View Poll Results: Which do you prefer?
I have tried both and prefer Works



1
5.00%
I have tried both and prefer K&N



0
0%
I have not tried both but prefer Works



5
25.00%
I have not tried both but prefer K&N



14
70.00%
Voters: 20. You may not vote on this poll
Works Vs. K&N Drop in filter
It was weird... I experienced a loss of power before my flash... put my stock filter in and it drove better.... then to convince myself it wasnt just my imagination I put the K&N back in, and sure enough, same loss of power... Also the K&N oil can damage your MAF sensor, so you basically have to wash all the oil off and let it dry to run that filter without worry... I used a spray cleaner on my MAF sensor and ran the K&N without oil, but had concerns about its filtration ability without the oil in it- decided to sell it and get a Works filter which can flow more air, not have to worry about the oil damaging my MAF sensor... only problem with the Works filter is that it costs a bit more than the K&N.... most people run K&N without issues, so it was a surprise to me when i had issues with it- figured at the time it may have something to do with the IX since I got mine right when they came out and threw the filter in the first week I had it.
who knows- but most people run K&N without issues (unless of course you are talking about their ram air intake)
who knows- but most people run K&N without issues (unless of course you are talking about their ram air intake)
Last edited by DJ Brett B; Mar 31, 2008 at 03:57 PM.
This is interesting. I also have the works mostly because of the increase in surface area as shown in their website. But to my surprise the area on both sides of the filter are not the same. One side has a big area and the other have a small area. I have not seen the K&N for the EVO but it is possible that they are both the same size on one of the filter sides. Who knows. I am not sure if it is worth the extra $$? I already have it so I will keep it. maybe someone at works can comment on the size diff on the side not shown on the pictures. It is difficult to tell without any real flow test. I have a K&N on my wifes sienna, je je!!
Can you e-mail me the info for the "works" air filter? I've been looking for something
germanwolf31@yahoo.com
Thx,
James
germanwolf31@yahoo.com
Thx,
James
any drop in filter that will fit in a EVO X Lancer 2.0 or 2.4, or an outlander newer than 2004 with a v6 or 4 cyl, will fit our GTS they are all the same. So if you find one for any of those the air filter is the same
i just found this out yesterday that its not the right one. the guy at the parts store found the right part # though its 33-2392. the filter is still thin but it comes with an adapter that closes the gap between the housing, only problem is he said that they couldnt even order it yet and that they were a k&n auth. dealer. checked k&n's website and searched the part # and nothing came up soooooo,
i guess works has it for now until K&N releases the right air filter for us.
I just bought the k&n frop in air filter couple weeks ago.
I got the K&N 33-2105.
There's a review on the web that shows you the power gain on the K&N.
Heres the link-> Review/Dyno.
I got the K&N 33-2105.
There's a review on the web that shows you the power gain on the K&N.
Heres the link-> Review/Dyno.
I just bought the k&n frop in air filter couple weeks ago.
I got the K&N 33-2105.
There's a review on the web that shows you the power gain on the K&N.
Heres the link-> Review/Dyno.
I got the K&N 33-2105.
There's a review on the web that shows you the power gain on the K&N.
Heres the link-> Review/Dyno.
lower MPG with K&N ???
I put my K&N drop in air filter on my Lancer two weeks ago and I averaged slightly lower numbers for mpg.
Before, I was getting between 26 and 28 mpg per tank. Now with the K&N filter I got 26 mpg.
I saw higher numbers on the dash mpg only the first day after I swapped the filter, after that the numbers displayed were a bit lower than before. I did the math after refueling and it confirmed that my average mpg went down.
Do you guys think I need to give it more time to adjust (2-3 tanks), or maybe I should reset the ECU by disconnecting the negative terminal on my battery...
I was hoping at least 1mpg improvement, but
, maybe there is something related to the CVT, or some electronics that I can't understand.
The driving conditions were the same as before, same commute, A/C on, same cruising speed.
I also made sure the filter is seated right in the air box.
Before, I was getting between 26 and 28 mpg per tank. Now with the K&N filter I got 26 mpg.
I saw higher numbers on the dash mpg only the first day after I swapped the filter, after that the numbers displayed were a bit lower than before. I did the math after refueling and it confirmed that my average mpg went down.
Do you guys think I need to give it more time to adjust (2-3 tanks), or maybe I should reset the ECU by disconnecting the negative terminal on my battery...
I was hoping at least 1mpg improvement, but
, maybe there is something related to the CVT, or some electronics that I can't understand.The driving conditions were the same as before, same commute, A/C on, same cruising speed.
I also made sure the filter is seated right in the air box.

