[alizain]

I was contemplating using a KNH air filter on my 2006 Taurus. What kind of filter is everyone using and with what results?

 

[rpflloyd]

fram paper filter in my sho. The K&N that was in it when I bought the car is sitting in a bag on the shelf in my garage.

 

[Dave SES]

K & N in all my cars. (Oil Filter, too.)

 

[2000sable]

QUOTE (alizain @ Apr 10 2009, 12:38 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=716741

I was contemplating using a KNH air filter on my 2006 Taurus. What kind of filter is everyone using and with what results?[/b]

Most people use a K&N Type filter. First, they are an oil based filter medium, filter better than a paper filter can, pass volumes more air than a paper filter can and they last the life of your car and only need to be cleaned every 50k miles if that. They pay for themselves in longevity, fuel savings, and a cleaner engine compared to a paper based filter.

Anyone who doesn't use a K&N type filter is a penny wise and pound foolish person.

http://www.knfilters.com/facts.htm

oil/fiber filters are the best filters. No serious car buff would put a paper filter in his car.

 

[alizain]

So what is better , KNH or fram paper filter, and who makes fram paper filters... which ones are better at keeping dirt out?

 

[2000sable]

QUOTE (alizain @ Apr 10 2009, 12:48 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=716759

So what is better , KNH or fram paper filter, and who makes fram paper filters... which ones are better at keeping dirt out?[/b]

If you go paper go cheap. I think all paper filters are a waste of money.

 

[rpflloyd]

Whats better depends on what you want. You want to brag that you have a K&N and have more fine particulates getting through, run it. The claim to horsepower, airflow, etc is all BS marketing hype. The stock paper filter flows more CFMs than your car will need. Sure, K&N will give you a different sound.

Anytime someone does and independent study of K&N the results are always the same ... K&N does not live up to the hype.

Here is some good info. BTW, there was a HUGE to do about Oiled vs paper filters on SHOForum. Some great info there as well.

http://www.nicoclub.com/articles.php?id=180100

 

[Rock strongo]

QUOTE (2000Sable @ Apr 10 2009, 02:37 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=716752

Most people use a K&N Type filter. First, they are an oil based filter medium, filter better than a paper filter can, pass volumes more air than a paper filter can and they last the life of your car and only need to be cleaned every 50k miles if that. They pay for themselves in longevity, fuel savings, and a cleaner engine compared to a paper based filter.

Anyone who doesn't use a K&N type filter is a penny wise and pound foolish person.

http://www.knfilters.com/facts.htm

oil/fiber filters are the best filters. No serious car buff would put a paper filter in his car.[/b]

I'll address a few mistaken assertions here:

1) Most people do not use an oiled air filter. Not even close.
2) K&N filters do not filter better than paper filters. It has been proven many times by independent labs that K&N acheives its greater flow rates by allowing more particulates to pass. Fact.
3) You cannot state how often the filter needs to be cleaned. It is all dependent upon the environmental and operating conditions.
4) A less restrictive air filter will not increase fuel economy in modern, MAF controlled vehicles. Since the computer will adjust the fuel mixture to accomodate incoming air density and flow, you cannot effectively lean out the mixture with a less restrictive air filter. If you dispute this, post evidence that is not from someone who sells oiled filters.
5) How exactly does more particulate entering the intake result in a cleaner engine? It doesn't.

Also, what happened to your statement from another thread that if something was better the auto manfacturer would use it? Why didn't his Taurus come with one if it is better?

If you want to use one, fine by me. Just don't try to justify it with false information.

 

[Dave SES]

QUOTE (Rock Strongo @ Apr 10 2009, 02:37 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=716781

If you want to use one, fine by me.[/b]

I guess since I have a K & N already, I'll keep it. Next time I might re-think the issue. I appreciate both sides of this argument. I wonder if the difference in particles let through one filter, or the difference in airflow through another makes a lot of difference. I always liked the sound of the increased air flow through the K & N. It was like flipping your old air cleaner cover. I really didn't notice a difference on this last one.

 

[the_intimidator_02]

K&N panel filter in mine. It's the same filter that was in my '92 tempo.

 

[rdt320]

fram filter does the job just fine

 

[2000sable]

QUOTE (Dave SES @ Apr 10 2009, 04:10 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=716787

QUOTE (Rock Strongo @ Apr 10 2009, 02:37 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=716781

If you want to use one, fine by me.[/b]

I guess since I have a K & N already, I'll keep it. Next time I might re-think the issue. I appreciate both sides of this argument. I wonder if the difference in particles let through one filter, or the difference in airflow through another makes a lot of difference. I always liked the sound of the increased air flow through the K & N. It was like flipping your old air cleaner cover. I really didn't notice a difference on this last one.
[/b][/quote]

oil media filters do not let more particles through than paper filters. That just isn't true. The fact is oil media filters remove more particles than paper filters do. Google "best air filter for your car review"

K&N type filters, Fram Air Hog or whatever, they are all better than paper filters. Paper filters are spun webs of paper fibers that have less control over the porosity of the media than an oil media filter does. All filters on a ~5micron or less level use weave technology to filter. They do not use holes, they use torturous path. An oil media filter uses the "stickiness" of oil to trap more particles in a thinner less torturous path than paper filters do.

The entire surface of an oil media filter will allow air to pass through. With a a paper filter maybe 50% of the surface is actually pathed. Paper filter pathing is straight up nothing more than use me once and clog me. With an oil based filter the pathing is uniform and one path can remain open longer and accumulate more particles because the path isn't dependant on physical barrier alone, it has oil that can attract and hold the particles.

For someone to say that oil based air filters allow more particles to pass and that is how they increase volume, that's just irresponsible and flat out not true.

 

[skinnyguy59]

QUOTE (2000Sable @ Apr 10 2009, 06:46 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=716801

QUOTE

I guess since I have a K & N already, I'll keep it. Next time I might re-think the issue. I appreciate both sides of this argument. I wonder if the difference in particles let through one filter, or the difference in airflow through another makes a lot of difference. I always liked the sound of the increased air flow through the K & N. It was like flipping your old air cleaner cover. I really didn't notice a difference on this last one.[/b]

oil media filters do not let more particles through than paper filters. That just isn't true. The fact is oil media filters remove more particles than paper filters do. Google "best air filter for your car review"

K&N type filters, Fram Air Hog or whatever, they are all better than paper filters. Paper filters are spun webs of paper fibers that have less control over the porosity of the media than an oil media filter does. All filters on a ~5micron or less level use weave technology to filter. They do not use holes, they use torturous path. An oil media filter uses the "stickiness" of oil to trap more particles in a thinner less torturous path than paper filters do.

The entire surface of an oil media filter will allow air to pass through. With a a paper filter maybe 50% of the surface is actually pathed. Paper filter pathing is straight up nothing more than use me once and clog me. With an oil based filter the pathing is uniform and one path can remain open longer and accumulate more particles because the path isn't dependant on physical barrier alone, it has oil that can attract and hold the particles.

For someone to say that oil based air filters allow more particles to pass and that is how they increase volume, that's just irresponsible and flat out not true.
[/b][/quote]
And on that note, I use a K&N panel filter. No more Fram paper filters for me, they never lasted long and always aloud sand and small particles through to the MAF side of the airbox past the filter. Haven't had any problems with the K&N.

 

[Rock strongo]

QUOTE (2000Sable @ Apr 10 2009, 06:46 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=716801

For someone to say that oil based air filters allow more particles to pass and that is how they increase volume, that's just irresponsible and flat out not true.[/b]

Take a look here, for one:

http://duramax-diesel.com/spicer/index.htm


Now do your own Google search and find plenty more like this. Facts are facts. K&N filters allow more particulates into the engine. Keep in mind that these tests were conducted with the K&N oiled to specification. I've seen plenty that were so over oiled that it had dripped all over the airbox.

Now how about addressing the other fallacies you asserted? Who is irresponsible and spouting false information?

Oh, by the way, did you know that many HEPA filters are made from a paper substrate? No, I guess not.

 

[austex04]

I just use Fram or Motorcraft paper filters. The oil types might filter a little better, but they also can restrict air flow, and can cause problems with MAF sensors since they use oil on the filter media. I just change mine when it starts to look dirty, since a really dirty filter will eventually let dirt bypass the filter. Mine lasts around 20-30k since I don't drive in dusty conditions. A paper Fram filter is around $6 at Walmart. I'm not sold by K&N's claims, maybe if I still had the '77 Grand Marquis I would consider it, since it didn't have a MAF sensor. PS Ford will void your warranty if you use a oil type filter media, so there must be somthing not-so-good about them.

 

[2000sable]

QUOTE (Rock Strongo @ Apr 10 2009, 06:55 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=716812

QUOTE (2000Sable @ Apr 10 2009, 06:46 PM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=716801

For someone to say that oil based air filters allow more particles to pass and that is how they increase volume, that's just irresponsible and flat out not true.[/b]

Take a look here, for one:

http://duramax-diesel.com/spicer/index.htm


Now do your own Google search and find plenty more like this. Facts are facts. K&N filters allow more particulates into the engine. Keep in mind that these tests were conducted with the K&N oiled to specification. I've seen plenty that were so over oiled that it had dripped all over the airbox.

Now how about addressing the other fallacies you asserted? Who is irresponsible and spouting false information?

Oh, by the way, did you know that many HEPA filters are made from a paper substrate? No, I guess not.
[/b][/quote]

HEPA Filters are made of Cellulose Nitrate not paper. They are also staged filters (I'm not talking about the absolute crap you'd see in a Vacuum cleaner). Filtering air is one of the things I do for a living.

Before we get in to a blood feud over this, our fuel filter and fuel will contribute more particles of a larger size to our engine than our air filter (any type) will.

A brand new oil based filter will appear to pass more particulates in particulate testing due to oil loss. When testing oil based filters you can not directly compare things like weights (the oil based filter is going to lose weight as the excess oil comes off), and particulate shed (The ISO tests were never intended for oil based filters and do not account for the oil droplets) because a paper filter is entirely different than an oil based filter. It's comparing apples and oranges.

An oil media filter actually gets better as it is used. A paper filter gets worse as it is used. Comparisons of paper filters to oil based filters after 10 hours of use prove that oil based filters are much better.

The amsoil filter is a damn good cellulose based filter. How about using that?

 

[2000sable]

QUOTE (austex04 @ Apr 11 2009, 03:43 AM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=716889

Ford will void your warranty if you use a oil type filter media, so there must be somthing not-so-good about them.[/b]

Can you find a citation for that? I've never seen this other than as a rumor. I've taken new cars in with a K&N in them for service and it's never been mentioned at the dealership.

 

[mwt]

I quit using air filters. They restrict air flow and you have to keep purchasing them.


Mike
B)

 

[risoworker]

ok in bryan terms:
if k&n filter added more horse power and gained mpg wouldn't every car company out there use it to
make the epa mpg numbers look better to the consumer.

i use fram. tought of buying the k&n but the price would kill me for my cars.

 

[2000sable]

QUOTE (risoworker @ Apr 11 2009, 07:01 AM) index.php?act=findpost&pid=716910

ok in bryan terms:
if k&n filter added more horse power and gained mpg wouldn't every car company out there use it to
make the epa mpg numbers look better to the consumer.[/b]

I personally do not and have not seen an increase in mpg or horse power using an K&N filter. I assume that is because the car isn't designed to use the increased flow or volume. Of course, racing cars use oil media air filters for the the air intake or no filter at all, because of the increase horse power in those situations.

Car makers put a lot of "adequate" stuff on cars for various reason. See, I'm learning. I'd imagine they use the paper filters because they are cheap and good enough to get the car out the door.

Why don't American car makers use a decent transmission cooler on their cars? Same logic as the air filter, I suppose.