Mike
I didn't think you were, and I'm not as thin skinned as my post implied.
Like I said, I have used them at one time or another on all of my
performance cars. If they were passing dirt to any measurable degree, it
would be noticeable in the inside of the carb or MAF. I have never seen any
evidence of that. At one time, they were talking 25 HP gains, which we all
know is BS. K&N makes a good product that will actually pay for itself in
air filters that you don't have to purchase. For that reason alone they are
a good investment, as long as the claims, whether real or implied, to
substantial horsepower gains are taken with a grain of salt. As for
extremely dirty conditions, I would probably pay closer attention. Luckily,
we have clean air here. (With the exception of a memorable experience with
Mt. St Helens)
Later
Bill
"Michael Johnson, PE" <cds@erols.com> wrote in message
news:lY6dnXhcUaRR2LLeRVn-pg@giganews.com...
> First off, K&N air filters aren't "a giant ripoff" as you state. They do
> flow more air than most OEM filters they replace and they can be cleaned
> and reused thus saving money on purchasing new filters. I haven't bought
> a new air filter for my Mustang in 14 years. The K&N has more than paid
> for itself.
>
> EVERY after market performance company exaggerates the hp/torque gains for
> their products. Most times these figures are based on a heavily modified
> engine that needs good air flow to maximize hp. On stock Mustangs there
> are typically modest gains (3-5 hp) from using a K&N filter. Whether it
> is enough to feel the difference or lower ET's, I doubt it.
>
> BTW, I wasn't picking on you in particular. Periodically these threads
> start and people make claims that using K&N filters harm your engine by
> letting too much dirt pass. I know of too many high mileage engines (mine
> being one) using K&Ns for 100,000+ miles for this to be true. I'm just
> trying to provide some balance to the thread.
>
> Me wrote:
>> I did not say that this filter would shorten the life of an engine or do
>> any harm. If taking issue with their increase horsepower claims is "K&N
>> bashing", guilty as charged. In there zeal to sell product, they make
>> claims that can not be proven outside of their own "testing." It seems to
>> me the term "Filtercharger" implies that the filter will increase air
>> flow.
>> Also, I wasn't talking about a racing application. Having been in the
>> industry for 20 plus years, attended multiple SEMA shows as a Performance
>> Warehouse Industry buyer, I know all about the product. I bought the line
>> direct when they first started selling filters for automotive
>> applications. My SHO, 1965 GT-350 Shelby and my GS430 Lexus all have
>> them. I stand by my original statement. If your present air filter is
>> restrictive, you may gain power with a K&N, but the filter does not
>> magically add power.
>> Thanks
>> Bill
>> Former NHRA Super Stock Eliminator National Record Holder.
>>
>> "Michael Johnson, PE" <cds@erols.com> wrote in message
>> news:EoOdnbs9udAlbbPeRVn-gw@giganews.com...
>>> To add a little balance to the K&N bashing I'll give my own personal,
>>> real world experience with K&N filters. I have had one installed in my
>>> '89 LX since it had 30,000 miles on the odometer. I now have 156,000
>>> hard driven miles on the car with the last 20,000 using a Kenne Bell
>>> supercharger. I still use the same K&N filter I installed at 30,000
>>> miles. There are multitudes of K&N users with my experience. BTW, the
>>> car uses no more oil than it did when new.
>>>
>>> All this "K&N is crap" stuff is just that, crap. EVERY FILTER lets dirt
>>> into the engine. IMO, a K&N filter will do no more harm to an engine
>>> than an OEM filter. While a K&N might only make 5 more hp on a
>>> basically stock engine, the real dividends come when the car is
>>> progressively modified. A car with a blower, head work, cam etc. will
>>> see an appreciable gain between an OEM and a K&N filter.
>>>
>>> Before anyone starts linking web sites with tests, keep in mind who may
>>> have done the tests and their motives. Also, there are many tests that
>>> are just plain unscientific and should be ignored. As for me, I have
>>> 100,000+ miles of personal experience to base my opinion on. Fact is
>>> that many of those that bash K&N products have ABSOLUTELY ZERO
>>> EXPERIENCE with them and have no idea whether their claims against K&N
>>> filter's performance is accurate or not.
>>>
>>> My personal experience makes me believe a K&N filter WILL NOT shorten
>>> the life of your engine if you change your oil as recommended for your
>>> driving conditions and generally keep your vehicle in a good state of
>>> maintenance and repair.
>>>
>>> Me wrote:
>>>> A giant rip-off. The only way it can add power is if your present air
>>>> cleaner system is restricting air flow. On most later model cars, this
>>>> is not the case. Also, no matter what they tell you, it doesn't filter
>>>> as well as a stock element. I don't have the site handy, but someone
>>>> did an comprehensive study and found the K&N did not filter as
>>>> efficiently as a paper element air cleaner. I have never seen any kind
>>>> of an improvement, and I have used these in two different cars.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Michael price" <michaelvprice@webtv.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:10206-432E270E-786@storefull-3234.bay.webtv.net...
>>>>> i have a stock 99 gt. i have read where this air filter alone does add
>>>>> some HP. they cost around $50. anyone here use 1 and do they really
>>>>> make
>>>>> a diffrence? mp
>>