 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Subaru Cars / December 2007does anyone use K&N air filters?
i am considering one for 2005 Forester ... are these air filters worth the money? There is no better purchase for your vehicle than a K&N filter. You will notice increased throttle response and better mileage. The best part is that you can clean it and it will last forevever in your car. Spending $20 for a paper filter is folly when you can spend $50 and have it last for as long as you have your car. Some naysayers are sure to post but you can disregard them. > i am considering one for 2005 Forester ... are these air filters worth the > money? Has anyone actually compared the filtration area, effectiveness, etc on these air filters? I know of independent studies made on oil filters, and the results were less than obvious. > i am considering one for 2005 Forester ... are these air filters worth the > money? Well, after asking my question decided to surf the web and found one test made by someone that understands what all of it is about. http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/airfilter/airtest3.htm I am sure a car would perform much better, if just for a while, without the restriction that and air filter imposes, but to me, not in the racing high performance circle, the air filter function is to protect the engine. Good Luck! > i am considering one for 2005 Forester ... are these air filters worth the > money? I say get the K&N. There is no evidence of widespread engine damage due to their use, no class action suits etc. I personally used one for over 110k miles on a 94 Trooper in on and off road usage. Vehicle was retired due to being totalled by errant driver and at ~145k miles there was no indication of impending engine failure. So when I bought my 04 outback I installed a K&N shortly after purchase. Now at 83k I have had no issues. Does any filter catch 100%? No. Regular oil changes eliminate dirt and dust too. > Well, after asking my question decided to surf the web and found one > test made by someone that understands what all of it is about. [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > - Show quoted text - > Well, after asking my question decided to surf the web and found one > test made by someone that understands what all of it is about. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >> i am considering one for 2005 Forester ... are these air filters worth >> the money? Hi, I use foam filter impregnated with oil. Wash it every two years. When I see all the fine dirt the filter caught, I know it's doing the job. Wash, clean it, spray very very thin layer of oil, wipe off excess put it back, use it over and over. My reason is economy rather than using throw away type paper filter. I don't race. >> Well, after asking my question decided to surf the web and found one test >> made by someone that understands what all of it is about. [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > put it back, use it over and over. My reason is economy rather than using > throw away type paper filter. I don't race. what oil do you spray on the filter? is this after you washed with water? thanks! >>>Well, after asking my question decided to surf the web and found one test >>>made by someone that understands what all of it is about. [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > what oil do you spray on the filter? is this after you washed with water? > thanks! Hi, The filter came with a spray can of oil. I think K&N has it too. Yes I wash it in warm water. >>>> Well, after asking my question decided to surf the web and found one >>>> test made by someone that understands what all of it is about. [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > The filter came with a spray can of oil. I think K&N has it too. > Yes I wash it in warm water. BTW, this filter kit is from Amsoil. The trick is using oil very little. If it goes thru foam, there is a risk it can screw up MAP sensor. I wash filter in summer time and dry it well under hot sun, then spray oil very thinly on the foam intake side. Squeeze it between newspaper sheets to soak up any excess oil. Need to do this every other year for normal driving. Using this since car was new and did not have any trouble. >>>>> Well, after asking my question decided to surf the web and found one >>>>> test made by someone that understands what all of it is about. [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] >Need to do this every other year for normal driving. >Using this since car was new and did not have any trouble. Winter bar chain oil (chain saw)) works good for air filters. Nice and sticky. You don't need much.  SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com > i am considering one for 2005 Forester ... are these air filters worth the > money? Hi, I haven't used the K&N--did use an Amsoil "oiled foam" model years ago. Next door neighbor installed a complete K&N intake system on a Mazda Miata earlier this year. His comments: --Don't expect huge increases in power or fuel economy. The most noticeable savings will most likely come from NOT throwing away a paper unit a couple of times a year. --With the complete intake system, the overall noise level in the engine compartment increased. A lot! --Some aftermarket parts require emissions testing and approval from a regulatory agency to be "legal" for street use. If there's an underhood sticker in the package w/ an "emissions approval" seal or number (CARB number here in California, or anything apropos to your locality), be sure to install it. The fellow who did his last smog test told him he was fine, as he'd installed the sticker K&N sent in the kit. W/o it, the car would fail the "visual" part of the test because of "non-factory" modification. I dunno about other localities and their practices. Just installing the filter w/o any other mods shouldn't be problematic in this department. Rick I've also noticed a large increase in noise when I added a cold air intake + oiled filter. I don't really like the noise. Is there any way to eliminate or minimize it? PP >> i am considering one for 2005 Forester ... are these air filters worth the >> money? [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > >Rick > I've also noticed a large increase in noise when I added a cold air > intake + oiled filter. I don't really like the noise. Is there any way > to eliminate or minimize it? Hi, Philip The "smart aleck" answer is to go back to the stock setup. But if we analyze that just a bit, we find that over the last 50 years or so, a tremendous amount of engineering has been done to "quiet" cars in many, many areas. The air intake is one area that illustrates the "compromise" function of so much engineering. Sometimes it takes just a little change in the design of the intake horn, such as the tapered shape many went to back when the intake to the air filter housing was but a short metal tube. When I was in high school in the early '60s, it was popular to remove that tube, thinking there was restriction in the system that would be removed by allowing a larger "hole" for the air to enter. Whether more air really got in or not is arguable, but it was no secret that the noise level usually increased at least a little. Over the years, we've seen a move to more "cold air" type intakes w/ hose/piping arrangements that bring the air from the front of the car, typically near an air intake for the radiator so it's not going to be pre-heated in the engine compartment, and may possibly enjoy a bit of "ram" effect at speed. One thing we see w/ many of these systems is some odd looking bends and/or "accordion pleats" along the intake. Some are obviously there to help the fit of the various bits, but at least some have some noise attenuating value. Going back to an aftermarket cold air system like the K&N, I'd venture a guess they're developed w/ air flow as the primary goal, and noise is a "necessary evil" in the design. The only way I can think of to "quiet" the system w/o compromising the internal flow would be to wrap the outer surfaces in some kind of sound deadening material. The result would be almost certainly ugly from a visual standpoint, and it's hard to say w/o actually doing it whether any improvement in noise level would be noticed. However, as my neighbor noticed, as did I the first time I rode in his car for an extended time, one quickly adjusts to "normal" background noises and tends to block them out. So I'd suggest your system will treat you the same: the time will come when you don't even "hear" it at all so you won't have to scrap it or do any modifications! Good luck! Rick > I've also noticed a large increase in noise when I added a cold air > intake + oiled filter. I don't really like the noise. Is there any way > to eliminate or minimize it? Put the original intake system back on, that's the only wasy to kill the noise. Did you notice some bulbous appendages on the OEM intake ductwork? That's part of the noise canceling system, as well as some intake performance tuning. Unless you are doing some serious racing, there's no gain from the cold air intake. >i am considering one for 2005 Forester ... are these air filters worth the >money? I've had one, and found it to be too much work. I am also concerned about oil and the MAF sensor; K&N says no problem, TSB's say otherwise. I will stick to paper. I did find this test and learned a lot about filters. The graphics take a bit to get loaded. http://www.duramax-diesel.com/spicer/index.htm SignatureSteve ASE Master Tech L1 Diag Currently residing at a Subaru Shop 4.5 years doing tires and alighnments >I've had one, and found it to be too much work. Those willing to the work may save a few bucks over the long run, but it is a lot of work. Performance wise? Looking at K&N's own graphs, most foam filter gains are at very high RPM's, ~ 5000 RPM, nowhere near the 1500-3000 RPMs that most cars see in normal driving. Even up the high range, the gains are at most a few horses and not something all that noticeable. On K&N's own published FAQ, they no longer claim a mileage increase, only that "some customers have reported gains". I'd bet those folks went from a dirty paper filter to a clean K&N. Similar gas mileage gains probably would have been seen with a clean paper filter. I think is was last year that the gov't clamped down on unsubstantiated mileage claims in advertising. On a fully prepared race car, with all kinds of mods that add a few HP each, they all add up, so a K&N is probably useful. On a street car, the biggest K&N performance gain will probably be from the decal or the visual impact under the hood of a show car. <G> >>I've had one, and found it to be too much work. > [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > the biggest K&N performance gain will probably be from the decal or > the visual impact under the hood of a show car. <G> Very true.. Reading the perfornance charts on the link I posted, about how much dirt can get through scares me. I don't rebuild my engine after each race... oops most of us dont race! Steve >>I've had one, and found it to be too much work. > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] >think is was last year that the gov't clamped down on unsubstantiated >mileage claims in advertising. The difference is the change in engines. Years ago, with carbs and first generation EFI, a blocked filter made the engine run progressively richer as it plugged up. With OBD2, in particular, this is no longer the case. The computer adjusts the fuel to the amount of air available, keeping the mixture more or less constant - so on today's engines a free flowing filter does NOT affect fuel mileage. It CAN affect power output, but generally only at high RPM when the engine air demand exceeds the capability of the filter to supply it. >On a fully prepared race car, with all kinds of mods that add a few HP >each, they all add up, so a K&N is probably useful. On a street car, >the biggest K&N performance gain will probably be from the decal or >the visual impact under the hood of a show car. <G> SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com We can debate performance gains but the cost savings of cleaning make it worthwhile > On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 13:23:55 GMT, "Bonehenge (B A R R Y)" > [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > > - Show quoted text - > We can debate performance gains but the cost savings of cleaning make > it worthwhile [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] >> >>- Show quoted text - Ditto! >We can debate performance gains but the cost savings of cleaning make >it worthwhile No arguement there. Had one on my first Aerostar - moved it to my second Aerostar. Olso one on my daughter's Neon. Likely saved over $200 over and above the cost on the two Aerostars (about 400,000km betweeen them) and another 100 or more on the Neon >> On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 13:23:55 GMT, "Bonehenge (B A R R Y)" >> [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] >> >> - Show quoted text - SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com So if you change your filter every 30,000 miles like the service intervals recommends. And you pay $48 for a K&N and another $15 for the cleaning kit.And lets not forget if you buy it online you will pay for shipping and if you buy it at Advance they sell the K&N for my car for $56 + tax. But i wont add in the shipping or the jacked up price at your local parts store or the tax to keep it simple So...You spent $63. Now you go buy an $8 puralotor filter and change it every 30,000 miles. Advance sells it for $7.97 but I'll round up. So that means you can change the filter 8 times with the puralator or 240,000 miles on your 8th change. and you save $1. So come your 9th change of the filter you would see a total savings of $9.I put 15,000 miles on my car a year. So i would see a $9 savings on air filters after 18 years. And by then my car has 270,000 miles on it. Who keeps a car that long ? I may even be dead by then .I aint the smartest guy in the world and no mathAmagician maybe my math is off ..but sh.t I'll just pay the $8 every 2 years and spend the 45 seconds to change it. We can debate performance gains but the cost savings of cleaning make it worthwhile On Dec 23, 1:53 pm, clare at snyder.on.ca wrote: > On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 13:23:55 GMT, "Bonehenge (B A R R Y)" > [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > > - Show quoted text - >>>I've had one, and found it to be too much work. >> [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] >>the biggest K&N performance gain will probably be from the decal or >>the visual impact under the hood of a show car. <G> I agree on the OBD tuning, but disagree on the cost savings. I feel, and is supported by the web page I posted, that the k&n lets too much dirt through. You may save money in the filters, but think it isn't worth it to the life of the engine. SignatureSteve ASE Master Tech L1 Diag Currently residing at a Subaru Shop 4.5 years doing tires and alighnments >>>>I've had one, and found it to be too much work. >>> [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > You may save money in the filters, but think it isn't worth it to the life > of the engine. Hi, OBD tuning? Doesn't OBD mean on board diagnostics? What does it have anything to do with tuning? When trouble occurs, ECU puts the engine in default mode(limp mode) at least to get you moving with CEL on. ECU has a limit, any filter has a limit. Even HEPA filter is not 100%. I am sure reusable filter is economical for long run. It's matter of how to use it. I never heard K&N filter caused engine damage. Did you? Way back, oil bath filter was very common. Some even used toilet paper roll in lieu of regular paper filter. In over 50 years driving I never suffered an engine damage due to poor maintenance. I always keep my vehicles in original condition. My rule of thumb to replace a car. When it starts leaking oil. It happens when the car is around 10 years old. I donate it to Kidney foundation, then go out buy new one with cash saved over during that 10 years. >>>>>I've had one, and found it to be too much work. >>>> [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] >OBD tuning? Doesn't OBD mean on board diagnostics? What does it have >anything to do with tuning? OBD2, more-so than previous systems,fine-tunes the engine as it goes to compensate for the restrictioon of a plugged air filter. Yes, some earlier EFI was as effective, or very close. Carbureted engines were a different story. OBD2 seamlessly blens the timing and mixture. >When trouble occurs, ECU puts the engine in >default mode(limp mode) at least to get you moving with CEL on. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >old. I donate it to Kidney foundation, then go out buy new one with >cash saved over during that 10 years. Oil bath is STILL the most effective method of air filtering - BAR NONE. Just too heavy, bulky, and service intensive for today's owners/drivers. I buy cars with 100,000km on them and put another 150,000 or so. Or like my current van, bought with 275,000km on it.#62,000 on it now. SignaturePosted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com i am considering one for 2005 Forester ... are these air filters worth the money? ========== I put a K&N on my STi and shortly thereafter read that the oil used on the filter can cause permanent damage the mass air flow sensor, which is inches "downwind" of the filter. For me even partial malfunction of the MAF is unacceptable. Fortunately a company called AEM has a new technology dry filter that requires no oil and is easier to clean than the K&N. Plus you don't have to buy the K&N oil. To me, the value is not having to find the right part at a parts store at every change (I change my air filter at each oil change, I live in a very dusty area) but the simplicity of keeping two washable air filters, one clean and ready to go, and the other on the car. The performance gain of K&N is well documented. The AEM filters claim to have the similar flow and filtration. Good luck http://www.duramax-diesel.com/spicer/index.htm I will stick with a oem. It's time consuming to get the charts up but read the test > i am considering one for 2005 Forester ... are these air filters worth the > money? [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY ** > ---------------------------------------------------------- |
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
|
©2008 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.