 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / BMW Cars / October 2007K&N Panel Air Filter - better performance?
Just wondering if replacing the stock filter with the above would noticeably improve performance or sound. Any comments? >Just wondering if replacing the stock filter with the above would noticeably >improve performance or sound. > >Any comments? Depends on model but my E38 V8 4.4 had the original filter style but with K&N replacement. The only difference is that you don't swap it out just clean it every 10K or so. No NOTICABLE performance increase. However if you like induction NOISE then a complete intake kit would give you a restless drive and make your car sound like it's being driven by a mindless moron - you might get 2 BHP from it too. Sir Hugh of Bognor  SignatureI used to be an Egotistical Meglomaniac - but now I'm just perfect! Hugh Gundersen hsg@h-gee.co.uk Bognor Regis, W.Sussex, England, UK > >> Just wondering if replacing the stock filter with the above would noticeably [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > You forgot the added functionality of allowing crap to reach the MAF causing it to fail and lose 50% engine power! >>> Just wondering if replacing the stock filter with the above would >>> noticeably improve performance or sound. [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > You forgot the added functionality of allowing crap to reach the MAF > causing it to fail and lose 50% engine power! Wouldn't that be the case with any performancy-type filter? After all lesser restriction to airflow would enhance performance, but compromise on the filtering ability? > "DCA" <dca860MAPS@yahooMAPS.co.uk> wrote in message >> You forgot the added functionality of allowing crap to reach the MAF >> causing it to fail and lose 50% engine power! More on *that* "myth" here.... http://www.knfilters.com/MAF/massair.htm > >> "DCA" <dca860MAPS@yahooMAPS.co.uk> wrote in message [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Interesting - thanks for the pointer. Would have preferred to see an independent review but better than myth I guess D Even more interesting: Ask K&N fans to list for you the car manufacturers who fit K&N filters to their cars from the factory. That's anyone from KIA (who does not seek all out performance) to Ferrari (who does). The list will be short to non-existent...and that speaks volumes. GRL "I know top management has always been behind me. I've felt them there many times." Officer Herbert "Spermwhale" Whalen in Joseph Wambaugh's The Choirboys >>> "DCA" <dca860MAPS@yahooMAPS.co.uk> wrote in message >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > independent review but better than myth I guess > D > Even more interesting: > Ask K&N fans to list for you the car manufacturers who fit K&N filters > to their cars from the factory. That's anyone from KIA (who does not > seek all out performance) to Ferrari (who does). > The list will be short to non-existent...and that speaks volumes. Indeed. If such a cheap simple swop was capable of giving the claimed improvements makers would fit them as standard. Signature*I will always cherish the initial misconceptions I had about you Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. >>Even more interesting: > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Indeed. If such a cheap simple swop was capable of giving the claimed > improvements makers would fit them as standard. The one thing that *can* be said definitively for K&N filters is they are re-usable. Car makers would never switch to re-usable filters (even if they cost the same, which they don't) as then their repair shops would have to spend time cleaning filters under warranty. So let's see: They cost more initially, are more expensive to maintain (if you include labor costs), may do a worse job at filtering the air and have negligible increase in performance. What a marketing campaign... Signature-Fred W >> Even more interesting: > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] >Indeed. If such a cheap simple swop was capable of giving the claimed >improvements makers would fit them as standard. Not necessarily so Dave. Sometimes contracts can be in the realms of offers one cannot refuse. Perhaps the filter companies have other holds over the manufacturers such as almost ZERO cost. Remember 1p on cost can be £100 on the price SignatureSir Hugh of Bognor The difference between men and boys is the price of their toys. Intelligence is not knowing the answer but knowing where and how to find it! Hugh Gundersen hsg@h-gee.co.uk Bognor Regis, W.Sussex, England, UK Oh, please. The supposed mpg and power gains combined with the deeply discounted price a large volume buyer would get would make the cost difference trivial. And do you seriously think that Corvette, BMW, Porsche, MB, Ferrari, Lambo, etc., etc. are going to worry about a $10-$20 air filter cost if that filter does half what K&N says theirs do? No way, mate. - George Litwinski "I know that management has always been behind me. I've felt them there many times." Officer Spermwhale Whalen in Joseph Wambough's The Choirboys > On Tue, 25 Sep 2007 09:01:39 +0100, "Dave Plowman (News)" > <dave@davenoise.co.uk> [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > as > almost ZERO cost. Remember 1p on cost can be £100 on the price > Oh, please. The supposed mpg and power gains combined with the deeply > discounted price a large volume buyer would get would make the cost [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > No way, mate. Huh? According to the K&N website: http://www.knfilters.com/filtercharger.htm "Our automotive OE (original equipment) replacement air filters generally add 1-4 horsepower." and "K&N makes no general fuel economy claims, however we encourage you to try our air filter for yourself." By the way, I do not believe you could even feel a change of 1 horsepower. It would require some pretty fancy equipment to even measure it. Where are the outrageous claims? People read and hear what they want to believe. These filters are not worth the money. Signature-Fred W OK, try this link: http://www.knfilters.com/feedback13.htm Many of the claims are absurd, but K&N is clever enough to let customers make them for them and then post them on their web site. You are right that their direct claims are much more modest, although I wonder if even that 1-4 hp gain claim is over an old plugged air-filter or what. >> Oh, please. The supposed mpg and power gains combined with the deeply >> discounted price a large volume buyer would get would make the cost [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > Where are the outrageous claims? People read and hear what they want to > believe. These filters are not worth the money. >> >> [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > You forgot the added functionality of allowing crap to reach the MAF > causing it to fail and lose 50% engine power! Sir Hugh, You'll have to explain how using a K&N brand panel airfilter in lieu of the normal paper airfilter will allow "crap" to reach the MAF. Do you have some direct experience in such crap infestation, or are you merely parroting some other compaintant? Signature-Fred W >You'll have to explain how using a K&N brand panel airfilter in lieu of >the normal paper airfilter will allow "crap" to reach the MAF. Do you >have some direct experience in such crap infestation, or are you merely >parroting some other compaintant? The data sheet on the K&N filter will explain it for you. The minimum particle size it will trap is larger than that of typical paper filters. If you want more airflow through a filter, you either need to increase the surface area or increase the minimum particle size you can trap. There is no magic to this. If you are in a racing situation, a high-flow filter is definitely a good idea. If you are driving on dirt roads, a high-flow filter is probably a bad idea and in the case of the K&N you will see dust trapped in the MAP and throttle after a couple thousand miles. Personally I wouldn't worry about the MAP so much as I'd worry about increased cylinder wear. In a street vehicle, if you want increased air flow, your best solution might be a much larger filter or dual filters. --scott Signature"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." >>You'll have to explain how using a K&N brand panel airfilter in lieu of >>the normal paper airfilter will allow "crap" to reach the MAF. Do you [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Personally I wouldn't worry about the MAP so much as I'd worry about > increased cylinder wear. Bing!! That's what I was saying. Explain how the MAP sensor gives a crap about what filter is on there. > In a street vehicle, if you want increased air flow, your best solution > might be a much larger filter or dual filters. Or no filter? Lots of airflow for a short time. Signature-Fred W >>> >>> [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] >have some direct experience in such crap infestation, or are you merely >parroting some other compaintant? I took that to mean some inferior boy racer type and NOT necessarily K&N SignatureSir Hugh of Bognor The difference between men and boys is the price of their toys. Intelligence is not knowing the answer but knowing where and how to find it! Hugh Gundersen hsg@h-gee.co.uk Bognor Regis, W.Sussex, England, UK >>Sir Hugh, >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > >I took that to mean some inferior boy racer type and NOT necessarily K&N With a subject of "K&N Panel Air Filter" I can't see how you made that mistake. As for the claims of increased performance, the only thing you get is an increase in noise so your car sounds faster. Turn the stereo up a little and you'll forget about it. >>>Sir Hugh, >>> [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > thing you get is an increase in noise so your car sounds faster. Turn > the stereo up a little and you'll forget about it. With the panel filters, you don't even get much more noise since you retain the stock airbox and snorkle. I can't say for sure because I *always* turn up my stereo. ;-) Signature-Fred W > Just wondering if replacing the stock filter with the above would > noticeably improve performance or sound. > > Any comments? No noticeable performance or sound change. Although some folks claim the K&N doesn't filter as well as stock, the ability to clean the K&N might save a few dollars over the long haul. Tom K. > Just wondering if replacing the stock filter with the above would noticeably > improve performance or sound. I tried it once and didn't notice a bean of difference. The cone CAN be better depending on your engine type and if it's mounted with a heatshield. I've found K&N's mounts to be pretty poor. SignatureWho needs a life when you've got Unix? :-) Email: john@unixnerd.demon.co.uk, John G.Burns B.Eng, Bonny Scotland Web : http://www.unixnerd.demon.co.uk - The Ultimate BMW Homepage! Need Sun or HP Unix kit? http://www.unixnerd.demon.co.uk/unix.html www.Strathspey.co.uk - Quality Binoculars at a Sensible price > > Just wondering if replacing the stock filter with the above would > > noticeably improve performance or sound. > I tried it once and didn't notice a bean of difference. The cone CAN be > better depending on your engine type and if it's mounted with a > heatshield. I've found K&N's mounts to be pretty poor. With most cars the stock air filter and housing form part of a tuned circuit - the length resonates to improve breathing at certain revs. Remove that and replace with a cone and you remove that function too. Signature*Why is 'abbreviation' such a long word? Dave Plowman dave@davenoise.co.uk London SW To e-mail, change noise into sound. >>Just wondering if replacing the stock filter with the above would noticeably >>improve performance or sound. > > I tried it once and didn't notice a bean of difference. The cone CAN be > better depending on your engine type and if it's mounted with a > heatshield. I've found K&N's mounts to be pretty poor. He's talking about the replacement panel filter. Signature-Fred W > Just wondering if replacing the stock filter with the above would noticeably > improve performance or sound. No. > Any comments? Save your money. Signature-Fred W > Just wondering if replacing the stock filter with the above would noticeably > improve performance or sound. > > Any comments? I realize this is an old thread but as it happens, I was discussing this very thing with my mechanic today. I've read about these filters on the forums and was curious. The people backing K&N claim a 3-4 MPG gain in normal driving, and a HP or two gain in more spirited driving. I was also intrigued by the "clean & re-use" aspect of these filters. My mechanic (Wittler Auto here in Albuquerque) told me that in theory, these filters might be a good idea, but actually, they have a fairly serious drawback. The seal is made of a silicone material, and according to the Wittler, they've seen lots of these filters with deformed seals. Seems that the seals deform when they get hot, i.e. the silicone gets too soft. Thus, when the seal is deformed, unfiltered air gets through to the engine. Thus, they aren't too fond of these things. He did say that *if they were made better* they might be OK. But, they would cost a lot more, too. So, for the time being, I'm skipping them and staying with the standard OEM type filters in my 530. Karl Winkler http://www.sandiastrings.com >> Just wondering if replacing the stock filter with the above would noticeably >> improve performance or sound. [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] >Karl Winkler >http://www.sandiastrings.com deformed seals Huh! Are these on the filters that he has fitted I wonder? More MPG - doubt it - never noticed it on my 740i E38 but then who would as the difference between 18MPG and 20MPG = heavy traffic or heavy right foot occasionally. Might be cheaper in the long run - never ever bought a new air filter for the car in all the years I had it so must have saved £300 or $600(US). But economy - never. Deformed seals - never. Sad filter seller - yes! Sir Hugh of Bognor SignatureRemember. You may honestly believe that you understood everything you thought I said but what you thought you heard wasn't exactly what I said. hsg@h-gee.co.uk hsg@bognor-bill.co.uk bognor-bill@bb-trading-uk.com E38 Bognor Regis, W.Sussex, England, UK >> Just wondering if replacing the stock filter with the above would noticeably >> improve performance or sound. [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > Karl Winkler > http://www.sandiastrings.com The problems with K&N go beyond the poor fit (and they do fit poorly..) They also don't filter as well as the OEM paper filter - in numerous tests it's been shown they let more dirt through than the factory filter does. The oil on them also has a bad habit of migrating down the air-stream through your MAF (Mass-Air-Flow sensor) - and often is responsible for the failure of the MAF (which costs $200-500 depend on what engine you have and how many you have..) BMW will not warranty any MAF on an engine using an oiled filter. The filtering is worst when the filter is freshly cleaned and oiled, and gets progressively better over time as the filter starts plugging up.. until it gets so plugged up the dirt ends up being pulled through the coarse cloth mesh. They are not really a good thing for your engine. The cost savings is actually also questionable. BMW makes a filter that tends to self-shed dirt it picks up. They typically last well beyond the recommended replacement interval with some simple removal, and tapping out of trapped dirt. On ones that are an updraft design - it isn't even necessary to perform that cleaning step - the design is such the dirt falls out of the filter into the airbox. For the cost of one K&N you can purchase at least 3 stock air filters from a discount vendor. Performance gains also can't be reliably shown. BMW is awfully good at designing engines and designing them for maximum performance. There is no reason for them to go undersize on an airfilter since the cost per unit increase for an adequately sized one is negligible. They're not going to leave HP laying around on the table for some bozos cobbling crap together in a garage to pick up. IMHO - K&N = marketing over performance. >>> Just wondering if replacing the stock filter with the above would >>> noticeably [quoted text clipped - 53 lines] > > IMHO - K&N = marketing over performance. I bought a K&N filter for my 1987 Toyota about 165000 miles ago and what I have noticed is it has shrunk somewhat, it still fits good and passes smog every time. the filter is 20 years old and is cleaned with every 3000 mile oil change. So that's 55 air filters @ 9 dollars a piece or a savings of about 495 dollars. After reading all the opinions about the K&N air filters and my own experience and reviewing, the filter designs are somewhat flawed. I think K&N could have used better material that does not shrink over time. Advanced Flow Engineering Air Filters claims better material than what I have in my old, yet still good K&N air filter. I bought one for my 330CI and am hoping for the best. Cheers, Brian >>> Just wondering if replacing the stock filter with the above would >>> noticeably [quoted text clipped - 53 lines] > > IMHO - K&N = marketing over performance. Care to show one documented proof that they filter poorly? I know, I';ve read it bazillions of times online too. I've just never seen good proof that this is the case. Perhaps it's people that don't know that you have to oil the filters? Signature-Fred W BIG Snip >> IMHO - K&N = marketing over performance. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > seen good proof that this is the case. Perhaps it's people that don't > know that you have to oil the filters? There was a filter comparison done and posted on one of the bimmer boards. K&N passed more air (more horsepower?) and more of the smaller particles than OEM. I'd be leary of one in a dusty climate. I'd also be concerned about the possibility of filter oil accumulating on the MAF. It's possible a well-designed intake system might give a 1-3 HP gain (and a poorly designed one, some loss), but I seriously doubt there would be any significant mileage improvement as claimed. R / John >> I know, I';ve read it bazillions of times online too. I've just never >> seen good proof that this is the case. Perhaps it's people that don't [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] >than OEM. I'd be leary of one in a dusty climate. I'd also be concerned >about the possibility of filter oil accumulating on the MAF. I was told years ago by a Formula Ford guru that oiled filters like K&N should not be cleaned and freshly oiled every five minutes. Something to do with a certain amount of crud actually improving the filtering capability without impacting airflow. 10K or 20K miles between cleanings, I was told. But, most people who fit K&N want nice shiny chrome with the K&N logo plainly visible, and a nice clean pink filter. Not yucky-looking black ones like there were on my Caterham Seven that I sold 18 months ago and now seriously regret having done so - but that's another story. SignatureDan. > Care to show one documented proof that they filter poorly? Sure.. http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/airfilter/airtest3.htm And you might want to read the entire article.. http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/airfilter/airtest1.htm > I know, I';ve read it bazillions of times online too. I've just never > seen good proof that this is the case. Perhaps it's people that don't > know that you have to oil the filters? Well - now you HAVE seen it. This isn't the only test like this I've seen. There was another one with industrial equipment - where they did regular oil tests for silica (sand) - and matched it up to the filters being used. The K&N was simply awful - they went back to standard paper based filters. >> Care to show one documented proof that they filter poorly? > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > being used. The K&N was simply awful - they went back to standard paper > based filters. Excellent!! That's just what I was looking for. Now I can continue to using the stock dry paper type filters for a good reason. ;-) Signature-Fred W >>Just wondering if replacing the stock filter with the above would noticeably >>improve performance or sound. [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > I'm skipping them and staying with the standard OEM type filters in my > 530. The deformed seal argument is BS. Their seals are just as good or better than the OE filter seals. They do not deform when they get hot. Those guys are on crack. The rest of the K&N "claims" is also BS. You will get no improvement in horsepower or mileage. You will get a filter that you have to clean and reinstall rather than just replace. Signature-Fred W > The deformed seal argument is BS. Their seals are just as good or > better than the OE filter seals. They do not deform when they get hot. > Those guys are on crack. If so - so am I. I've had the K&N seal deform on a BMW motorcycle. The filter seal was too big, when the airbox was clamped closed the seal extruded from the seal area. > The rest of the K&N "claims" is also BS. You will get no improvement in > horsepower or mileage. You will get a filter that you have to clean and > reinstall rather than just replace. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.