Air Filter material comparison
#1
Rotary Freak
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Houston
Posts: 1,742
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Air Filter material comparison
Check this out...
Message: 4
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2003 20:16:38 EDT
From:
Subject: FWD Test on oiled air filters
Hi, got this off the Datalogit list, very interesting
>I was responsible for
>evaluating re-usable air filters for a major construction/mining company
>that had hundreds of vehicles ranging from large earthmovers to pick-up
>trucks and salesmen's cars. This study was embarked upon due to the fact
>that we were spending upwards of $30,000 a MONTH on paper air filters.
>Using them one time then throwing them away.. I inititated the study in
>that I was convinced that a K&N type filter or oiled foam would save us
>many dollars per year in filter savings, man hour savings, and of course
>engines as these would filter dirt better than paper. (yes, I had read the
>K&N ads and was a believer) Representative test units were chosen to give
>us a broad spectrum from cars right through large front end loaders. With
>each unit we had a long history of oil analysis records so that changes
>would be trackable. Unfortunately, for me, every single unit having
>alternative re-usable air cleaners showed an immediate large jump in
>silicon (dirt) levels with corresponding major increases in wear metals.
>In one extreme case, a unit with a primary and secondary air cleaner, the
>secondary (small paper element) clogged before even one day's test run
>could be completed. This particular unit had a Cummins V-12 engine that had
>paper/paper one one bank and K&N/paper on the other bank; two completely
>independent induction systems. The conditions were EXACTLY duplicated for
>each bank yet the K&N allowed so much dirt to pass through that the small
>filter became clogged before lunch. The same outcome occured with oiled
>foams on this unit.
>>We discontinued the tests on the large pieces almost
>immediately but continued with service trucks, formen's vehicles, and my
>own company car. Analysis results continued showing markedly increased wear
>rates for all the vehicles, mine included. Test concluded, switched back to
>paper/glass and all vehicles showed reduction back to near original levels
>of both wear metals and dirt. I continued with the K&N on my company car
>out of stubborness and at 85,000 miles the Chevy 305 V-8 wheezed its last
>breath. The top end was sanded badly; bottom end was just fine. End of
>test. I must stress that EVERYONE involved in this test was hoping that
>alternative filters would work as everyone was sick about pulling out a
>perfectly good $85 air cleaner and throwing 4 of them away each week per
>machine... So, I strongly suggest that depending upon an individual's long
>term plan for their vehicles they simply run an oil analysis at least once
>to see that the K&N or whatever alternative air filter is indeed working IN
>THAT APPLICATION... It depends on a person's priorities. If you want
>performance then indeed the K&N is the way to go but at what cost??? And
>no, I do not work for a paper or glass air filter manufacturing company nor
>do I have any affiliation with anything directly or indirectly that could
>benefit George Morrison as a result..
Here's the info I have on air filter performance. Tests were done using
SAE J726C Test Method 5-best --> 1-worst
Oiled foam(AMSOIL,UNI), Paper, Oil Bath, Oiled Gauze,(K&N)
Large particle efficiency 5 5 5 4
Small particle efficiency 5 4 1 2
Airflow capacity 5 2 3 5
Dust holding capacity 4 2 5 2
Load up characteristic 4 1 5 1
Backfire characteristic 3 2 5 3
Cleanability 4 1 4 3
As you can see, K&Ns are great for airflow, which is what they were
designed for. Their original application was on racing engines, where
airflow is important and ultimate engine life was of little consern.
They
are not as good at filtering as paper or oiled foam types.
Sorry that was so long but I thought it was important!
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2003 20:16:38 EDT
From:
Subject: FWD Test on oiled air filters
Hi, got this off the Datalogit list, very interesting
>I was responsible for
>evaluating re-usable air filters for a major construction/mining company
>that had hundreds of vehicles ranging from large earthmovers to pick-up
>trucks and salesmen's cars. This study was embarked upon due to the fact
>that we were spending upwards of $30,000 a MONTH on paper air filters.
>Using them one time then throwing them away.. I inititated the study in
>that I was convinced that a K&N type filter or oiled foam would save us
>many dollars per year in filter savings, man hour savings, and of course
>engines as these would filter dirt better than paper. (yes, I had read the
>K&N ads and was a believer) Representative test units were chosen to give
>us a broad spectrum from cars right through large front end loaders. With
>each unit we had a long history of oil analysis records so that changes
>would be trackable. Unfortunately, for me, every single unit having
>alternative re-usable air cleaners showed an immediate large jump in
>silicon (dirt) levels with corresponding major increases in wear metals.
>In one extreme case, a unit with a primary and secondary air cleaner, the
>secondary (small paper element) clogged before even one day's test run
>could be completed. This particular unit had a Cummins V-12 engine that had
>paper/paper one one bank and K&N/paper on the other bank; two completely
>independent induction systems. The conditions were EXACTLY duplicated for
>each bank yet the K&N allowed so much dirt to pass through that the small
>filter became clogged before lunch. The same outcome occured with oiled
>foams on this unit.
>>We discontinued the tests on the large pieces almost
>immediately but continued with service trucks, formen's vehicles, and my
>own company car. Analysis results continued showing markedly increased wear
>rates for all the vehicles, mine included. Test concluded, switched back to
>paper/glass and all vehicles showed reduction back to near original levels
>of both wear metals and dirt. I continued with the K&N on my company car
>out of stubborness and at 85,000 miles the Chevy 305 V-8 wheezed its last
>breath. The top end was sanded badly; bottom end was just fine. End of
>test. I must stress that EVERYONE involved in this test was hoping that
>alternative filters would work as everyone was sick about pulling out a
>perfectly good $85 air cleaner and throwing 4 of them away each week per
>machine... So, I strongly suggest that depending upon an individual's long
>term plan for their vehicles they simply run an oil analysis at least once
>to see that the K&N or whatever alternative air filter is indeed working IN
>THAT APPLICATION... It depends on a person's priorities. If you want
>performance then indeed the K&N is the way to go but at what cost??? And
>no, I do not work for a paper or glass air filter manufacturing company nor
>do I have any affiliation with anything directly or indirectly that could
>benefit George Morrison as a result..
Here's the info I have on air filter performance. Tests were done using
SAE J726C Test Method 5-best --> 1-worst
Oiled foam(AMSOIL,UNI), Paper, Oil Bath, Oiled Gauze,(K&N)
Large particle efficiency 5 5 5 4
Small particle efficiency 5 4 1 2
Airflow capacity 5 2 3 5
Dust holding capacity 4 2 5 2
Load up characteristic 4 1 5 1
Backfire characteristic 3 2 5 3
Cleanability 4 1 4 3
As you can see, K&Ns are great for airflow, which is what they were
designed for. Their original application was on racing engines, where
airflow is important and ultimate engine life was of little consern.
They
are not as good at filtering as paper or oiled foam types.
Sorry that was so long but I thought it was important!
#3
Mr. Links
iTrader: (1)
lmao... not as good as "oiled foam types"...
I did read an article when I was selecting my intake which also stated about performance loss due to the non-foam filters getting clogged up fairly quick (which is why I choose the foam type myself).
Oh well, just more information for people to make an informed decision as to what they would like to add to their car. Thanks for the info!
I did read an article when I was selecting my intake which also stated about performance loss due to the non-foam filters getting clogged up fairly quick (which is why I choose the foam type myself).
Oh well, just more information for people to make an informed decision as to what they would like to add to their car. Thanks for the info!
#6
Rotary Enthusiast
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Posts: 1,252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't understand the following, what does he mean by top end bottom end?
"I continued with the K&N on my company car out of stubborness and at 85,000 miles the Chevy 305 V-8 wheezed its last breath. The top end was sanded badly; bottom end was just fine."
"I continued with the K&N on my company car out of stubborness and at 85,000 miles the Chevy 305 V-8 wheezed its last breath. The top end was sanded badly; bottom end was just fine."
#7
Rotary Freak
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Houston
Posts: 1,742
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Last edited by PVerdieck; 04-10-03 at 10:50 AM.
Trending Topics
#8
Rotary Freak
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Houston
Posts: 1,742
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
#10
Senior Member
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: South Florida
Posts: 617
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My personal opinion is that, while the actual bits of fact strewn throughout the article are probably correct, they don't mean a whole lot in a typical sports car environment. Its not like you can do a lot of off-roading in an FD, and its highly unlikely...sad as that it may be...that something else won't get you that rebuild before the K&N filtering ability. I've also heard numerous stories of foam elements crumbling getting sucked into the intake, which is something the K&Ns won't do. I have no plans on ditching mine.
jds
jds
Originally posted by Cihuuy
is this for real???
is this for real???
#15
Eats, Sleeps, Dreams Rotary
You know, I remember readind somewhere that the foam filters break down and can get sucked in...I just bought the Airinx filters and the foam it came with is not Foam Foam, it's like Plastic Foam...I don't see how it can break down and get sucked in. I know this doesn't pertain to the subject here but I thought I would chime in.
Me
Me
#16
Mr. Links
iTrader: (1)
Originally posted by apneablue
You know, I remember readind somewhere that the foam filters break down and can get sucked in...I just bought the Airinx filters and the foam it came with is not Foam Foam, it's like Plastic Foam...I don't see how it can break down and get sucked in. I know this doesn't pertain to the subject here but I thought I would chime in.
You know, I remember readind somewhere that the foam filters break down and can get sucked in...I just bought the Airinx filters and the foam it came with is not Foam Foam, it's like Plastic Foam...I don't see how it can break down and get sucked in. I know this doesn't pertain to the subject here but I thought I would chime in.
However, I've been running the HKS now for quite a while and I've never had that happen. I change my filters about once a year, but inspect them periodically.
That myth is the same as all the other RX-7 myths. Anything without proper maintenence is bad whether it's air filters or anything else on the car.
#17
Slower Traffic Keep Right
iTrader: (5)
Originally posted by bureau_c
I've also heard numerous stories of foam elements crumbling getting sucked into the intake, which is something the K&Ns won't do. I have no plans on ditching mine.
jds
I've also heard numerous stories of foam elements crumbling getting sucked into the intake, which is something the K&Ns won't do. I have no plans on ditching mine.
jds
#18
Mr. Links
iTrader: (1)
Originally posted by ISUposs
I had a HKS intake with foam filters for a few years with abosolutely NO signs of degredation. I know this is bad of me, but I just regularly cleaned and oiled them. they didn't ever get very dirty do that told me one of two things. either they didn't work, or the engine bay of the FD doesn't get too dirty under normal city/hwy driving conditions. hope it was the second scenario. I replaced them with a couple of regular K&N cone filters.
I had a HKS intake with foam filters for a few years with abosolutely NO signs of degredation. I know this is bad of me, but I just regularly cleaned and oiled them. they didn't ever get very dirty do that told me one of two things. either they didn't work, or the engine bay of the FD doesn't get too dirty under normal city/hwy driving conditions. hope it was the second scenario. I replaced them with a couple of regular K&N cone filters.
#19
The Chevy V8 is a reciprocating engine, meaning that it uses pistons. The top end is the engine head containing the valves, cams, rocker arms, etc. The bottom end has the pistons, rings, crankshaft, etc.
Originally posted by reza
I don't understand the following, what does he mean by top end bottom end?
"I continued with the K&N on my company car out of stubborness and at 85,000 miles the Chevy 305 V-8 wheezed its last breath. The top end was sanded badly; bottom end was just fine."
I don't understand the following, what does he mean by top end bottom end?
"I continued with the K&N on my company car out of stubborness and at 85,000 miles the Chevy 305 V-8 wheezed its last breath. The top end was sanded badly; bottom end was just fine."
#20
Lives on the Forum
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: San Lorenzo, California
Posts: 14,716
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
8 Posts
There is not enough detail in that report to come to any accurate conclusions.
People have been using K&N filters in their cars for over 30 years. If it truly accelerated engine wear that badly, there would be solid documentation to the fact.
As DomFD3S pointed out, any type of filter that flows more air is expected to not filter quite as well. Hopefully, few of our vehicles would be subjected to the conditions at a construction/industrial site.....
People have been using K&N filters in their cars for over 30 years. If it truly accelerated engine wear that badly, there would be solid documentation to the fact.
As DomFD3S pointed out, any type of filter that flows more air is expected to not filter quite as well. Hopefully, few of our vehicles would be subjected to the conditions at a construction/industrial site.....
#21
Rotary Freak
MY mechanic puts the pistons and rings in the top end w-pin and small end of the rod in the top end. The rod big end , rod bearings ,crank and crank bearings in the bottom end . Cam in the block with chain or gears is bottom end. Over head cam is top end.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
24seven_dada
3rd Generation Specific (1993-2002)
20
11-10-18 12:03 PM
Tem120
3rd Generation Specific (1993-2002)
4
09-07-15 09:53 AM