@@jacobjames1171 Same, also if you accidentally oil them too much it can hurt a sensor. If I could replace them every time and it be cost effective, I would use them without a doubt.
@@texasbtc not really or depending the driver how u take care ur car…i run K&N for 7 year and still ruuning good for me even i lost 2miles per gallon but its not a big deal and im happy for a few ho😅
I cannot wait to see the results! I have been planning to do something similar but my problem was the sample size. Maybe now since you did it, n=2 so it's more results and we can get even better data! Nice work on the video!
K&N is how I caught a mechanic lying about changing my air filter and charging me $17.00 for it. Got a vehicle inspection, and it clearly says on the air box "DO NOT REMOVE K&N FILTER". He wrote on the bill "changed air filter". When I opened the air box the K&N was still there. I trust mechanics about as far as I can throw them.
Was this a independent mechanic or a car dealership mechanic? Stealerships are notorious for lying and up selling because service advisors get a commission. Who do you think pays for the fancy showroom.
@@ve3xtr Gas station Mechanic(just as bad). I used to drive a telephone truck which needed regular service, you should see a mechanics eyes light up when I'd drive in(Jiffy Lube,Good Year even a Dealerships) for service.
@@urbannpa Oh man, there's the problem right there. The reputable technicians out there don't have to screw anyone over and they certainly don't work at gas stations.
It would be good to see the difference in filtration effectiveness. Living in the driest state on the driest continent, dust ingress has damaged 5 engines in my 48 years of driving. Filtration performance is therefore more important than a tiny performance benefit. A dry paper filter is best because Brownian Motion results in capture of tiny particles by entrapment in the dry fibres. Wet filters do not capture the smallest particles in the same way, resulting in less effective filtration. How about a comparison?
Good point Rolf. The air filters prime job is to filter dust out of the air to protect the engine. K&N exhaustively market their performance improvement and say little about dust capturing ability. This is for good reason. Other tests consistently find K&N to be substandard in their ability to catch dust.
@@anders2821 Not the case at all. Check out actual dust stopping tests on air filters. Dry pleated paper and other woven fibres consistently outperform K&N in the air filters primary function of removing dirt particles.
@@curiositykilledthecat1557 k&n isn't gonna filter as good as dry or stock like paper filters but depending where you live it may be just fine. Dry dusty place it may not be a good idea. Where I live in VA it's not really dry and my engine stays clean I don't get much dust under the hood.
The reason why the dirty filter made a slight improvement over the clean filter is because the souls of the dead bugs have become trapped in the old filter and those trapped souls translate into greater power!
Yeah don't forget the souls of unknown hard labor slaves that work hardest with lowest salary just to make those cheap yet claimed premium replacement oem filter.. their souls also contribute for the extra slight performance gain vs the stock oem filter lol
After years with a reusable, washable Filter I noticed how actually bad my Engine ran over time. At the beginning it was nice and had good performance, I changed back to a paper filter from a good brand. My observation was that no matter how good the filter was oild, cleaned, washed, whatever, it let through bigger particles and introduced more wear to my engine. I ditched it, the benefits did in no way outweigh the disadvantages. Wouldn't buy again, just keep your stock filter in good condition and change it once in a while.
I had something similar happen. I added a cold air intake to my Cummins diesel engine and it came with a K&N performance filter. I kept it clean and oiled and in good condition. Lately I noticed my fuel mileage while towing was getting worse. I opted to change back to a paper filter and my fuel mileage increased by almost 3 mpg. Since I tow 600+ miles at a time this was a significant improvement.
Too much oil on the filter probably. Doesn’t need anything but a light spray. Nothing against you or anything but I bet a brand new filter properly oiled would give you back that mpg.
Merlin D. Wizzard how can you say it’s the same performance when the entire video proves there is a performed upgrade with the k and n? Would I spend the money for this tiny upgrade? No I would not. But the video makes its pretty clear performance does improve with the better filters.
@@merlind.wizzard3558 It just showed on this specific car a K&N is 3.5% more powerful vs a BRAND NEW oem filter as in perfectly clean, no "maintenance" is gonna get it cleaner then brand new, and the tests also showed the un-maintained filter didnt hamper performance at all, im not a K&N fan and i dont think putting the filter on is gonna net and noticeable difference by itself , the stickers are just worn to death its like an ugly mole to have a K&N sticker these days... but even though i wouldnt buy one since im not into HP gains the video clearly shows it is superior atleast for the car shown so why say its not and a clean "maintained" filter is the best...watch the video again clean filter vs dirty filter no difference, KnN 3.5% difference in pretty accurate testing both dyno and practical runs
I also would’ve liked to see an MPG test. I changed my old 93 civic beater to a k&n cone filter with an autozone shortram back in my ricer days and my mpg went from 30 average to 40. At first I thought it was a fluke but it was consistently 5-10 mpg better per tank with the same daily driving. To this day I’m still not really sure why it jumped up that much but my guess is they come from the factory with a really restrictive filter.
Dad. I’ve recorded huge mpg gains in every vehicle that I’ve used a K&N filter. The power gains have been almost undetectable in most vehicles except my 2014 1500.
For poops and hahas I tested out the K&N filters in my SHO and I was honestly shocked. Granted that my car is tuned and we are talking about a car with 146 hp to the crank to a car that makes 360 to the crank (stock) I tuned it with the factory air box. My cars tuner measure 0-60 times and the K&N filter made a fairly significant difference. By that I mean it shaved about .4 seconds on average off of my 0-60 times. That could just mean the OE filter was really restrictive or it could just mean that the K&N filters really are just that superior. Either way it's a cheap mod and will make alot more of a difference than a heart shaped fake tow hook lol
@@Thejackedshredder no he’s right the engine running smoother and breathing easier makes your mpg go up but I couldn’t tell you how much it really does improve mpg
Not that significantly since the MAF sensor will input to the ECU the reduced airflow due to a dirty airfilter and the ECU will cut the fuel back accordingly and vice-versa. In the old days, yes certainly with a carburettor.
Sometimes a smaller engine model may do less MPG than the larger engine model simply because the small engine has to be pushed hard all the time. Typical example first gen Mercedes B class with the 1.5 litre engine (way to small for that car) does less MPG than the 1.7 litre the next model up. I think this is one of the reasons people in the UK assume that American cars must get the most appalling fuel economy imaginable but actually they are not having to work very hard to do daily driving
maybe another 1 - 3 HP if that only because it removes the charcoal restriction. Too many people have debunked cold air vs current air filters do very little if anything.
@WeAreWatching Yu I just watched their video on CAI with the Honda S2000, they first tested the car on a dyno with the CAI then with the factory airbox. With the factory airbox they lost "5 kilowatts of power" which converts to 6.7 horsepower. In other words they gained about 6.7 horsepower with the CAI. not much at all but it is a gain.
It would have been nice to see dyno numbers for no filter scenario (open pipe) to see how much of a restriction the filters introduce. Maybe something for a future video.
@@PhxitTV i totaly agree with you. but i meant on the dyno in a controlled environment where the chance of something getting sucked into the engine is none existent.
@@handyman3320 yeah there is no harm in running without a filter if you are standing still. the filter is there for when you get dust in the air while driving and stuff.
Engineering Explained - now find a way to give us the most useful information and that would be filtration efficiency vs airflow. Then we can pick the one that flows the best but still protects the engine. That is the whole purpose of an engine air filter after all.
@@mrsmith8436 agreed. The highest performance filter hits the particulate removal criteria (and total filter load criteria) at the lowest pressure drop. If you dont care about filtration, why run a filter at all?
Unfortunately, it looks like this test could have performance bias. The driver of the car needs to be blinded to which air filter they are testing in each run, or they can consciously (or unconsciously) alter the results. This is particularly important in a test like this where the numbers are so close that even a slight lift-off on the throttle will make a significant difference.
I used K&N years with no problems. Oiled it every 50k miles or so. Read comments about dirt in the intake after the K&N. Wiped mine with my finger and it was perfectly clean. I bought a few paper filters but am thinking about going back to the K&N when those are used up.
"Do not use K&N filters in anything you care about! My brother's friend's uncle's neighbor knows a guy, who used a K&N filter in his truck, and suddenly his refrigerator stopped working!" 😅
@@maximusmax4557 Wow! U know th@ clown 2? He confessed it was because he kept blow drying the ice maker! But after using synthetic grease on the muffler bearings on th@ Tesla the K&N breathed hard & launched a wheel stand!! It was right after the keg stand!!!
The best youtuber out there, i remember 2 years ago, in my automobile mechanic school, on of my teacher showed one of your videos as a demo...from montreal canada
You'll notice K&N says "designed to" and they carefully avoid the actual claim of increasing anything. They confirmed that with me on the phone, they wouldn't guarantee any gain. A performance filter may also pass larger grit particles, wearing pistons and rings and contaminating oil. Remember the auto maker spends lots of money trying to make the highest power (EPA MPG) without causing that unacceptable engine wear.
You can always put another OEM filter in parallel (if you have the space, of course) so the filters will see only half of air at peak performance, thus, passing trought the filter easier, or at least I think that that would work...
@acynder1 is right on the mark, if you think your air filter is costing you power get a larger air filter. K&N says that filtering efficiency is 99.7%. Very nice. Except ALL other filter makers are above 99.9%. Flip the numbers over - K&N allow 300% MORE dirt. This is verified by user reports of dirt on the INSIDE of their air ducting downstream (after the air is filtered) of the filter. As far as I’m concerned, this video is an embarrassing fail. Look away, it’s shameful.
If it's designed to do it and it does not, that is illegal to sell as it's false advertising. Do you not think these companies test their filters, to see if they filter adequately and whether the oil becomes tacky enough to catch dirt and not blow into the air system? Did you see oil and dirt all over the charcoal filter too?
I have used K&N for years. Twice a year I pull it, clean it and re-oil it. Acceleration and MPG has always been better with the K&N. Many nay sayers will disagree but I am satisfied that the initial investment was worth it.
ive been using one on my bike for 8yrs...its filter element were never re- oiled other than dry cleaning with vaccuum cleaner...i notice lately its resin rubber perimeter lining had begun to crack, but the element itself is intact
I have ran K&N filters for over 10 years. They are reusable, have a million mile warranty, and obvious a great buy. Having a reusable air filter saves alot of money over time for sure.
Jason. I used to design and build clean rooms. If you want actual filtration data very willing to work with you on this! It’s quite easy to use validated equipment I have on a test rig to help you answer that question.
Christopher Laman please do the validation air filtering. I am much more interested in how clean the air going to my engine is than a miserable 2% increase in horsepower or a 2% decrease in time to speed.
as a tech anytime a clogged up mass airflow came in and obviously failed it had a k&n. they’re like having no filter. I believe engine masters did a great filter dyno test…I wouldn’t use k&n even on a yrack car but thats just me
Yup. They are almost always over oiled and that oil end up coating the MAF sensor. GM has a section in their owners manuals that warns not to use "oiled air filters"
@@TofuInc even if they are oiled correctly, they don't filter as well, and the filter is there to clean the air, not to be a speed part. I can see why GM warns against them. If the performance advantage didn't have the trade off of not cleaning as well, every manufacturer would use them.
@@richardelliott8352 Not true. Headers are speed parts. When was the last time u bought a ride w/factory installed headers? What brand claims 100% filtr8ion? Oil filters even best out @ 99.9%. Do the maintenance intervals folks & even if using aftermarket items inspect, clean & or replace.
Great video, very interesting. I've been rallying for years. I've had all the K &N stuff, it blocks quickly, and will soon starve the engine of its breathing. Stock filters work best, easy to clean, easy to replace, and cheap. Unless you want a good look under the hood ( Bonnet) stick with stock stuff. If you want an extra 5 to 10 HP free, wiring your Alternator with a switch so you can turn it off ( World rally cross cars run with no alternator just a newly charged battery) will give you that. We have it on the rally car, and turn it off in the stage, turn it on for road sections.
the K&N also is washable. I gained about 10bhp from swapping to K&N in my audi A5 3.0 tdi, could probably gain more if I modded it by doing the case removal. I have washed it 2 times since I bought it and honestly, it already paid itself compared to having it changed. (albeit audi service actually does it for a flat rate included in their oil filter/oil service)
@@MrBlazzin101 all I can tell you is that after 180-200k km with a K&N mass airflow air filter, my 2008 matrix began turning over while being left in gear on a slight slope... yes I did inspect/clean/oil it every 2-4k km when needed
@@Misiekgren yeah see, that's why I don't even want to try and mess around with the k&n. I think I'm just gonna leave the regular filter. Better for me in the long run.
Probably one of THE most helpful videos EVER. I found out aftermarket cold air intakes quite often actually lose power. Mainly because the engineers who built the car calculated the best amount of air volume needed in an air box. Changing that can hurt performance. So can having an open air intake that sucks in tons of hot air vs cold air. The K&N drop in filter and a larger diameter intake tube connected to a factory air box is absolutely the way to go!
@@franchisefred4066 I found that out about a year ago as well when doing my research. Just never bothered to come back to TH-cam to edit a comment on a video.
@@franchisefred4066 Not if you don’t over-oil it. A thorough cleaning, followed by a thorough drying, then proper oiling and you’ll get over 215k of reliable service.
I would say the reason for the Carquest "premium" filter's performance is the higher number of pleats and greater surface area of the filter material compared to OEM.(Can't say anything else without knowing the types and thickness of the materials)
Quite possible, the flow at each fold in the paper should be higher, so more folds, more flow. This does depend on whether the flow profile is laminar or turbulent in the intake though - you'd expect it to be be laminar given the increase of csa compared to intake pipe. The other thing to consider in safety and reliability terms is the possibility of the filter collapsing at higher flow rates, that's why you more for OEM, because you have that guarantee.
Yes, they work. I have had a full K&N intake and filter system in my Jeep Grand Cherokee for well over a year now. I document my gas milage and usage for work daily. I not only get better gas MPG, I get a noticable increase in passing accel and HP.
What you are not "feeling" in your daily commute is the additional engine wear accumulation from your K&N air filters lower initial efficiency. The K&N layered cotton gauze media is WIDE OPEN (low efficiency) until it accumulates a dust cake. Once the filter has caught some stuff after a couple thousand miles, it's efficiency finally rises close to the OEM requirements. However during that cake build, the K&N filter is allowing large & fine micron-size contaminants into your engine intake. K&N typically markets it's air flow performance (low restriction), but that's because the media is very open. The oiled K&N filters also throw your mass air flow sensor off and will let your engine run at peak air/fuel optimization.
I've seen filtration efficacy tests of K&N vs paper air filters and what I would say is that Jason's guess as to why the K&N filter might be flowing more air is true. If filtration efficacy and engine protection are of paramount importance to you you would do well to research the topic carefully and not just look at airflow restriction tests. Another point to consider if you do chose to use the K&N air filter is to be careful not to over oil the filter medium, as excess oil might get sucked out of the filter and end up coating the MAF sensor downstream of the filter and cause erroneous airflow calculations in the ECU.
And further...to reduce air flow restriction while still maintaining filtration efficacy you would have to increase filter size. So you would use the same filter material and same material thickness but increase the dimensions of the filters "face."
Literally am cleaning my MAF right now and throwing my K&N in the trash from it fouling my MAF and throwing a lean fuel code. Never had this issue on any of my other vehicles I have ran K&Ns on but my Tacoma's MAF no likey.
@@herrerajoey2 Throw that Tacoma in the trash, lol. My ‘02 GTP with 215k miles has no problem with it’s K&N drop in filter. One time I apparently over-oiled it and a few days later set a code. User error; myself. That was over 200K ago. I learned my lesson and it’s been fine ever since.
@@markgasdaglis5109 ...which is why that CarQuest paper filter probably had better performance than OEM - it had more "folds" in the filter material, i.e. greater surface area.
I bought a K&N filter not because I cared about more power, but mainly because I thought it would save in the long run since it's washable and reusable. Now I have some second thoughts if it doesn't filter out contaminants as well as regular filters as I tend to keep my cars a long time. But no problems to report so far after 190,000km.
ProjectFarm did a video on filters as well the less restrictive don’t filter as good and allow in dirt, the K and N was the least restrictive but allowed a lot more dirt
@Kong〉Godzilla you are missing the point, cleaning you air filter does not help your engine taking inn less dirt, only more air. Long story short, if you drive in dirt/dust don't use "performance"/high flow filters...
Rubbish. You don't need a restrictive filter to stop dirt. Part of what makes K&N more "open" is the fact they have greater surface area. So it will flow more even with the same pore size as a more restrictive filter. Plus the oil on the K&N traps dirt that might otherwise fit through the media.
Being in air quality most of my life it is my experience that with a given size of a filter and I’m talking square inches a filter area.... of these 4 tested filters. The one with the best airflow will be the worst in particle filtering
Food for thought. Great comment and definitely one worth thinking about. Thanks for the info Ron. This should be the top comment as it's the most useful.
If you look at 1:06 you can see the aftermarket filter has 25 folds compared to the 15 of the OEM. This means it has more surface area. This way the engine is not working so hard to pull air to the engine plus it has the same filtering capabilities. They were able to put more square inches as you say into a smaller area. As for the K&N, I have one but I would not bet it was better at filtering.
Great informative video! There's a big missing piece though when it comes to long term effects of less filtration on the engine. The internet is full of people with opinions on this, but finding hard data is frustratingly difficult.
Its simple,k&n short term gain is a few HP. Long term is HP loss because of less filtration. I race cars for over 20 years, and we do use k&n filters but clean/oil or chance them every race. Nobody i know uses Them in their daily cars. Hope this helps.
Exactly. Want best performance, remove your filter completely and have some sort of forced intake for the air. Numbers will go up, but so will the likelihood of damage.
Hard data is what the manufacturers generate and use , and why the select paper filters. They don't just make stuff up or play spin the wheel when designing the car's systems .
@@richardelliott8352 they use paper because it's cheap and disposable, can force the buyer to spend more money AND spend less on manufacturing the cars
Cold air intakes are little more than a gimic at best with manufactures advertising false and doctored numbers about their performance. It's been independently lab proven that the extremely minimal gains (1-4 hp at best and not even noticeable) aren't worth their cost even though cold air intake systems are relatively cheap.
Dave Webster Personally I won’t run a K&N unless it was just on a drag car or something, I’ve bough a few cars people had put them in & the intakes were abnormally dirty as a result, I tossed them & put in a paper Wix. The K&N oil coating tends to wreck sensors too.
Matt's Garage Yep. K&N improves performance by being a less restrictive, but also less effective filter. The ultimate in this quest is no filter at all. That will maximize your performance. The question is: how much engine life are you will to trade for performance. I stay with stock filters as they perform quite well and generally provide very good filtration. And no messy oil to deal with.
I feel like the CarQuest one would fall under the the 'just right' category -- it gives a slight performance increase, probably filters better than stock or the K&N filters, and doesn't break the bank. I'll definitely be waiting for a follow-up video on this :)
@ISSA VIBEZ From what i've read/seen/experienced, that's not the case ! Everything is usually as clean as with the stock filter. I'm not saying it's not happening, just it's not noticeable while cleaning the airbox with a rag, it's still perfectly clean.
@@Totone56 Same here, have cleaned my air box carefully with a white cloth after a long service, it was very very clean The K&N gets even more efficient when it become a bit more dirty. The filtering surface increases with the help of all the particles that stucked in the filter oil.
@@ronbishop1739 smart thinking but when i replaced mine, it was for a used car just bought and I needed it! Then I thought about when I had to clean it, even tho it would be a long time! I seen a guy on youtube who stranded himself by doing that! Lol
I have used K&N for over 15 years. Never had an "engine wear issue". I do notice better throttle response & and, as indicated, a slightly better running engine. Whether it's worth the $$$ is up to you. Anyone who's leasing, save your money.... (Note, do not expect an MPG increase, you may, or you may not- that's a crap shoot, but less air restriction & good plugs do generally help)
I used to use K&N filters, but had an issue with the filter allowing oil to migrate to the MAF sensor. This was a new filter, not one that had been over-oiled. It caused my vehicle run terribly. The error codes on my tahoe didn't help diagnose the problem, and even a dealership where I previously worked couldn't figure out why I was having so many issues. I've since gone back to paper filters.
Think I will stay with Delco; Not familiar with this issue and just had MAS blown out by McNamara when he spray gum out on an Idle air bypass solenoid so with this and just installed Iridium distributor cap I had not heard of oiling dry air filter since the 1957 265 Air over Oil thing; Static pressure drop does matter as per Mr Prudhomme and velocity - the filter looks big enough to me 01 Silverado W
I remember figuring out how much cfm that my car needed and ( after calling K&N) finding out the OEM style K&N filter cfm wasn't going to be high enough for a 2.3 Quad 4. I went to a 4.5" cone filter later and used a nitrile connector. Car ran way better. It wasn't K&N's fault, Gm made the OEM filter housing too small for the engine.
The carquest filter, though less expensive, has many more pleats affectively increasing the filter surface area which allows for the increased air flow. Stick with the cheap dry filter. K&Ns are easy to over saturate with oil which can cause mass air flow sensor damage.
eureka! thats gives me a great idea!! if we make a transparent airbox exposed to sunlight and we put some plants inside, it gives off oxygen in the daytime and enrichens the engine intake box...more oxygen means more power!!
My first thought would be that having more pleats with the Car Quest filter means more surface area to pull air through, making it more efficient. Likewise the K&N filter has a lot of pleats, but also a less dense filter material makes it easier for air to pass through. This material may also make it easier for small particles of dirt to pass through...
Spot on assessment. More pleats = more surface area = more air flow. Also, K & N filters definitely allow more contaminants to pass through, including the oil they use on the element. I ruined a Nissan MAF sensor in a 300zx by installing a K & N filter. It was an expensive lesson to learn just trying gain a minimal amount of power.
@@TnDAtkinson I heard this before, but wasn't sure if it was true. What filter do you currently use. I have a K&N on my 4Runner and thought about replacing it, because I wasn't sure it was the best filter
The beauty of the K&N is that it'll pay for itself. I've been running one in my F-150 for 17 years and it works just fine. The trick is to oil it LIGHTLY on the intake side only. The mass inflow sensor never gets dirty. If I'm going to be driving on a dusty road for awhile I'll swap it with an OEM paper filter. I take great care of my truck and I think the K&N is a great value.
@@jacobrobles688 It appears you've never owned one? You buy the filter and a can of the K&N spray oil. They sell it in a kit. Look up "How to oil K&N filter" on Google or your preferred search engine.
@@byronlemay2166 thank you very much. I’m going to buy an oil filter and change it myself for the first time today. I know it’s not very hard, just never done it. I appreciate it
I know with gas engines the K&N gums up the MAP sensor with the oil and many people don't know that and clean it off frequently they can permanently screw their gas mileage because that sensor controls the air flow and if it gets bad you MPG gets bad
Very cool video. 2.5% isn't much, but cool to see that performance filters do have some improvement on performance. It is still a larger factor of improvement than some very expensive modifications.
2.5% is actually quite a bit. If you think about it like 40 yard times. Someone running 4.7 sec 40 yard dash vs 4.5 sec is a good bit of difference. That difference only gets exaggerated as speeds increase. Losing a 1/4 mile by 1/2 a second looks pretty bad
The main reason I used a K&N on my '01 Kia Sephia was not for a hp boost (I mean, it's a 1.8l KIA...) it was for the longevity and reusablility of the filter. Lasted for as long as I had the car.
@@pyro5624.if you only expect your civic to last 10 years K&n good choice if you want it to last more than 10 years in the case of a 4th generation Toyota Camry 4cyl that can last 450 thousand miles stick with OEM I had a 2000 Honda civic lx and the OEM filter from the Honda dealer totally outperformed the k&n crap k&n actually destroyed my 1995 Toyota Camry 4cyl is at 225 thousand miles right now but it's on its way out because of damage to one of the cylinders because all that dirty air that k&n allows to get in I have a 1998 Toyota Camry Le 4cyl and I'm sticking with the OEM denso air filter I want my 450 thousand miles out of it right know it has 110 thousand miles I expect at least 300 thousand miles more from it it has zero leaks and still runs like brand new it handles speeds of over 90 miles in the freeway like nothing I haven't try 100 miles because the freeway traffic is pretty bad lol.
@@pyro5624 . What year is it and what is the mileage on it too . My civic was a 2000 which supposed to be LAST REAL GOOD CIVIC now my reason for selling this car had nothing to do with the K&n filter the OEM simply outperformed K&n I would even say that K&n rob my car of horsepower now for your civic to be even considered in the class of the 3d and 4th generation Toyota Camry it has to last you at least 400 thousand miles K&n did not destroyed my civic it was simply outperformed by the OEM filter the 1995 Toyota Camry that K&n filter destroyed it wasn't my choice the previous owner had that filter without cleaning it God knows how long but 222 thousand miles for a Toyota Camry is unacceptable the car still running lol I just don't like how it runs it already passed the smog check at a star station here in California yeah it might be true you can't destroy a 3d and 4th generation Toyota Camry but if it doesn't run smooth it's time to retire the car.
It would have been useful to have two bases...the OE filter, and NO filter at all. By having no filtration (and minimising Air flow reduction) you could get an idea of the trade off between restriction and power. As you said, you didn’t test filter efficiency...but no one would choose to drive around in a car with no filter at all, so it’s really important to know how well each filter actually works. For me, living in a dusty rural environment, I’ll always choose filtration capability over claimed power gains.
Actually, that type of testing rarely works. Unless the car is tuned speed density from the factory, it will run terrible or barely at all. Wouldn't be a good test.
Obviously it’s only a marginal change, but considering how ridiculously easy swapping out an air filter is, that’s actually pretty impressive. Whether or not it’s worth paying 2x (or more) for the slight bump in performance is up to you. Perhaps the Carquest filter (or similar one) is a nice sweet spot between small increase in performance for little to no more cost. Anyway, great video!
@@donkeykong1234 - You also have to spend money for the cleaning fluid (basically kerosene) and oil to re-oil the filter. Then, what do you do with the dirty kerosene without adding to environmental pollution? K&N is the "gift" that keeps on "giving".
@@daveinwla6360 even with that the cost is still offset over the long term since those products are cheap and I guarantee that little bit of kerosene is the least of our pollution problems
@@tobythenewguy6188 I bought the drop in K&N filter for my 5.0 F150 and its a dry filter. It say's do not use the K&N cleaning kits, its just a rinse with the hose filter.
@@KingOfShenanigan Preignition is auto-ignition of the air/fuel mixture before the spark plug fires. The auto-ignition occurs at a location in the cylinder outside of the controlled flame front from spark ignition. Similarly, detonation is auto-ignition of fuel, usually after the spark plug fires. Like preignition, detonation occurs outside of a controlled flame front from the spark plug. The term detonation is often used by racers as both preignition (before the spark), as well as uncontrolled burning after the spark.
@@kylebutler7142 okay that's interesting. I really appreciate the explanation. One more follow up question if you don't mind. How do you know if detonation is happening? Do you just feel it or hear it, or do you have to do a specific test?
I thought about it, but the consequences outweigh the benefits haha. Even the brand new filters had a few bugs and debris on them after the pulls, and I'd rather that stuff not end up in my engine haha.
I’m only 1:40 into the video and had to comment. My last truck with a V8 and 12 years old had a K&N air filter in as soon as I broke the engine in. I had a friend who had a speed shop with a dyno and we ran it with the stock filter and the K&N. I don’t remember the exact numbers but I got a 19 horsepower increase and a 24 ft pound increase in torque. Not a lot on the dyno but on the road you noticed the difference. Especially when towing. In twelve years I only cleaned it once and it didn’t really need it then, but it was extremely low mileage when I sold it. Ron
If you look online there was also a test already done about all kinds of different filters there is one that is almost as good as the K&n but they were also testing to see how many Particles all the filters would let through and the k&N let thru Way more particles which is much harder on your motor
Good stuff! Another variation of this test that I would be curious to see, is to measure the actual filtration capabilities of the filters. Some thing that could measure particle sizes that pass through, so that we can see the trade-off of power/ dirt that gets into the engine.
Good point. Because generally, permeability is permeability. You'd think that regardless of make, a 2um hole will let through the same amount of air no matter whose filter its located in. Obviously with warranty implications, OEM filters are going to be more aggressive in capturing suspended particles than a gofast drop-in. Its hard to find data about the flow characteristics of different filter medias though.
“Randomizing” run sequence for the real road test: “randomize” only make sense, if we’re doing multiple rep’s of each condition. Otherwise, if only run each condition one time, whatever the randomly chosen sequence is still just one sequence - randomizing did not help even out anything. If each condition had 3 iterations, then we could look at stdev within each group. That enables a comparison between conditions, whether the 0.05 second difference we thought we saw, is meaningful at all from perspective of signal-over-noise.
@@postalpancho I’ll give some examples: Tests that are run in controlled environment, you’d randomize the run sequence. Each “condition” would be run three times. And it might look like: A, c, b, d, c, a, d, b, etc... There are even statistical software that will help you generate a randomized sequence. You wouldn’t change the filter mid-run. You’d put the filter (of what you suppose to test) into the filter box, make the run, capture the data, and that’s that test, move to next sequence. Yes, a pain in the rear. But that’s what’s needed for a non-biased true-comparative rest. Why each condition should have multiple repeat? Imagine this: say you used filter A for your daily driving on Monday, and it performs “80” (whatever that means). Then on Wednesday the same filter scores “90” in the same benchmark. So is filter A really an 80, or 90? If a third data point is at 85, then overall Filter A performs 85, +/- 5 (uncertainty). You’d want to capture that type of data across ALL your test setups, meaning all the filters. If Filter B scores 86, +/- 7, then is Filter B really better than Filter A? In that case, I’d say they’re equivalent to each other. Any difference between the two is not statistically significant. If you use the same test methodology, and a Filter C gives 50 +/- 5, then we CAN say Filter C sucks vs A & B. We can also say the “noise” in the test has being relatively consistent from one filter to another. If filter D gives 100 +/ 30. Then Filter D *might* have a higher average score (100), BUT it has a lot of variability vs all other filters using the same test method. Therefore, this increase in variability is NOT due to test methodology, but due to a shitty Filter D. But without at least 3 data points per filter, you wouldn’t have known that about Filter D. In fact, if Filter D’s first score was 130, you’d think it is the best filter and ran your conclusion that way. Or, if Filter D first score was 70, you’d have put Filter D in 3rd place, thinking it is “better” than Filter C. But, knowing the wide variation, we’d be cued to ask why. Upon further investigation, we might find Filter C is made of garbage paper, and air movement is enough to blow a hole though it. 130 is a big hole. 100 is a medium hole. 70 is a small hole. So Filter D is garbage. And even Filter C is better than D. But again, without minimum 3 data points per condition, we would not have known that. In real life, whether you are in a lab, or in a factory testing a new component installed to a manufacturing line, we seldom have the luxury to run the ideal test sequence. (Takes away production time from the line, consumes time & raw materials during test, etc). So sometimes you’ll find experienced test designer cutting corners, leaning on their past knowledge of similar materials, and making assumptions where they don’t get to run & obtain the new data. Sometimes this works well. Sometimes this blows up in their face. Example: Space shuttle booster rocket’s rubber seal, at what exact temperature does the seal lose its pliability, and no longer able to make an effective seal? Because of the rheology of rubber, this is never an exact temperature point. But were enough tests conducted, to provide a “danger cold” temperature range for this particular rubber formulation? So if shuttle had being sitting outdoor overnight at colder than the start of that temp range, launch needs to be postponed until the entire shuttle had sat in warmer temperature for at least another X hours...
@@moonshiner0197 If the video would caveat this was a crude test, ballpark figure, then yes I agree with you. But the video used big words like “correlate” between “dyno vs real world”, trying to pass off as a valid engineering test setup. In addition, attempts to be a head-to-head product competition. With that perspective, then no, the test setup and analysis is not congruent with what the video claims to be. It all depends on the context. Take the stock filter for example: From old/used to new/clean, we actually saw a DECREASE in performance of -0.5% If we assume for a moment that -0.5% was “real”, then the video comparing from stock new filter (Clean) to Car Quest Filter obtained a +1% performance gain, that claim is now bogus. Why? Batch to batch difference in the stock filter is already more than 0.5%. And if we did the N=3 for each condition, we will likely find the test method variability itself in the 1~2% range. If so, then the K&N filter’s “better” performance of 2% is within noise, therefore not truly “better”. Why else does randomizing & multiple repeat matter? Look at roughly 6:48 for the sunlight & shadow angle. Shadow was casted at about a 60-degree angle, very slanted. If this was in the late-afternoon / early-evening, and K&N was the last filter in the test, it got the benefit of cooler air and higher air density. Again, context matters. We already have many product manufacturers making biased fake testing & dubious claims on their product. Independent 3rd-party testers like this video should be more neutral in its test setup and analysis.
I put a K&N filter in my 4 cyl truck about 12 years ago and noticed quite a difference in performance, but the filter I replaced was really dirty. Great product imhop.
I put a k&n on my 87 grand national and it made a pretty good difference but the biggest difference i felt is when I put it on my 1996 impala the throttle response was night and day
To get more air to flow requires larger passage ways through the filter. The larger passage ways also allow dirt in. If you have a turbo, a K&N will chew up the turbo wheel. Use at your own risk.
Man, this is the best test I've ever seen.. Simple and clear.. So, I think that it worth to buy a K&N filter.. Thanks for answering this ancient question..
I ran k&n for years on and off road and never really had any problems but moving to a rural and dusty location and rebuilding engines on a regular basis including my own, I’ve found that they aren’t as effective as advertised in dirt retention! If you want a real air filter and don’t want dust in your engine try uni filter! I Won’t go back to anything else! My filter is rear of the cabin and I drive on dirt often with a ute and with a little extra hp there’s a lot of dust to say the least! And none of it is in my motor!
Initially thought this was going to be a fake test (real commercial) for K&N air filters. Extremely pleased to see a real scientific study done. Will be subscribing to your channel.
Increases hp, even without air filter you can increase even more hp, but KN filter don´t filter the polution as the other filters... K&N filter needs a special oil-spray to impregnate the filter and stop the dust... I don´t recomend k&n filter unless you want to kill your engine.
@Mr. Morningstar You did not perceived loss because you don´t have two exact cars to do the experiment, one with normal filter and the other with k&n filter, and after that, at 280.000 miles, check compressions and dyno them and see that the car with k&n filter, did lost much more torque and horse power than the other car with the normal filter... Thats why you did not perceived any loss, because you can´t compare nothing.
@@Shooter-zy2oe i´m not interested in destroying my car to get 2-3hp on a 1.3 tons car.... If you are curious go ahead and tell us the experience about puting more dust into the engine don´t cause any problem... I´ll wait here.
I have had K&N filters in my vehicles for years. I want the engine breathe easily. I also put new exhaust systems on and adding an inch in diameter. These two modifications help quite a bit. I saw a 4mpg increase in our pickup by adding the K&N and going to a larger exhaust.
Whether the K&N filter will help, and how much it can help, depends on the vehicle. The part that isn't a variable is how well they filter. I've never seen a dirty intake tract with a stock or stock replacement filter and have never seen a clean one with a K&N.
Excess oil from the filter gets sucked into the intake duct and traps dirt. It's better, cheaper, and easier to just buy OEM or premium non-oiled filters. And let's not forget that you have to clean, dry, and re-oil K&N style filters.... I don't have time for that or the extra expense. I'm sticking to OEM air filteration.
I've been using K&N for the last 30 years. Never had a problem. Just don't over oil them. You only have to clean them every 4-5 years unless you are driving through dusty conditions all the time. In the long run they are less maintenance and lower cost plus you do get a small performance boost.
Bad decision regardless, it allows more dust through and coats your sensors and intake with a thing layer of oil over time. All for a 2-4hp gain? Gotta think smart here folks. Unless you're programming your vehicle for 91 or 93 octane tune, there isnt a real point in shortening your engines life span for that 4hp
Keep in mind the K & N is washable/reuseable. You can normally go about twice as far on a K&N compared the average paper filter, and their guarantee for 10-years/1,000,000 warranty (doubtful they've ever had anyone come back at 999,999 miles complaining their air filter doesn't work anymore! lol). Over the lifetime of a vehicle they more than pay for themselves, as long as you're conscientious enough to clean/lube them when needed.
Very useful video. Also one thing you didn't mention is the performance filters from k&n normally come with a lifetime warranty. So that's another cost saving to bear in mind.
Thanks to the K&N filter I recovered 5hp of my detuned BMW N52, and the engine breathes so much better (smoother idle). The acceleration is more linear and dude you feel it past 100kmh. The car air filter housing has inner dirt traps and has a bent inlet duct which makes big dirt particles impossible to find their way to the engine. I don t mind replacing the Filter after only 50K kms.
I trashed my k&n after I saw how much crud and sediment was building in the intake plenum after just a few weeks. If u plan on keeping the car/truck throw it away.
But… how well does the filter actually filter the air that goes into the engine? Isn’t that it’s actual job? I don’t care about a filter that increases power but will suck in anything smaller than a bird…..
OEM filters are designed with the longevity of your engine in mind. Yes, they're restrictive but that's because they're doing what they're designed to do, filter.
To get any kind of significant increase in performance from a filter you'd have to go with a cone filter and an intake relocation kit. The cone allows more air to flow through the filter at once and relocating it allows you to pull cooler air. You're not going to see any kind of perceptible difference by just sticking a flat filter in the stock intake box.
Almost all factory air boxes I have seen have a vent tube underneath that pulls air from the front of vehicle and outside air. Most automakers have done their homework
cold air intakes aren't really worth it on modern engines. modern engines are designed to allow for plenty of air. unless you're upgrading your turbo, fuel system, etc then there's no point to a cold air intake "upgrade".
![The ULTIMATE Air Filter Test [Engineer Tested]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/RdbFAG5xbyY/mqdefault.jpg)
Did you try slapping on the k&n sticker on the car? +15 hp i heard.
There is no way that's true, you are thinking of supercharged decal
No, each sticker is only +5
i tried on mine, gotten only 1.5 hp more on crank. How many of these you used?
i put 32 sunoco stickers on my bumber n swear my accord hits 10’s now
stickers can make any car go faster!
12:55 for the answer
Thank you sir🙏🏻
Thank you bro!
Fosty not the hero we deserved , but the hero we need
Nice one bro
Thank you kind sir. I just can't finish any of his videos.
Finally! Scientific proof that my Hyundai Accent with a parts store air filter is a sleeper! Thanks for the confirmation Jason!
you killed me lol 🤣😂
You got a legit rally car right there bro!
I mean, Hyundai did have Accents in WRC once. So... there were Accent rally cars = Accents are rally cars = I drive a rally car!
I have one too with a k&n lmao read my mind😂😂😂
XD dead haha
I always run K&N not so much for performance, but the fact you can wash them and reuse them over and over.
I stopped using them because I got sick of waiting from them to dry.
@@jacobjames1171 damn talk about inpatient
@@TwistahsWorld it's not like it's a $200+ per purchase issue, though. I'd prefer not having to worry about too much or too little oiling after
@@jacobjames1171 Same, also if you accidentally oil them too much it can hurt a sensor. If I could replace them every time and it be cost effective, I would use them without a doubt.
@@texasbtc not really or depending the driver how u take care ur car…i run K&N for 7 year and still ruuning good for me even i lost 2miles per gallon but its not a big deal and im happy for a few ho😅
I cannot wait to see the results! I have been planning to do something similar but my problem was the sample size. Maybe now since you did it, n=2 so it's more results and we can get even better data! Nice work on the video!
Good to see u here chris
Love your channel too
We need new videos Chris.
Agreed, the more vehicles the better, I love this kind of stuff!
For some reason, i read that comment with Chris' voice lol
And yeah, larger sample sizes is always welcome and makes it more scientific too.
Either one of you Chris or EE should now test marvel mystery oil. Been waiting for it long.
This is how TH-cam videos should be. Thorough and thoughtful an complete and I don't know how to express my admiration for quality. Thank you.
Which ones clean the air best?
I watched a video and immediately subscribed
@@clayz1 Standard air cleaner will protect your engine better than K&N.
Thats something you dont learn in university.
I was just saying to myself what a great video
This guy Is always on point.
K&N is how I caught a mechanic lying about changing my air filter and charging me $17.00 for it. Got a vehicle inspection, and it clearly says on the air box "DO NOT REMOVE K&N FILTER". He wrote on the bill "changed air filter". When I opened the air box the K&N was still there. I trust mechanics about as far as I can throw them.
Was this a independent mechanic or a car dealership mechanic? Stealerships are notorious for lying and up selling because service advisors get a commission. Who do you think pays for the fancy showroom.
@@ve3xtr Gas station Mechanic(just as bad). I used to drive a telephone truck which needed regular service, you should see a mechanics eyes light up when I'd drive in(Jiffy Lube,Good Year even a Dealerships) for service.
@@urbannpa Oh man, there's the problem right there. The reputable technicians out there don't have to screw anyone over and they certainly don't work at gas stations.
Maybe they changed the cabin air filter?
Can a person really trust any oil coming out of a tube, that hangs down from ceiling ? Always do my own oil changes !
It would be good to see the difference in filtration effectiveness. Living in the driest state on the driest continent, dust ingress has damaged 5 engines in my 48 years of driving. Filtration performance is therefore more important than a tiny performance benefit. A dry paper filter is best because Brownian Motion results in capture of tiny particles by entrapment in the dry fibres. Wet filters do not capture the smallest particles in the same way, resulting in less effective filtration. How about a comparison?
K&N should be best for that. You can wash them and have to spray them with a oil mist which will capture all dust
Good point Rolf. The air filters prime job is to filter dust out of the air to protect the engine. K&N exhaustively market their performance improvement and say little about dust capturing ability. This is for good reason. Other tests consistently find K&N to be substandard in their ability to catch dust.
@@anders2821 Not the case at all. Check out actual dust stopping tests on air filters. Dry pleated paper and other woven fibres consistently outperform K&N in the air filters primary function of removing dirt particles.
@@curiositykilledthecat1557 k&n isn't gonna filter as good as dry or stock like paper filters but depending where you live it may be just fine. Dry dusty place it may not be a good idea. Where I live in VA it's not really dry and my engine stays clean I don't get much dust under the hood.
The oil on this filter can be very bad for the sensor
The reason why the dirty filter made a slight improvement over the clean filter is because the souls of the dead bugs have become trapped in the old filter and those trapped souls translate into greater power!
Isn't that because with the dirty filter power test was with a warm engine?
Yeah don't forget the souls of unknown hard labor slaves that work hardest with lowest salary just to make those cheap yet claimed premium replacement oem filter.. their souls also contribute for the extra slight performance gain vs the stock oem filter lol
Amen
@@lionsinofprideescanor8709 Sacrifice the youngest worker and use the blood as a fuel additive, hahaha.
Snap! That vehicle came to a complete stop after it encountered *The* *RoadGhostBusters!*
But don't you get a sticker with the K&N? If you didn't put the sticker on you are missing out on an extra 5hp gain
Hahaha, I did get a sticker. I did not put it on. I did not gain all the horsepressures.
and don´t forget to paint the brakes red! +10HP
Lol!!! xDDD
Rookie mistake 🤦♂️
This is true. No sticker no gains
Ordered a high-performance filter and a turbo kit showed up... weird.
So what? Put it in already! 😂
Whoa 😱
@@vanz7099 heha 😍
I'd chalk that up as a win, good buddy.
that’s not even a problem lmao
After years with a reusable, washable Filter I noticed how actually bad my Engine ran over time. At the beginning it was nice and had good performance, I changed back to a paper filter from a good brand. My observation was that no matter how good the filter was oild, cleaned, washed, whatever, it let through bigger particles and introduced more wear to my engine. I ditched it, the benefits did in no way outweigh the disadvantages. Wouldn't buy again, just keep your stock filter in good condition and change it once in a while.
I had something similar happen. I added a cold air intake to my Cummins diesel engine and it came with a K&N performance filter. I kept it clean and oiled and in good condition. Lately I noticed my fuel mileage while towing was getting worse. I opted to change back to a paper filter and my fuel mileage increased by almost 3 mpg. Since I tow 600+ miles at a time this was a significant improvement.
@@robertm1692 I presume you got the engine professionally remapped too? The most worthwhile thing you can do.
It’s called engine air restrictions. 😂😂😂
Photos of the wear ??
Too much oil on the filter probably. Doesn’t need anything but a light spray. Nothing against you or anything but I bet a brand new filter properly oiled would give you back that mpg.
I would have liked to see a NO FILTER test (at least on the dyno) to see how much restriction there is with an air filter.
Merlin D. Wizzard how can you say it’s the same performance when the entire video proves there is a performed upgrade with the k and n? Would I spend the money for this tiny upgrade? No I would not. But the video makes its pretty clear performance does improve with the better filters.
@@merlind.wizzard3558 It just showed on this specific car a K&N is 3.5% more powerful vs a BRAND NEW oem filter as in perfectly clean, no "maintenance" is gonna get it cleaner then brand new, and the tests also showed the un-maintained filter didnt hamper performance at all, im not a K&N fan and i dont think putting the filter on is gonna net and noticeable difference by itself , the stickers are just worn to death its like an ugly mole to have a K&N sticker these days... but even though i wouldnt buy one since im not into HP gains the video clearly shows it is superior atleast for the car shown so why say its not and a clean "maintained" filter is the best...watch the video again clean filter vs dirty filter no difference, KnN 3.5% difference in pretty accurate testing both dyno and practical runs
I also would’ve liked to see an MPG test. I changed my old 93 civic beater to a k&n cone filter with an autozone shortram back in my ricer days and my mpg went from 30 average to 40. At first I thought it was a fluke but it was consistently 5-10 mpg better per tank with the same daily driving. To this day I’m still not really sure why it jumped up that much but my guess is they come from the factory with a really restrictive filter.
Dad. I’ve recorded huge mpg gains in every vehicle that I’ve used a K&N filter. The power gains have been almost undetectable in most vehicles except my 2014 1500.
@@Joshg1984 Don't confuse him anymore.
Wow that's alot effort to prove that point. You definitely deserve a sub
Yeah but he talked to you much say the same thing over and over have you waiting
For poops and hahas I tested out the K&N filters in my SHO and I was honestly shocked. Granted that my car is tuned and we are talking about a car with 146 hp to the crank to a car that makes 360 to the crank (stock) I tuned it with the factory air box. My cars tuner measure 0-60 times and the K&N filter made a fairly significant difference. By that I mean it shaved about .4 seconds on average off of my 0-60 times. That could just mean the OE filter was really restrictive or it could just mean that the K&N filters really are just that superior. Either way it's a cheap mod and will make alot more of a difference than a heart shaped fake tow hook lol
Something people don't think about when comparing power numbers: better horses can translate as better MPG as well.
Not really depends on your mods
@@Thejackedshredder no he’s right the engine running smoother and breathing easier makes your mpg go up but I couldn’t tell you how much it really does improve mpg
Not that significantly since the MAF sensor will input to the ECU the reduced airflow due to a dirty airfilter and the ECU will cut the fuel back accordingly and vice-versa.
In the old days, yes certainly with a carburettor.
Sometimes a smaller engine model may do less MPG than the larger engine model simply because the small engine has to be pushed hard all the time. Typical example first gen Mercedes B class with the 1.5 litre engine (way to small for that car) does less MPG than the 1.7 litre the next model up. I think this is one of the reasons people in the UK assume that American cars must get the most appalling fuel economy imaginable but actually they are not having to work very hard to do daily driving
@@psions555 Manufacturers often over compensate for the smaller engine with a lower final drive ratio which results in poorer fuel consumption.
I would love to see this same comparison on a K&N replacement filter vs a whole K&N cold air intake system.
maybe another 1 - 3 HP if that only because it removes the charcoal restriction. Too many people have debunked cold air vs current air filters do very little if anything.
@@Hidden02 Wrong! They actually do work. Plenty of videos to prove you wrong.
@WeAreWatching Yu
No. Lol
They have 2 proving you do make horsepower. One of the 2 videos featured his Honda S2000.
@WeAreWatching Yu I just watched their video on CAI with the Honda S2000, they first tested the car on a dyno with the CAI then with the factory airbox. With the factory airbox they lost "5 kilowatts of power" which converts to 6.7 horsepower. In other words they gained about 6.7 horsepower with the CAI. not much at all but it is a gain.
WeAreWatching Yu Yes, you’re confused because the first test was with the CAI on, they then changed it for stock airbox and thus lost power
It would have been nice to see dyno numbers for no filter scenario (open pipe) to see how much of a restriction the filters introduce. Maybe something for a future video.
Ivan Iminov bad idea to have no filter
@@PhxitTV i totaly agree with you. but i meant on the dyno in a controlled environment where the chance of something getting sucked into the engine is none existent.
Worth a Try🤔
@@PhxitTV it was JUST TO TEST, not drive around for months
@@handyman3320 yeah there is no harm in running without a filter if you are standing still. the filter is there for when you get dust in the air while driving and stuff.
Useful, unbiased information .. what a concept. Thanks EE!
Haha, the world could use a little more of that kind of thing! :)
Engineering Explained - now find a way to give us the most useful information and that would be filtration efficiency vs airflow. Then we can pick the one that flows the best but still protects the engine. That is the whole purpose of an engine air filter after all.
@@mrsmith8436 agreed. The highest performance filter hits the particulate removal criteria (and total filter load criteria) at the lowest pressure drop. If you dont care about filtration, why run a filter at all?
Unfortunately, it looks like this test could have performance bias. The driver of the car needs to be blinded to which air filter they are testing in each run, or they can consciously (or unconsciously) alter the results. This is particularly important in a test like this where the numbers are so close that even a slight lift-off on the throttle will make a significant difference.
I used K&N years with no problems. Oiled it every 50k miles or so. Read comments about dirt in the intake after the K&N. Wiped mine with my finger and it was perfectly clean. I bought a few paper filters but am thinking about going back to the K&N when those are used up.
"Do not use K&N filters in anything you care about! My brother's friend's uncle's neighbor knows a guy, who used a K&N filter in his truck, and suddenly his refrigerator stopped working!" 😅
I hear them fancy filters can turn you gay from all them high end chemicals n such they use when makin em.
😮
…….. you clean and re-oil your filter every 50k? 😂 never buying a car with a K&N system on it ever again if that’s how you folks treat them.
@@maximusmax4557 Wow! U know th@ clown 2? He confessed it was because he kept blow drying the ice maker! But after using synthetic grease on the muffler bearings on th@ Tesla the K&N breathed hard & launched a wheel stand!! It was right after the keg stand!!!
The best youtuber out there, i remember 2 years ago, in my automobile mechanic school, on of my teacher showed one of your videos as a demo...from montreal canada
Well if you ever see that teacher again, tell him/her I said thank you!! :)
Also from mtl canada 👍
salut :)
@@oddixgames6704 salut les quebecois
Ville de Québec here
You'll notice K&N says "designed to" and they carefully avoid the actual claim of increasing anything. They confirmed that with me on the phone, they wouldn't guarantee any gain. A performance filter may also pass larger grit particles, wearing pistons and rings and contaminating oil. Remember the auto maker spends lots of money trying to make the highest power (EPA MPG) without causing that unacceptable engine wear.
not really. its cost(mainly),looks,packaging,sound and only on sports/sporty cars,performance
not really. its cost(mainly),looks,packaging,sound and only on sports/sporty cars,performance
You can always put another OEM filter in parallel (if you have the space, of course) so the filters will see only half of air at peak performance, thus, passing trought the filter easier, or at least I think that that would work...
@acynder1 is right on the mark, if you think your air filter is costing you power get a larger air filter.
K&N says that filtering efficiency is 99.7%. Very nice. Except ALL other filter makers are above 99.9%. Flip the numbers over - K&N allow 300% MORE dirt. This is verified by user reports of dirt on the INSIDE of their air ducting downstream (after the air is filtered) of the filter.
As far as I’m concerned, this video is an embarrassing fail. Look away, it’s shameful.
If it's designed to do it and it does not, that is illegal to sell as it's false advertising. Do you not think these companies test their filters, to see if they filter adequately and whether the oil becomes tacky enough to catch dirt and not blow into the air system? Did you see oil and dirt all over the charcoal filter too?
I have used K&N for years. Twice a year I pull it, clean it and re-oil it. Acceleration and MPG has always been better with the K&N. Many nay sayers will disagree but I am satisfied that the initial investment was worth it.
what kind of oil do you use to make it greasy again
@@zanstefanic6252 i think k&n sells that oil....idk
Oil the filter?
It’s a spray that K&N offers
ive been using one on my bike for 8yrs...its filter element were never re- oiled other than dry cleaning with vaccuum cleaner...i notice lately its resin rubber perimeter lining had begun to crack, but the element itself is intact
I have ran K&N filters for over 10 years. They are reusable, have a million mile warranty, and obvious a great buy. Having a reusable air filter saves alot of money over time for sure.
Jason. I used to design and build clean rooms. If you want actual filtration data very willing to work with you on this! It’s quite easy to use validated equipment I have on a test rig to help you answer that question.
Awesome, could you send me an e-mail? (About section of my TH-cam channel). Would love to get some ideas from ya!
Christopher Laman please do the validation air filtering. I am much more interested in how clean the air going to my engine is than a miserable 2% increase in horsepower or a 2% decrease in time to speed.
Engineering Explained you have mail @howcars
Christopher Laman this would be very interesting to see and better answer if the aftermarket filters are actually worthwhile
This would be an absolutely awesome follow up to this video, I hope to see it!
"it does says PREMIUM!" lol
its a fact: PREMIUM car engines are much better than normal ones
its a fact: PREMIUM putz's are much better than normal ones
Wow, I did not expect such clear and logical results. I thought any gains would be too small to see above the noise in the data.
Me neither, honestly I was impressed how well the data came out.
so it was logical that the car with a dirty filter would accelerate faster than when it had a new OEM filter?
as a tech anytime a clogged up mass airflow came in and obviously failed it had a k&n. they’re like having no filter. I believe engine masters did a great filter dyno test…I wouldn’t use k&n even on a yrack car but thats just me
Yup. They are almost always over oiled and that oil end up coating the MAF sensor. GM has a section in their owners manuals that warns not to use "oiled air filters"
@@TofuInc even if they are oiled correctly, they don't filter as well, and the filter is there to clean the air, not to be a speed part. I can see why GM warns against them. If the performance advantage didn't have the trade off of not cleaning as well, every manufacturer would use them.
Best comment here by you
@@richardelliott8352 Not true. Headers are speed parts. When was the last time u bought a ride w/factory installed headers? What brand claims 100% filtr8ion? Oil filters even best out @ 99.9%. Do the maintenance intervals folks & even if using aftermarket items inspect, clean & or replace.
The effort and quality you put into your videos is amazing. Subscribed. Hope you get to 2M very soon
Very kind, thank you for watching and thanks for subscribing!! :)
Can you try this on the Nissan Leaf just for good measure?
On it!
A Nissan Leaf lmfao gtfoh
The filter will always be dirty, cause the leaves
Filter the bs about these batteries on wheels
Only if a Model 3 is used to compare the two!
Great video, very interesting. I've been rallying for years. I've had all the K &N stuff, it blocks quickly, and will soon starve the engine of its breathing. Stock filters work best, easy to clean, easy to replace, and cheap. Unless you want a good look under the hood ( Bonnet) stick with stock stuff. If you want an extra 5 to 10 HP free, wiring your Alternator with a switch so you can turn it off ( World rally cross cars run with no alternator just a newly charged battery) will give you that. We have it on the rally car, and turn it off in the stage, turn it on for road sections.
the K&N also is washable.
I gained about 10bhp from swapping to K&N in my audi A5 3.0 tdi, could probably gain more if I modded it by doing the case removal. I have washed it 2 times since I bought it and honestly, it already paid itself compared to having it changed. (albeit audi service actually does it for a flat rate included in their oil filter/oil service)
PLEASE
Also do a comparison of the particles each filter catches/allows through. I think it would be an important part to review as well.
Yes, you could weigh each before and after.
an air particulate matter meter could be used for this.
Yeah cause I've heard the k&n doesnt catch particles very well
@@MrBlazzin101 all I can tell you is that after 180-200k km with a K&N mass airflow air filter, my 2008 matrix began turning over while being left in gear on a slight slope... yes I did inspect/clean/oil it every 2-4k km when needed
@@Misiekgren yeah see, that's why I don't even want to try and mess around with the k&n. I think I'm just gonna leave the regular filter. Better for me in the long run.
Probably one of THE most helpful videos EVER. I found out aftermarket cold air intakes quite often actually lose power. Mainly because the engineers who built the car calculated the best amount of air volume needed in an air box. Changing that can hurt performance. So can having an open air intake that sucks in tons of hot air vs cold air. The K&N drop in filter and a larger diameter intake tube connected to a factory air box is absolutely the way to go!
Yeah but turbo go fwoosh
you think the washable KN filter sucks in more air than the paper filters?
Yes but that oil from the kn filter affects those mass air flow sensors 🤦🏼♀️🤦🏿♀️🤦♂️
@@franchisefred4066 I found that out about a year ago as well when doing my research. Just never bothered to come back to TH-cam to edit a comment on a video.
@@franchisefred4066 Not if you don’t over-oil it. A thorough cleaning, followed by a thorough drying, then proper oiling and you’ll get over 215k of reliable service.
I would say the reason for the Carquest "premium" filter's performance is the higher number of pleats and greater surface area of the filter material compared to OEM.(Can't say anything else without knowing the types and thickness of the materials)
Exactly! Wish the video would have mentioned that. :-(
More pleats= more better.
I think the cheap filter is the best bang for the buck, unless you enjoy cleaning filters.
Quite possible, the flow at each fold in the paper should be higher, so more folds, more flow. This does depend on whether the flow profile is laminar or turbulent in the intake though - you'd expect it to be be laminar given the increase of csa compared to intake pipe. The other thing to consider in safety and reliability terms is the possibility of the filter collapsing at higher flow rates, that's why you more for OEM, because you have that guarantee.
Was just about to post this. Subaru filters seem to have very few pleats in comparison to other brands from what I've seen.
Yes, they work. I have had a full K&N intake and filter system in my Jeep Grand Cherokee for well over a year now. I document my gas milage and usage for work daily. I not only get better gas MPG, I get a noticable increase in passing accel and HP.
What you are not "feeling" in your daily commute is the additional engine wear accumulation from your K&N air filters lower initial efficiency. The K&N layered cotton gauze media is WIDE OPEN (low efficiency) until it accumulates a dust cake. Once the filter has caught some stuff after a couple thousand miles, it's efficiency finally rises close to the OEM requirements. However during that cake build, the K&N filter is allowing large & fine micron-size contaminants into your engine intake. K&N typically markets it's air flow performance (low restriction), but that's because the media is very open. The oiled K&N filters also throw your mass air flow sensor off and will let your engine run at peak air/fuel optimization.
@@DJtheDad I've run K&N filters alone all the way to fill intake systems for decades in many cars. Never seen engine degradation.
This is probably by far the best comparison video with OEM vs performance drop in filter. Great review man thank you!!!
I've seen filtration efficacy tests of K&N vs paper air filters and what I would say is that Jason's guess as to why the K&N filter might be flowing more air is true. If filtration efficacy and engine protection are of paramount importance to you you would do well to research the topic carefully and not just look at airflow restriction tests. Another point to consider if you do chose to use the K&N air filter is to be careful not to over oil the filter medium, as excess oil might get sucked out of the filter and end up coating the MAF sensor downstream of the filter and cause erroneous airflow calculations in the ECU.
And further...to reduce air flow restriction while still maintaining filtration efficacy you would have to increase filter size. So you would use the same filter material and same material thickness but increase the dimensions of the filters "face."
Literally am cleaning my MAF right now and throwing my K&N in the trash from it fouling my MAF and throwing a lean fuel code.
Never had this issue on any of my other vehicles I have ran K&Ns on but my Tacoma's MAF no likey.
@@herrerajoey2 Throw that Tacoma in the trash, lol. My ‘02 GTP with 215k miles has no problem with it’s K&N drop in filter. One time I apparently over-oiled it and a few days later set a code. User error; myself. That was over 200K ago. I learned my lesson and it’s been fine ever since.
@@markgasdaglis5109 ...which is why that CarQuest paper filter probably had better performance than OEM - it had more "folds" in the filter material, i.e. greater surface area.
@@herrerajoey2 had a k&n in my Tacoma without issue. I've been using k&n for over 30yrs but thinking of switching to the no oil ones like aem.
I added a turbo in my Tesla, now I have to figure out the fuel part
Lmao!
Just put a fuel pressure regulator. Duh.
Put an engine in the Tesla and use the motor to drive the turbocharger.
Adjust your differentialator valve to 11 pounds of boost on the low side and 4 pounds of boost on the high side 👍🏽👍🏽👍🏽
I thought you can only supercharged tesla. Wow
I bought a K&N filter not because I cared about more power, but mainly because I thought it would save in the long run since it's washable and reusable. Now I have some second thoughts if it doesn't filter out contaminants as well as regular filters as I tend to keep my cars a long time. But no problems to report so far after 190,000km.
ProjectFarm did a video on filters as well the less restrictive don’t filter as good and allow in dirt, the K and N was the least restrictive but allowed a lot more dirt
@Kong〉Godzilla you are missing the point, cleaning you air filter does not help your engine taking inn less dirt, only more air. Long story short, if you drive in dirt/dust don't use "performance"/high flow filters...
I use nothing but Wix in my truck. Never let me down.
@@williamlaidlaw6281 I just wonder, how many people have been let down by an air filter?
Rubbish. You don't need a restrictive filter to stop dirt. Part of what makes K&N more "open" is the fact they have greater surface area. So it will flow more even with the same pore size as a more restrictive filter. Plus the oil on the K&N traps dirt that might otherwise fit through the media.
The best and most affordable modification for your car is maintainence
Sorry dude modifications and maintenance are two different things
Being in air quality most of my life it is my experience that with a given size of a filter and I’m talking square inches a filter area.... of these 4 tested filters. The one with the best airflow will be the worst in particle filtering
Exactly Ron. K&N useless out in the dust off road.
Food for thought. Great comment and definitely one worth thinking about. Thanks for the info Ron. This should be the top comment as it's the most useful.
If you look at 1:06 you can see the aftermarket filter has 25 folds compared to the 15 of the OEM. This means it has more surface area. This way the engine is not working so hard to pull air to the engine plus it has the same filtering capabilities. They were able to put more square inches as you say into a smaller area. As for the K&N, I have one but I would not bet it was better at filtering.
@@Dialysisforever no, just no.
@@Kold2012 the more surface area means less static pressure behind it... hvac knows this. That's why they prefer 4inch filters
Great informative video! There's a big missing piece though when it comes to long term effects of less filtration on the engine. The internet is full of people with opinions on this, but finding hard data is frustratingly difficult.
Its simple,k&n short term gain is a few HP. Long term is HP loss because of less filtration. I race cars for over 20 years, and we do use k&n filters but clean/oil or chance them every race. Nobody i know uses Them in their daily cars. Hope this helps.
Exactly. Want best performance, remove your filter completely and have some sort of forced intake for the air. Numbers will go up, but so will the likelihood of damage.
Doesn't matter when the engine starts go bad that's when you off yourself
Hard data is what the manufacturers generate and use , and why the select paper filters. They don't just make stuff up or play spin the wheel when designing the car's systems .
@@richardelliott8352 they use paper because it's cheap and disposable, can force the buyer to spend more money AND spend less on manufacturing the cars
You should do one on the K&N filter vs the K&N cold air intek
Cold air intakes are little more than a gimic at best with manufactures advertising false and doctored numbers about their performance. It's been independently lab proven that the extremely minimal gains (1-4 hp at best and not even noticeable) aren't worth their cost even though cold air intake systems are relatively cheap.
And what are your sources? Or is it just anecdotal?
Drop In filter is your best bet. 60 dollars 4hps.....or 300 dollars 4.5hps.......Hmmm not a hard decision
So the high flow sports filter how much worse are they at filtering?
And how much will that shorten the life of your engine by?
It's a great question and something I plan to test eventually!
@@EngineeringExplainedI think that's the real question
Dave Webster Personally I won’t run a K&N unless it was just on a drag car or something, I’ve bough a few cars people had put them in & the intakes were abnormally dirty as a result, I tossed them & put in a paper Wix. The K&N oil coating tends to wreck sensors too.
Matt's Garage Yep. K&N improves performance by being a less restrictive, but also less effective filter. The ultimate in this quest is no filter at all. That will maximize your performance. The question is: how much engine life are you will to trade for performance. I stay with stock filters as they perform quite well and generally provide very good filtration. And no messy oil to deal with.
I feel like the CarQuest one would fall under the the 'just right' category -- it gives a slight performance increase, probably filters better than stock or the K&N filters, and doesn't break the bank. I'll definitely be waiting for a follow-up video on this :)
Got a K&N on my SV 650. No power increase, maybe a small change on sound. But best part is : You don't have to replace it, you clean it.
@ISSA VIBEZ From what i've read/seen/experienced, that's not the case !
Everything is usually as clean as with the stock filter.
I'm not saying it's not happening, just it's not noticeable while cleaning the airbox with a rag, it's still perfectly clean.
@@Totone56 Same here, have cleaned my air box carefully with a white cloth after a long service, it was very very clean The
K&N gets even more efficient when it become a bit more dirty. The filtering surface increases with the help of all the particles that stucked in the filter oil.
Thing is tho, if u don't have another filter, you have to wait for the one to dry! I'm bout to buy a 2nd filter so i don't have to worry about that!
@@lordmalice8368 - I saved my original air filter so I could go somewhere while the K & N was drying.
@@ronbishop1739 smart thinking but when i replaced mine, it was for a used car just bought and I needed it! Then I thought about when I had to clean it, even tho it would be a long time! I seen a guy on youtube who stranded himself by doing that! Lol
I have used K&N for over 15 years. Never had an "engine wear issue".
I do notice better throttle response & and, as indicated, a slightly better running engine.
Whether it's worth the $$$ is up to you.
Anyone who's leasing, save your money....
(Note, do not expect an MPG increase, you may, or you may not- that's a crap shoot, but less air restriction & good plugs do generally help)
I used to use K&N filters, but had an issue with the filter allowing oil to migrate to the MAF sensor. This was a new filter, not one that had been over-oiled. It caused my vehicle run terribly. The error codes on my tahoe didn't help diagnose the problem, and even a dealership where I previously worked couldn't figure out why I was having so many issues. I've since gone back to paper filters.
Think I will stay with Delco; Not familiar with this issue and just had MAS blown out by McNamara when he spray gum out on an Idle air bypass solenoid so with this and just installed Iridium distributor cap I had not heard of oiling dry air filter since the 1957 265 Air over Oil thing; Static pressure drop does matter as per Mr Prudhomme
and velocity - the filter looks big enough to me 01 Silverado W
Been looking for one of these videos recently, none that explained it well and this one popped up in my sub box! Love it!
I remember figuring out how much cfm that my car needed and ( after calling K&N) finding out the OEM style K&N filter cfm wasn't going to be high enough for a 2.3 Quad 4. I went to a 4.5" cone filter later and used a nitrile connector. Car ran way better. It wasn't K&N's fault, Gm made the OEM filter housing too small for the engine.
The carquest filter, though less expensive, has many more pleats affectively increasing the filter surface area which allows for the increased air flow. Stick with the cheap dry filter. K&Ns are easy to over saturate with oil which can cause mass air flow sensor damage.
I think most K&N's do get oiled these days. I haven't had a wet one in decades.
Shoulve done no filter
Second that
Yep. Was just gonna say that.
Sep596
Wouldnt work right
yup see how long your engine lasts!!!
@@philwragg9529 You're a moron if you think that an engine in a controlled environment can't run without a air filter lmao.
The souls of the dead bugs were giving the car extra boost!
Their souls were consumed by the engine for power. All energy just changes form, it never "leaves or goes away"....right? Rules of science of energy.
eureka! thats gives me a great idea!! if we make a transparent airbox exposed to sunlight and we put some plants inside, it gives off oxygen in the daytime and enrichens the engine intake box...more oxygen means more power!!
KNEEL BEFORE ZOD!
fidel catsro yea moron the plants would go into the engine and ruin the injectors
@@JuanMartinez-hy6yf comrade, it is a joke
Again I have to say, Quality content with Logical and measurable Data.
My first thought would be that having more pleats with the Car Quest filter means more surface area to pull air through, making it more efficient. Likewise the K&N filter has a lot of pleats, but also a less dense filter material makes it easier for air to pass through. This material may also make it easier for small particles of dirt to pass through...
K&N has been known to not filter air very well, compared to other filters
Spot on assessment. More pleats = more surface area = more air flow. Also, K & N filters definitely allow more contaminants to pass through, including the oil they use on the element. I ruined a Nissan MAF sensor in a 300zx by installing a K & N filter. It was an expensive lesson to learn just trying gain a minimal amount of power.
@@TnDAtkinson I heard this before, but wasn't sure if it was true. What filter do you currently use. I have a K&N on my 4Runner and thought about replacing it, because I wasn't sure it was the best filter
@@Theyralltakenfu I use Wix air filters on my 2004 Sienna w/355,000 miles and my 1987 Supra Turbo.
@@TnDAtkinson Ok. Thanks, that’s the one I may go too if I change it out.
The fact the stock filter breathes just as well even when filled with detritus means it's probably a good filter.
The beauty of the K&N is that it'll pay for itself. I've been running one in my F-150 for 17 years and it works just fine. The trick is to oil it LIGHTLY on the intake side only. The mass inflow sensor never gets dirty. If I'm going to be driving on a dusty road for awhile I'll swap it with an OEM paper filter. I take great care of my truck and I think the K&N is a great value.
How do you oil it?
@@jacobrobles688 It appears you've never owned one? You buy the filter and a can of the K&N spray oil. They sell it in a kit. Look up "How to oil K&N filter" on Google or your preferred search engine.
@@byronlemay2166 thank you very much. I’m going to buy an oil filter and change it myself for the first time today. I know it’s not very hard, just never done it. I appreciate it
That’s a good idea!
@@byronlemay2166 kn come pre oiled so when it’s time to change filter is when you clean and reoil
Sadly K&N doesn't make an air filter for my Tesla . . .
I ll bet you don t get regular oil changes either
Weird! 😂
I know with gas engines the K&N gums up the MAP sensor with the oil and many people don't know that and clean it off frequently they can permanently screw their gas mileage because that sensor controls the air flow and if it gets bad you MPG gets bad
No, but lots of mining companies mining for incredibly toxic and unhealthy acids\metals for your batteries more than make up for it.
@@machucast Not Tesla batteries - contains practically zero cobalt unlike your iPhone battery. Like I said - you got some research to do.
Very cool video. 2.5% isn't much, but cool to see that performance filters do have some improvement on performance. It is still a larger factor of improvement than some very expensive modifications.
2.5% is actually quite a bit. If you think about it like 40 yard times. Someone running 4.7 sec 40 yard dash vs 4.5 sec is a good bit of difference. That difference only gets exaggerated as speeds increase. Losing a 1/4 mile by 1/2 a second looks pretty bad
Please look up reviews where the filtering effectiveness is tested as well. The minor performance increase comes at a huge price!
The main reason I used a K&N on my '01 Kia Sephia was not for a hp boost (I mean, it's a 1.8l KIA...) it was for the longevity and reusablility of the filter. Lasted for as long as I had the car.
Me 2. That's the only reason I bought one for my civic.
How long did you own the car?
@@pyro5624.if you only expect your civic to last 10 years K&n good choice if you want it to last more than 10 years in the case of a 4th generation Toyota Camry 4cyl that can last 450 thousand miles stick with OEM I had a 2000 Honda civic lx and the OEM filter from the Honda dealer totally outperformed the k&n crap k&n actually destroyed my 1995 Toyota Camry 4cyl is at 225 thousand miles right now but it's on its way out because of damage to one of the cylinders because all that dirty air that k&n allows to get in I have a 1998 Toyota Camry Le 4cyl and I'm sticking with the OEM denso air filter I want my 450 thousand miles out of it right know it has 110 thousand miles I expect at least 300 thousand miles more from it it has zero leaks and still runs like brand new it handles speeds of over 90 miles in the freeway like nothing I haven't try 100 miles because the freeway traffic is pretty bad lol.
alive since 2010. Bought it right off the lot. I have no problem with my civic.
@@pyro5624 . What year is it and what is the mileage on it too . My civic was a 2000 which supposed to be LAST REAL GOOD CIVIC now my reason for selling this car had nothing to do with the K&n filter the OEM simply outperformed K&n I would even say that K&n rob my car of horsepower now for your civic to be even considered in the class of the 3d and 4th generation Toyota Camry it has to last you at least 400 thousand miles K&n did not destroyed my civic it was simply outperformed by the OEM filter the 1995 Toyota Camry that K&n filter destroyed it wasn't my choice the previous owner had that filter without cleaning it God knows how long but 222 thousand miles for a Toyota Camry is unacceptable the car still running lol I just don't like how it runs it already passed the smog check at a star station here in California yeah it might be true you can't destroy a 3d and 4th generation Toyota Camry but if it doesn't run smooth it's time to retire the car.
It would have been useful to have two bases...the OE filter, and NO filter at all. By having no filtration (and minimising Air flow reduction) you could get an idea of the trade off between restriction and power.
As you said, you didn’t test filter efficiency...but no one would choose to drive around in a car with no filter at all, so it’s really important to know how well each filter actually works. For me, living in a dusty rural environment, I’ll always choose filtration capability over claimed power gains.
Actually, that type of testing rarely works. Unless the car is tuned speed density from the factory, it will run terrible or barely at all. Wouldn't be a good test.
Obviously it’s only a marginal change, but considering how ridiculously easy swapping out an air filter is, that’s actually pretty impressive. Whether or not it’s worth paying 2x (or more) for the slight bump in performance is up to you. Perhaps the Carquest filter (or similar one) is a nice sweet spot between small increase in performance for little to no more cost. Anyway, great video!
Well IIRC the K&N filters say you don't have to swap them out as often and you can even clean and reuse them.
k&n is a lifetime filter, whether you get any performance or not - the investment cost to no longer replace filters gets there eventually.
@@donkeykong1234 - You also have to spend money for the cleaning fluid (basically kerosene) and oil to re-oil the filter.
Then, what do you do with the dirty kerosene without adding to environmental pollution? K&N is the "gift" that keeps on "giving".
@@daveinwla6360 even with that the cost is still offset over the long term since those products are cheap and I guarantee that little bit of kerosene is the least of our pollution problems
@@tobythenewguy6188 I bought the drop in K&N filter for my 5.0 F150 and its a dry filter. It say's do not use the K&N cleaning kits, its just a rinse with the hose filter.
It is pretty well-known that while K&N filters flow more air, they also flow more dirt. So, it comes down to how you weigh longevity vs. performance.
When I had a K&N I had to start using premium fuel because the K&N obviously let so much more air in and cylinder pressure went up causing detonation.
@@kylebutler7142can you explain what you mean by detonation? Thanks
@@KingOfShenanigan Preignition is auto-ignition of the air/fuel mixture before the spark plug fires. The auto-ignition occurs at a location in the cylinder outside of the controlled flame front from spark ignition.
Similarly, detonation is auto-ignition of fuel, usually after the spark plug fires. Like preignition, detonation occurs outside of a controlled flame front from the spark plug. The term detonation is often used by racers as both preignition (before the spark), as well as uncontrolled burning after the spark.
@@kylebutler7142 okay that's interesting. I really appreciate the explanation. One more follow up question if you don't mind. How do you know if detonation is happening? Do you just feel it or hear it, or do you have to do a specific test?
@kingofshenanigans722 it will feel weird and may even make a slight pinging sound
If you could do a run without a filter that would be great!
I thought about it, but the consequences outweigh the benefits haha. Even the brand new filters had a few bugs and debris on them after the pulls, and I'd rather that stuff not end up in my engine haha.
@@EngineeringExplained Well, yeah. Fair enough. Great video by the way!
I can not qait to see that
@@EngineeringExplained even on the dyno?
@@EngineeringExplained just on the dyno would be interesting. Nice video although
K&N FTW! Even on my wife's non-performance cars, I always drop a K&N air filter and a tuner sticker for that extra 5hp, yo!
*Suddenly car quest sales go through the roof.
🤣
I’m only 1:40 into the video and had to comment. My last truck with a V8 and 12 years old had a K&N air filter in as soon as I broke the engine in. I had a friend who had a speed shop with a dyno and we ran it with the stock filter and the K&N. I don’t remember the exact numbers but I got a 19 horsepower increase and a 24 ft pound increase in torque. Not a lot on the dyno but on the road you noticed the difference. Especially when towing. In twelve years I only cleaned it once and it didn’t really need it then, but it was extremely low mileage when I sold it.
Ron
Had some Frijoles last night and now I need a filter for my trousers
Ryan Sellars 😂😂
you'll need the k&n trouser filter judging by this video stock wont cut it
Odale
@ Ryan Sellars- Will the filter for your pants help with gas leaks? LOL
Dude I love the actual real life and dyno testing, way better then the other videos. You got your self a sub today sir
If you look online there was also a test already done about all kinds of different filters there is one that is almost as good as the K&n but they were also testing to see how many Particles all the filters would let through and the k&N let thru Way more particles which is much harder on your motor
Good stuff! Another variation of this test that I would be curious to see, is to measure the actual filtration capabilities of the filters. Some thing that could measure particle sizes that pass through, so that we can see the trade-off of power/ dirt that gets into the engine.
Good point. Because generally, permeability is permeability. You'd think that regardless of make, a 2um hole will let through the same amount of air no matter whose filter its located in. Obviously with warranty implications, OEM filters are going to be more aggressive in capturing suspended particles than a gofast drop-in. Its hard to find data about the flow characteristics of different filter medias though.
Projectfarm has done this. k&n performed extremely bad. They're really pretty bad filters.
“Randomizing” run sequence for the real road test: “randomize” only make sense, if we’re doing multiple rep’s of each condition. Otherwise, if only run each condition one time, whatever the randomly chosen sequence is still just one sequence - randomizing did not help even out anything.
If each condition had 3 iterations, then we could look at stdev within each group. That enables a comparison between conditions, whether the 0.05 second difference we thought we saw, is meaningful at all from perspective of signal-over-noise.
How is he supposed to randomize it when he is installing the air filter?
@@postalpancho
I’ll give some examples:
Tests that are run in controlled environment, you’d randomize the run sequence. Each “condition” would be run three times. And it might look like:
A, c, b, d, c, a, d, b, etc...
There are even statistical software that will help you generate a randomized sequence.
You wouldn’t change the filter mid-run.
You’d put the filter (of what you suppose to test) into the filter box, make the run, capture the data, and that’s that test, move to next sequence.
Yes, a pain in the rear. But that’s what’s needed for a non-biased true-comparative rest.
Why each condition should have multiple repeat?
Imagine this: say you used filter A for your daily driving on Monday, and it performs “80” (whatever that means).
Then on Wednesday the same filter scores “90” in the same benchmark.
So is filter A really an 80, or 90?
If a third data point is at 85, then overall Filter A performs 85, +/- 5 (uncertainty).
You’d want to capture that type of data across ALL your test setups, meaning all the filters.
If Filter B scores 86, +/- 7, then is Filter B really better than Filter A?
In that case, I’d say they’re equivalent to each other. Any difference between the two is not statistically significant.
If you use the same test methodology, and a Filter C gives 50 +/- 5, then we CAN say Filter C sucks vs A & B. We can also say the “noise” in the test has being relatively consistent from one filter to another.
If filter D gives 100 +/ 30.
Then Filter D *might* have a higher average score (100), BUT it has a lot of variability vs all other filters using the same test method. Therefore, this increase in variability is NOT due to test methodology, but due to a shitty Filter D.
But without at least 3 data points per filter, you wouldn’t have known that about Filter D. In fact, if Filter D’s first score was 130, you’d think it is the best filter and ran your conclusion that way.
Or, if Filter D first score was 70, you’d have put Filter D in 3rd place, thinking it is “better” than Filter C.
But, knowing the wide variation, we’d be cued to ask why. Upon further investigation, we might find Filter C is made of garbage paper, and air movement is enough to blow a hole though it. 130 is a big hole. 100 is a medium hole. 70 is a small hole. So Filter D is garbage. And even Filter C is better than D.
But again, without minimum 3 data points per condition, we would not have known that.
In real life, whether you are in a lab, or in a factory testing a new component installed to a manufacturing line, we seldom have the luxury to run the ideal test sequence. (Takes away production time from the line, consumes time & raw materials during test, etc).
So sometimes you’ll find experienced test designer cutting corners, leaning on their past knowledge of similar materials, and making assumptions where they don’t get to run & obtain the new data.
Sometimes this works well.
Sometimes this blows up in their face.
Example:
Space shuttle booster rocket’s rubber seal, at what exact temperature does the seal lose its pliability, and no longer able to make an effective seal?
Because of the rheology of rubber, this is never an exact temperature point. But were enough tests conducted, to provide a “danger cold” temperature range for this particular rubber formulation?
So if shuttle had being sitting outdoor overnight at colder than the start of that temp range, launch needs to be postponed until the entire shuttle had sat in warmer temperature for at least another X hours...
@@jack765ful we're testing air filters on a 140hp crossover, its not rocket science
@@moonshiner0197
If the video would caveat this was a crude test, ballpark figure, then yes I agree with you.
But the video used big words like “correlate” between “dyno vs real world”, trying to pass off as a valid engineering test setup. In addition, attempts to be a head-to-head product competition.
With that perspective, then no, the test setup and analysis is not congruent with what the video claims to be.
It all depends on the context.
Take the stock filter for example:
From old/used to new/clean, we actually saw a DECREASE in performance of -0.5%
If we assume for a moment that -0.5% was “real”, then the video comparing from stock new filter (Clean) to Car Quest Filter obtained a +1% performance gain, that claim is now bogus.
Why?
Batch to batch difference in the stock filter is already more than 0.5%.
And if we did the N=3 for each condition, we will likely find the test method variability itself in the 1~2% range.
If so, then the K&N filter’s “better” performance of 2% is within noise, therefore not truly “better”.
Why else does randomizing & multiple repeat matter?
Look at roughly 6:48 for the sunlight & shadow angle. Shadow was casted at about a 60-degree angle, very slanted.
If this was in the late-afternoon / early-evening, and K&N was the last filter in the test, it got the benefit of cooler air and higher air density.
Again, context matters.
We already have many product manufacturers making biased fake testing & dubious claims on their product.
Independent 3rd-party testers like this video should be more neutral in its test setup and analysis.
I experienced a similar result using a stock filter vs K&N on an ‘04 Ram SRT-10. 4rwhp and 6rwtq increase with the K&N.
Not to mention that the K&N is also washable and reusable 👍
That's the best part imo.
I put a K&N filter in my 4 cyl truck about 12 years ago and noticed quite a difference in performance, but the filter I replaced was really dirty. Great product imhop.
yeah but they filter air pretty badly. Thats why they get much air trough it and improve the performance
@@motorenbastler9289 do you know of an off the shelf filter that filters better and still allows better performance?.
@@Chuckles.. no this is not possible. Either you want performance or clean air and a long life engine.
I like your unbiased, scientific approach. Letting the numbers speak for themselves.
That ain't dirty, that's gently used.
Right... i just changed my air filter at 25k.... lol
Some people live in desert areas or even gravel roads then should change morr bit otherwise yea it can breath
You sir need to go out and change your air filter right now.
I put a k&n on my 87 grand national and it made a pretty good difference but the biggest difference i felt is when I put it on my 1996 impala the throttle response was night and day
To get more air to flow requires larger passage ways through the filter. The larger passage ways also allow dirt in. If you have a turbo, a K&N will chew up the turbo wheel. Use at your own risk.
The best test about K&N filters. Congrats!
Bought the K&N for my 2018 VW GTI SE 6M. Can't feel any difference, but did get a slight bump in average fuel economy.
Man, this is the best test I've ever seen.. Simple and clear.. So, I think that it worth to buy a K&N filter.. Thanks for answering this ancient question..
Thanks!
I ran k&n for years on and off road and never really had any problems but moving to a rural and dusty location and rebuilding engines on a regular basis including my own, I’ve found that they aren’t as effective as advertised in dirt retention! If you want a real air filter and don’t want dust in your engine try uni filter! I Won’t go back to anything else! My filter is rear of the cabin and I drive on dirt often with a ute and with a little extra hp there’s a lot of dust to say the least! And none of it is in my motor!
Initially thought this was going to be a fake test (real commercial) for K&N air filters. Extremely pleased to see a real scientific study done. Will be subscribing to your channel.
Thanks for subscribing!
You haven't been here long enough then :)
I use K&N filters. Better MPG over all. Light oil is the key. I also let the filter sit for 30min before reinstalling.
I actually wasn’t too surprised from the results. I think that’s pretty average for everyone. KN you get an increase from 2-5hp increase. Solid video.
Increases hp, even without air filter you can increase even more hp, but KN filter don´t filter the polution as the other filters... K&N filter needs a special oil-spray to impregnate the filter and stop the dust... I don´t recomend k&n filter unless you want to kill your engine.
@Mr. Morningstar You did not perceived loss because you don´t have two exact cars to do the experiment, one with normal filter and the other with k&n filter, and after that, at 280.000 miles, check compressions and dyno them and see that the car with k&n filter, did lost much more torque and horse power than the other car with the normal filter... Thats why you did not perceived any loss, because you can´t compare nothing.
@@Big1_ so im guess u have done that test before
@@Shooter-zy2oe i´m not interested in destroying my car to get 2-3hp on a 1.3 tons car.... If you are curious go ahead and tell us the experience about puting more dust into the engine don´t cause any problem... I´ll wait here.
@keith cunningham shhhh! let them enjoy their 2-3 hp dude... Don´t be bad.
I have had K&N filters in my vehicles for years.
I want the engine breathe easily.
I also put new exhaust systems on and adding an inch in diameter.
These two modifications help quite a bit.
I saw a 4mpg increase in our pickup by adding the K&N and going to a larger exhaust.
I have used a K&N in the last 8 cars I’ve owned. Love them!
Such cool work you did in this video - thumbs up and a big THANK YOU !!! :)
Thanks Peter!
@@EngineeringExplained Will you please give me the link to the follow up video?
What do you estimate the HP and Torque gains from a performance cabin air filter?? HA!!
A/C ice cold in 0.5 seconds. ;)
I can run faster.
lol
18 cubic feet per minute improvement of cold air blowing in my face. 😂
Colder faster flowing air but may contain more dust
Whether the K&N filter will help, and how much it can help, depends on the vehicle. The part that isn't a variable is how well they filter. I've never seen a dirty intake tract with a stock or stock replacement filter and have never seen a clean one with a K&N.
they don't filter worth a crap it's just a piece of gauze and oil look at the data on them they're terrible
Excess oil from the filter gets sucked into the intake duct and traps dirt.
It's better, cheaper, and easier to just buy OEM or premium non-oiled filters.
And let's not forget that you have to clean, dry, and re-oil K&N style filters.... I don't have time for that or the extra expense.
I'm sticking to OEM air filteration.
I've been using K&N for the last 30 years. Never had a problem. Just don't over oil them. You only have to clean them every 4-5 years unless you are driving through dusty conditions all the time. In the long run they are less maintenance and lower cost plus you do get a small performance boost.
Finally some proof for the K&N “go to filter” we all have spent money on. Lol
Great comparison. 👍🏼🇨🇦
One of the few times I haven't been suckered!
Bad decision regardless, it allows more dust through and coats your sensors and intake with a thing layer of oil over time. All for a 2-4hp gain?
Gotta think smart here folks. Unless you're programming your vehicle for 91 or 93 octane tune, there isnt a real point in shortening your engines life span for that 4hp
There have been many air filter comparisons done over the years, going back to the great car magazines of the seventies.
Now have to deal with the filtration issues. Do they let more stuff into the motor? Contamination?
I have used K&N for well over 30 years in almost everything I’ve owned; and have never EVER had a single problem with them. Not one issue.
Jason, You should do a piece calculating how many miles it would take to recoup the cost of the K&N due to improved efficiency.
Keep in mind the K & N is washable/reuseable. You can normally go about twice as far on a K&N compared the average paper filter, and their guarantee for 10-years/1,000,000 warranty (doubtful they've ever had anyone come back at 999,999 miles complaining their air filter doesn't work anymore! lol). Over the lifetime of a vehicle they more than pay for themselves, as long as you're conscientious enough to clean/lube them when needed.
A standard air filter should be replaced every 15k, k&n doesn't have to be cleaned until 50k, $15 dollars for a cheap store brand vs $45 for a k&n.
Very useful video. Also one thing you didn't mention is the performance filters from k&n normally come with a lifetime warranty. So that's another cost saving to bear in mind.
Thanks to the K&N filter I recovered 5hp of my detuned BMW N52, and the engine breathes so much better (smoother idle).
The acceleration is more linear and dude you feel it past 100kmh.
The car air filter housing has inner dirt traps and has a bent inlet duct which makes big dirt particles impossible to find their way to the engine.
I don t mind replacing the Filter after only 50K kms.
We need to see a video on how well different filters can filter the dirty incoming air.
Good observation
NICOFORUMS did this. K&N did worse than even the cheapest filter.
@@jeepinbanditrider Threw out my K&N filter after finding the filtration results.
Noo😭 but I did hear somebody said that the amount of dirt that gets through is such a small amount it doesn't affect it
I trashed my k&n after I saw how much crud and sediment was building in the intake plenum after just a few weeks. If u plan on keeping the car/truck throw it away.
Oh yeah time to get a K&N filter for my Chevy Spark😂
Or you could just throw the filter in the trash and get the biggest increase!
@@BradAcquilin Hahaha. May as well right.
Eat your Wheaties and pedal faster!
But… how well does the filter actually filter the air that goes into the engine? Isn’t that it’s actual job?
I don’t care about a filter that increases power but will suck in anything smaller than a bird…..
OEM filters are designed with the longevity of your engine in mind. Yes, they're restrictive but that's because they're doing what they're designed to do, filter.
To get any kind of significant increase in performance from a filter you'd have to go with a cone filter and an intake relocation kit. The cone allows more air to flow through the filter at once and relocating it allows you to pull cooler air. You're not going to see any kind of perceptible difference by just sticking a flat filter in the stock intake box.
Almost all factory air boxes I have seen have a vent tube underneath that pulls air from the front of vehicle and outside air. Most automakers have done their homework
cold air intakes aren't really worth it on modern engines. modern engines are designed to allow for plenty of air. unless you're upgrading your turbo, fuel system, etc then there's no point to a cold air intake "upgrade".