible - on the 968 they are significant - dyno test prove this

it seems that you do not understand how an oiled air filter works - perhaps doing some research on that would help you understand what the rest of us already know for fact based on experience - even that test shows that the k&n accumulated dirt faster than the others, reaching it's maximum flow restriction sooner - all that means is that you need to clean it more often than you need to change the others - big deal since that is so easy - it does not matter that it passed more fine dirt or not, because it does not cause any harm

caution is prudent course in the face of known issue - there IS NO KNOWN ISSUE - paranoia is worrying about something that doesn't exist - just because there are others that are paranoid does not give credibility to a theory - it just means another chance for improved kool-aid sales

again, show me where this filter did damage - without that though, this is just plain silly paranoid conjecture in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary

don't play the "don't pick on me card" - i certainly could have done something more, but have kept this open, as that is the policy here, expecting that you would eventually bring on some real evidence of failure - now, however, i will demand proof of failure, or request that you remain silent, as the rest of us are all in agreement about the filter, and you are the sole voice of dissent - no more theories - no more studies that try to support theories - i want proof of failures due to the filter, on a properly maintained car with a properly installed and maintained k&n filter

time to put up or shut up, because this thread is pointless without it

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ds968]

<!--quoteo(post=77221:date=Aug 9 2009, 03:04 PM:name=flash)-->QUOTE (flash @ Aug 9 2009, 03:04 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->make the column charts "look" like there are huge differences between things - there is no scale to the variance<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ha, good observation... i did not even pay attention to that.


In any case, you ( anyone and everyone ) can believe whatever article, and/or whomever you find to be the more credible source, I am simply going on my own experience and that of individuals I have known for years who used K&N in a variety of cars, for decades and decades, some in much dustier venues than where I live, and some with cars far more expensive than ours..and none experienced any problems.

Furthermore, IF the K&N filters would have been deemed to be even partially responsible for premature engine wear or actual damage, coverage from the media, and soon to follow attorneys looking for class action grounds would jump on that finding so quickly your head would spin..

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Cloud9...68]

Well put, DS. As an engineer, I always prefer to rely on objective data wherever possible. But this argument reminds me of debates over whether this brand of synthetic oil, with xx% of such-and-such additive, is better than Brand Z with its nitro-molysilicate detergent package.

The only way to obtain objective data on the air filter debate (the same logic applies to the oil brand debate) would be to take about a dozen newly-rebuilt engines, run two with paper filters (replaced at the manufacturer's recommended interval), and the rest with K & N's, cleaned at a few different intervals (with at least two replicates of every interval case), and run under identical conditions, with identical maintenance, for about 150,000 miles. The engines would receive leakdown tests at regular intervals (say every 30,000 miles), and then get torn down, with every major clearance meticulously measured. The resultant wear data would then be analyzed using ANOVA (Analysis of Variance) to determine if there is any statistically significant difference between the two types of filtration. In other words, it ain't never gonna happen.

Lacking this, I think the fact that there is no known case of a premature engine failure to which a K & N filter contributed in a major way, supported by decades of oil analysis results, is a decent indicator that a K & N filter that is cleaned and oiled at proper intervals is safe. Furthermore, since I assume flash's dyno test showing a several-hp advantage of the K & N was on a new, freshly-oiled filter seems to indicate that despite the more-than-adequate filtration of this filter, it somehow manages to also increase horsepower. S_Cal, I share your puzzlement as to how this is possible, but I wouln't lose any sleep over going with a K & N.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ds968]

on the horsepower side of things, were it not tested on the same ( airbox modded ) 968, on the same dyno, the same day, by a party that has absolutely no vested interest in K&N, and with the only variable being the K&N vs OE filter, I would also share the skepticism.. at least regarding a whopping 5 hp delta between the two.. seems like a lot, but we all know this car reacts in the most unpredictable ways to things that do not work the same in 99.9% of all other cars out there so it is what it is..

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[rxter]

So how often do we need to clean the K&N?

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

depends on where you drive and what it is in the air - pop the cover, take a look - if it looks dirty, clean it - i end up doing it every 1000 miles or so, just to keep it in tip top, but if i had to guess, i'd say it is more like every 3-5k

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[S_Cal968]

<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->i certainly could have done something more, but have kept this open<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Hmm, so now you're threatening me, nice - that's a great way to treat others! And, we wonder why a member left the forum earlier. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/rolleyes.gif[/img]

I find it interesting how anything that has portrayed the K&N in a negative light is quickly discounted - nothing is frigg'n good enough. You can nit-pick the graphs all night long, but the numbers don't lie. Sure, if those that read this thread are not open minded enough to at least consider all the possibilities, then this is a waste of time.

I am by no means alone - there are many other sites having the same debate and many have the same concerns I do. I don't know what happen to the others on this site - perhaps I'm the only one brave enough to put up with your abrasive retorts.

BTW, you obviously didn't comprehend my earlier post that details the function of the filter. And, it would've been nice if you had just addressed the points I made rather than trying to wow us with big numbers. [Kind of reminds me Carl Sagan millions & billions & zillions...] [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/blink.gif[/img]

<!--quoteo-->QUOTE <!--quotec-->it does not matter that it passed more fine dirt or not, because it does not cause any harm<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Really, based on what...certainly not controlled test & inspection?

Suggestion: For this forum to work I think we need to work on respecting each other opinions right or wrong and keep the condescending tone to a minimum! [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/glare.gif[/img]

~~~~~~~~
@Cloud; +1 Controlled testing is exacting what I suggested earlier. It's the only way to conclusively define that there's little or no harm done by the 5 -20 micron grit that's passed by the K&N. And, for the little bit of power gain I choose not to use it. Perhaps an increased oil service interval is in order[?]. Why some get so upset and can't just respect my choice is beyond me...

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

you are not reading from the writer's perspective

you chose to make the assertion that i was speaking from the position of the ADMIN - i was not - you need to make the distinction between me and my role - they are not one and the same - were i to speak in that role, it would have been from that screen name, and not this one - there was no threat - i merely said that while i could have taken a different path (the owners could have done something else), we did not - it is not site policy - we do not like to edit or curtail opinion - i am NOT the only voice of the ADMIN - any administrative actions are taken by the joint ownership, not by a sole individual, and never by the individual's screen name - hence, the discussion was allowed to continue in its twisted pointless path

this thread could have been edited, buried, or ended, and probably should have, but again, this is not the site's policy, so it was not - you have been allowed to rant endlessly about something that we all know from experience does not exist

you say things like "numbers don't lie" - you are correct - the countless users are the "numbers" - nothing else has been presented to indicate otherwise - all you have presented is THEORY - you cannot apply post hoc ergo propter hoc here - there have been no failures, therefore the dirt does no harm - there need be no more proof at this point

sometimes it just doesn't matter that something is there - just because something might do harm in large quantity does not mean that you need to worry about small quantity - there is water in every gasoline too - so what? it isn't enough to do harm - should we all stop using gas station pumps because they allow water vapor in, and start demanding complete vacuum controlled systems?

there is NO EVIDENCE to suggest that anything allowed past by the K&N is in any way harmful to the engine

all you are spouting is theory and conjecture with no basis in fact - we are presenting countless facts based on endless successful use - basically you want to tell the countless thousands of people that the millions and millions of miles they have driven without issue are insignificant, and in spite of all that they are risking catastrophic failure

i am not the only one taking a position on this - every other poster in this thread has taken the same position, with similar evidence, and even some testing - we also all see the holes in the "data" you provided - you choose instead to tee off on me alone - so be it, but keep things in perspective - i am not the one being condescending - i am just the one saying what the others are too polite to say - you are attempting to tell all of us that we and everyone we know that we are wrong, without providing one shred of evidence of failure - that is condescending - this is so painfully obvious to the rest of the world - none of us can understand why you don't get it - the only thing i can assume is that you have taken this posture based on an entirely different agenda

it's like saying "green cars can cause crashes" - lots of superstition around the race tracks on that one, but no data to support it

i could care less what you do with your own car for your own paranoid reasons - that's fine - i am not trying to say otherwise - do NOT try to tell us what to do with ours without proof

once again, present proof of failures attributable to the properly installed and maintained K&N on a properly maintained engine and we will certainly listen - failing that though, this is moot

you have presented your unsupported opinion - we get that - "warning" heard - thank you - we all disagree with you

moving on now

do we need to close this thread to put an end to this repetition?

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[PorscheDude]

Close it, before I die of either boredom or laughter.

This is the most ridiculous "debate" I've ever read on this forum.

I cannot believe someone has lost so much sleep and done so much "research" on this.
Only to hear the sound of one hand clapping.

Stick with your Frame and be happy. If you stop one person from using a
K&N will you be happy???

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[S_Cal968]

I've never suggested that someone's engine would fail - you're putting words in my mouth! Where did I tell people what to do with their cars[?!?].
My point was increased engine wear. My initial intention was to throw out some food for thought, after that it was downhill.

What "Holes" in the data?? The Duramax test was done in a professional lab. [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/rolleyes.gif[/img]

Correct, no forum should squelch or close a topic based on a disagreement. There will always be different perspectives and all should be respected. Sadly there are many members that are silent and may have some valuable input that, get this, may differ from yours Bob. I don't how I can be classified as "ranting" or "spouting" [nice vindictive words] when I'm stating my position/points and responding to your abrasive tone.

@P-dude; if you're not interested or bored - why do still read this thread?! [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/rolleyes.gif[/img] I haven't lost any sleep over this...

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Gotter]

<!--quoteo(post=77342:date=Aug 10 2009, 09:17 PM:name=PorscheDude)-->QUOTE (PorscheDude @ Aug 10 2009, 09:17 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}><!--quotec-->Close it, before I die of either boredom or laughter.

This is the most ridiculous "debate" I've ever read on this forum.

I cannot believe someone has lost so much sleep and done so much "research" on this.
Only to hear the sound of one hand clapping.

Stick with your Frame and be happy. If you stop one person from using a
K&N will you be happy???<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->

+1

Seriously, I've haven't seen this much ado about something since the last healthcare debate on MSNBC. To summarize: The original question was. "How does the K&N flat filter combined with the airbox mod compare to the K&N cone filter?" Answer: "The Cone doesn't fit, and the flat gives sufficient power gain over a paper filter to boot. Some feel there may be damage to the internals if the filter is not properly maintained."

To be clear, there may be damage to engine parts if you don't properly maintain ANY of the support components. Just ask my wife when she failed to tell me her oil light had been on for a couple months. She ran it DRY. Threw a piston. Thankfully (?!) it was her old beater Camry. But still.



So, case closed? [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/rolleyes.gif[/img]

Thanks to all who contributed.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

you did suggest that an engine would fail by making assertions that running the K&N allowed damaging material into the engine - it does not - street engines just aren't that critical of that - perhaps a race engine, with its higher tolerances and increased heat and load, might need better filtering than a street car, but again, no proof of that either

the holes in the data are simply that regardless of any lab study, where they skew minute differences in results so that they appear to be more than they are, and draw conclusions based on speculation with no supporting cases of failure, in the real world, that dirt doesn't matter

again i use the gas pump analogy - there is plenty of data on what damage water can do to an engine - there is plenty of data on the fact that water gets into the storage tanks - so what? the bottom line is that not enough gets in there to do harm

lol - if you think my tone was abrasive or words vindictive, you should have seen the things i wanted to say, but chose not to, and rather to stick to the issue at hand, rather than digressing to things that should have been said privately - it has gotten increasingly frustrating when the rest of the real world disagrees with your theory, yet you continue to try to make a point without supporting evidence - as for other members and what they would have said, they would all fall in line with the rest of the world that knows that there is no evidenced problem with the filters - the countless masses have spoken - if there were a problem, especially, here in california, where a hot cup of coffee can buy you a nice big house in beverly hills, we would have seen cases brought up, whether won or not - we would have heard something from somebody somewhere - yet, after 35 years, nothing but the silence of happy customers - that speaks volumes

as for the future of this thread, that discussion will be had today amongst the owners, but i am pretty sure there will be an official position that without new information, this thread will be closed, or at least an official request to cease

j.c. - sorry your thread turned into such nonsense - your conclusions are accurate

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[xrad]

I made my last post on page one because that is where my expertise ended, and even then , it was cut and pasted from some 'Society of Filtration' (which I plan to join ASAP...not).

Usually, when I get to this topic and this thread, I crack open a beer and enjoy what everyone has to say. It is these lively antagonizing robust 'conversations' which are most interesting!!

If you go back to the beginning of the post and reread everything, you will find much info about air filtering, sometimes colored and hidden by opinion.

I know I learned something from and about this topic from everyone invloved (except from 'Hot968' on page three [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif[/img] [img]style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif[/img] )!

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

they can get lively - unfortunately there is an all too common tendency for someone reading to think that something written must inherently come with emotional or personal content - that is not the case - as an example, most of the time, when i am typing, i do not consider the reader an individual or concern myself with how they might misinterpret something, regardless of whether i know them or not - i am merely putting down what i want to say, regardless of the reader - it is just cold and emotionless information - that doesn't always meet with the best of success, but it does remove me emotionally from the conversation - it is fairly easy to switch off your emotions if you want to, especially in places like this, but you have to remain vigilant about it - that keeps it civil - without fail, when it spins out of control is when somebody fails to control those emotions - everyone does it, including me

this is unfortunately the nature of these sites, as people tend to use them as chat boards - that is only a part of their purpose, and if more focus was spent on the technical aspects, and less on the social, less of that would happen

but then it wouldn't be nearly as interesting or colorful either, or give us nearly as much stuff to talk about at events

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[wmuldowney]

I have to go with the general censuses here.
I have had a K&N filter on virtually every car I have owned (not 40 cars and million miles) with no issues. My BMW 540 had over 180K when I sold it and have put 250K miles each on a Ford F-150 and Chevy 2500HD and sold both trucks. All three vechicals still run and the 2 trucks are still daily drivers!

I can tell a before and after difference with the K&N filters and in a lot of the vechicals eventually went with the "cold air intake" upgrade, which by all measure would have allowed even more trash in due to surface area and exposure.

Is there any damage due to "air filtration" issues? Maybe. But I am religious about regular mainatinace (except for transmission fluid changes?) I can list the mechanical failures of all and have never had blown engine and only replaced one tranny due to blown line.

These vehicals will probably be long dead before any of this mystical, fairy dust mixed with unicorn horn particulate mater will take out the engines.

Just sayin.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[xrad]

PS: I just got my 'paper' Mahle filters...I will use these for daily use drive to work. Then, when I feel spirited or going on a road cruise, I will switch to the K+N.

Best of both worlds...or worst of both, depends on how you look at it...

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

knock yourself out - no chance i'll be doing that though - with all the other stuff i have done to improve intake flow and temperature on my car, the power gains due to the increased flow of the filter are magnified - i wouldn't be surprised if i saw a 10-15 hp drop at 100 mph if i switched to paper - with no real world evidence of any chance of any downside of the K&N, i'm not willing to give up that power

at the track i might think about adding more filtration, since that is where the air is the worst, but likely i won't even do anything there

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.