Might give you pause next time you're looking to spend some $ on your car...

http://home.usadatanet.net/~jbplock/ISO5011/SPICER.htm

 

cliffnotes?

 

I think I need to freshen up on my calculus and quantum physics to understand what that thread was talking about

 

Sounds like GM paid big money out to make sure their filters showed better than the aftermarket ones. Don't read too much into it. I worked for GM for years and know how they try to run this game about OEM being better than aftermarket. I run K&N in all my vehicles and K&N by far exceeds OEM filters if oiled right.

 

^ You have no idea what you are talking about.

This test was done quite a while ago and the results speak for themselves, the Paper AC delco filter outperformed all other filters. Paper filter = win

 

Yeah right, keep thinking that. You run the OEM filter all you want, your choice. My K&N's have out performed every OEM filter including AC Delco in all of my GM vehicles and that is a fact.

Yeah, for the OE factory parts department.

 

first look at who is sponsoring the research. If I am a big company performing the research, of course I am going to skew the results in their favor.

 

+1
and I used to work for them so I do know their tactics very well.

What do they say? uhh... Paper filters are for coffee.

And all from a guy that was supposedly an expert of what and he says this in his article....Anyone else see the fallacy or flaws in some of this BS.???

 

It's just like tobacco companies doing research to show smoking doesn't kill you.

 

Dayton, you might try rereading the article.

1) The research was not sponsored by GM; the persons doing it were diesel enthusiasts, one of whom happened to work at a facility that had access to the tools to perform these tests.
2) All of the filters tested were purchased at retail by other deisel enthusiats and donated to the project.
3) The initial restriction (in in/H2O) ranged from a low of 4.54 for the K&N to 6.23 for the AC Delco (hereafter AC).
4) All filters were subjected to an ISO 5011 test to measure the amount of time and particles required to reduce the filter to its initial restriction + 10 in H2O. The K&N filter ran for 24 minutes before hitting this point, and the filter passed 7.00 grams of test particles through the filter in that time. The AC filter ran for more-than 60 minutes, while only passing .40 grams.
5) Based on the (4), the K&N filter held 211.6 grams of material before hitting the restriction limit. The AC filter help 573.9.

Now the good part...

6) Despite the much lower initial restriction, after less-than 200 grams of dust was delivered to the filter, the flow restriction of the K&N filter exceeded that of the AC.


From the article:
In summary, it would appear that _for this particular filter_, K&N's marketing materials do not stand up- it does not function as well at filtering air as the OEM part. Additionally, after a relatively short period of time your oiled gauze type filter can be performing more-poorly than an OEM filter. While K&N does publish their estimated HP gains for filters on their website, you must write in to ask them for a copy of their ISO 5011 testing results.

Based on the above, also, I would suggest that K&N's stated service interval of 30-50k miles is too long ensure adequate performance of their filters.

 

That's why I just skip using an air filter and run a pair of pantyhose









(this post is meant as sarcasm)

 

I see this as a dirt filtration test and not a test to see who flows more absent of dust.

 

My dad is a diesel mechanic, and told me the exact same thing this study shows. I never was sure if he was right, but this definately confirms his theory.

The graph shows that the K&N flow more when absolutely clean, but as the dust grows past 190 gms the flow begins to drop tremendously compared to the paper. The study also showed that the K&N filter passed 7.00 gms of the test particles while the paper only passed .4 gms. That is 1750% more particles getting the opportunity to damage your engine.

These highly porous high flow filters are great for race cars who clean or replace them every race, and expect to replace engine parts all the time. For those of us who want a filter for daily driving, K&N isn't the way to go.

 

for starters, i would like to point out if you are retarded enough to let your filter accumulate 1/2 a pound of dust without cleaning it, you deserve to have the 7 grams of dust pass into the engine.

for the AC delco filter, it had well over a pound of dust in it!!!! seriously... does anyone ever allow it to get that bad?

so even if we look at the results from a realistic perspective, and assume those results are not flawed in anyway, the results are telling us exactly what everyone assumed!

the K&N has less of a pressure drop then the OEM filter. this means your engine doesn't have to work as hard to suck air in. this IS a performance gain. obviously if a filter is going to flow more air, you are going to have a more porous filter, and more dirt going into the engine.

moral of the story? K&N filters DO make more power then OE (although it will be debatable as to how much), but at a cost of less filtering. the effectiveness of the filter will remain strong provided regular maintance and cleaning of the K&N type filter, while the OE MUST BE REPLACED.

 

<---- Just noticed your last comment.
<---- Removing pantyhose mod when he gets home.