edatlanta
Hosting in Panama City Beach, FL
Senior Member
Joined: 08/13/2008
View Profile
Good Sam RV Club Member
 Offline
|
Tractors from generations ago were typically very low rpm engines and very loose tolerances compared to what we have today. They also operated at much lower temperatures. A bit of dust running through them wouldn't cause nearly the problems on engines of today. A bit of dust in an injector can shut down that cylinder. A grain of sand could go through an old carburetor with no problems.
I don't think we are comparing apples to apples here.
Ed
2006 GMC 2500HD CCSB 4x4 Duramax/Allison, Titan 52 gallon fuel tank, TTT/Schefenacker Towing Mirrors, Prodigy Controller, B&W Companion Hitch, Progressive Industries EMS-PT50C, TST Systems 507 TPMS
2010 Jayco Designer 35RLTS,Cummins/Onan RV QG 5500 EVAP
|
427435
Rochester, Mn
Senior Member
Joined: 11/12/2005
View Profile
|
havasu4us wrote:Gale Hawkins wrote:Clay L wrote:This site has some testing data on K&N filters
TEST DATA
While I could not view the graphs I did read the following text.
"In the chart above it’s important to note the different test durations for each filter. The AC Delco filter test ran for 60 minutes before exceeding the restriction limit while the AMSOIL and K&N tests each ran for 20 and 24 minutes respectively before reaching max restriction. In 60 minutes the AC Filter accumulated 574gms of dirt and passed only 0.4gms. After only 24 minutes the K&N had accumulated 221gms of dirt but passed 7.0gms. Compared to the AC, the K&N “plugged up” nearly 3 times faster, passed 18 times more dirt and captured 37% less dirt. See the data tables for a complete summary of these comparisons."
I don't mean to put a damper on your data... but that Spicer information is eon's old. Arlen Spicer visited the K&N facility in Riverside based upon the data that has been perpetuated thru that internet site. He basically retracted the data... unfortunately... that bit of information never made the "fair and balanced" section. Everyone continues to bash the product.
As for the class A diesel applications, they are NOT Oiled, they are a dry filter, no different than Farr, Napa, Fleetguard, Wix. They are just another option. They ARE washable tho.... a good thing. I just dislike the perpetuation of bad data. For the record, yes I do have one on my Class A diesel. Continue your discussion but use current factual information for the OP, not... I don't trust that thing...
The original tests were sound. While Arlen Spicer did visit the K&N facility and watched them repeat the tests on THEIR test machine, the results still showed that the AC filter did a much better job of filtering--------just not quite as big a difference.
Others have copied some of the verbiage from the original Spicer test, I will repeat the most pertinent:
Compared to the AC, the K&N “plugged up” nearly 3 times faster, passed 18 times more dirt and captured 37% less dirt. See the data tables for a complete summary of these comparisons.
During my engineering career, I had responsibility for the specifying and installation of air cleaners for Cat, Deere, and Detroit Diesel engines in feller-bunchers. The installations had to pass their engineers approval before we could buy their engines for OEM use. Those companies would have laughed their back sides off if I would have proposed something like K&N filters.
If you don't know what a feller-buncher is, here's a picture:
Mark
2000 Itasca Suncruiser 35U on a Ford chassis, 65,000 miles
2003 Ford Explorer toad with US Gear brakes,
Ready Brute tow bar, and Demco base plate.
|
427435
Rochester, Mn
Senior Member
Joined: 11/12/2005
View Profile
|
To the OP, find and re-install the original air filter.
Increased air flow from a less restrictive air filter on a modern diesel or a fuel injected gas engine does nothing for your mpg anyway.
|
havasu4us
Montana & Lake Havasu City, Az
Full Member
Joined: 01/12/2007
View Profile
Good Sam RV Club Member
Offline
|
427435 wrote:havasu4us wrote:Gale Hawkins wrote:Clay L wrote:This site has some testing data on K&N filters
TEST DATA
While I could not view the graphs I did read the following text.
"In the chart above it’s important to note the different test durations for each filter. The AC Delco filter test ran for 60 minutes before exceeding the restriction limit while the AMSOIL and K&N tests each ran for 20 and 24 minutes respectively before reaching max restriction. In 60 minutes the AC Filter accumulated 574gms of dirt and passed only 0.4gms. After only 24 minutes the K&N had accumulated 221gms of dirt but passed 7.0gms. Compared to the AC, the K&N “plugged up” nearly 3 times faster, passed 18 times more dirt and captured 37% less dirt. See the data tables for a complete summary of these comparisons."
I don't mean to put a damper on your data... but that Spicer information is eon's old. Arlen Spicer visited the K&N facility in Riverside based upon the data that has been perpetuated thru that internet site. He basically retracted the data... unfortunately... that bit of information never made the "fair and balanced" section. Everyone continues to bash the product.
As for the class A diesel applications, they are NOT Oiled, they are a dry filter, no different than Farr, Napa, Fleetguard, Wix. They are just another option. They ARE washable tho.... a good thing. I just dislike the perpetuation of bad data. For the record, yes I do have one on my Class A diesel. Continue your discussion but use current factual information for the OP, not... I don't trust that thing...
The original tests were sound. While Arlen Spicer did visit the K&N facility and watched them repeat the tests on THEIR test machine, the results still showed that the AC filter did a much better job of filtering--------just not quite as big a difference.
Others have copied some of the verbiage from the original Spicer test, I will repeat the most pertinent:
Compared to the AC, the K&N “plugged up” nearly 3 times faster, passed 18 times more dirt and captured 37% less dirt. See the data tables for a complete summary of these comparisons.
During my engineering career, I had responsibility for the specifying and installation of air cleaners for Cat, Deere, and Detroit Diesel engines in feller-bunchers. The installations had to pass their engineers approval before we could buy their engines for OEM use. Those companies would have laughed their back sides off if I would have proposed something like K&N filters.
If you don't know what a feller-buncher is, here's a picture:
Mark,again, you see, you can just State that Arlen visited K&N and all was as "the results still showed that the AC filter did a much better job of filtering--------just not quite as big a difference." Please, all I have asked from all of these postings... please provide factual data, from a documented source. Arlen's site is no longer up or supported... K&N will give you lot's of documentation. I don't care what the OP does.... I just want documentation, notThose companies would have laughed their back sides off if I would have proposed something like K&N filters".
This is a perfect example of why an individual should investigate a product on their own, not this banter I am seeing. If you don't like a product fine... just do not conflict your dislike with a picture of a tractor and a random statement with no documentation.
If the OP were to state... I have a Napa filter on my used MOHO... should I take it off? You would all come back and give a more positive response, at least not the bashing I see. You might even recommend an AFE, or a Spectre Intake system...
.
TIFFIN PHAETON
09' JEEP
12' RZR S
IDAHO TOTE TAG
|
Hudsoner
Hudson
Full Member
Joined: 02/06/2011
View Profile
|
During my working life I was responsible to source filters for specific medical equipment. In this job I worked together with filter media developers from Donaldson and 3M (probably the two largest filter media producers in the US. During this work we also talked about K&N filters because I did do some vintage Triump Roadster racing. Different engineers from both companies told me that I should stay away from K&N because of their inferior filtering ability.
|
|
|
427435
Rochester, Mn
Senior Member
Joined: 11/12/2005
View Profile
|
havasu4us wrote:
This is a perfect example of why an individual should investigate a product on their own, not this banter I am seeing. If you don't like a product fine... just do not conflict your dislike with a picture of a tractor and a random statement with no documentation.
If the OP were to state... I have a Napa filter on my used MOHO... should I take it off? You would all come back and give a more positive response, at least not the bashing I see. You might even recommend an AFE, or a Spectre Intake system...
.
And the documentation for Arlen Spicer refuting his original tests is??????
And I wouldn't bash a NAPA filter represented as an OEM replacement.
|
bill h
coastal reconquista
Senior Member
Joined: 08/02/2001
View Profile
|
K&N lets more grit in. Oil analysis will tell you that. So will a white Kleenex wiped inside the air tract right after the K&N. Sometimes you can feel the grit with your fingers.
Two-stroke desert motorcycle racers really didn't like the grit in their needle wrist pin bearings.
NOTE: Any incorrect spelling is intentional to prevent those annoying popups.
84 Barth 30Tag powered by HT502/Thorley/Weiand etc, Gear Vendors OD.
Siamese Calvin and Airedale Hobbes, 4WD Toyota toad
|
down home
south
Senior Member
Joined: 06/01/2008
View Profile
Offline
|
My experience with K&N was with highly modified street gas engines in Mustangs and 4x4s.
All of them had some degree of dusting. When I cleaned the filters and reoiled I had to clean the fine dust out of the throttle body. Imagine what that di to the rings and valves too.
I went back to a 14 in air filter with two Olds air filters on carburator engines and the stock filter on injected engines.
The reason the K&N flows so much better because of less restriction or larger holes in the material that air can enter.
I'll stick to stock filters or if it can be done a larger stock type filter.
If I was building a drag engine or street rod it wouldn't matter as much as the engines get torn down often and not a lot of dirt on cool summer evenings on the boulevards or drag strips.
|
Weathertodd221
FL
Senior Member
Joined: 12/03/2009
View Profile
Offline
|
bill h wrote:K&N lets more grit in. Oil analysis will tell you that. So will a white Kleenex wiped inside the air tract right after the K&N. Sometimes you can feel the grit with your fingers.
Two-stroke desert motorcycle racers really didn't like the grit in their needle wrist pin bearings.
all things equal... K&N specifies a precharger cover for offroad or extremely dusty conditions.
If you operate a vehicle in said conditons and dont take the appropriate precautions...thats your own problem.
My experience... ive never had any problems. Any issues I did have... K&N warrantied it quickly and overnighted parts on 2 occassions.
Lets see.. I can pay $45 for an OEM filter thats recommended to be changed every 20k or buy a K&N good for 1,000,000 miles for $60.
Also as a former dirtbiker... I routinely serviced my bikes airfilter/box by having 2 spares handy. Its an involved process of cleaning the box/element and reoiling. Yes grit got sucked through the OEM or aftermarket filter... hence why you spray oiled the walls/tract so the dirt will stick to it.
|
Don Don
Pleasant Grove, AL {Suburb of Birmingham}
Senior Member
Joined: 05/21/2005
View Profile
Good Sam RV Club Member
|
Waste of Money. Test have proven this time and time again.
|
|
|
|
