Local source for KN Filters

Discussion in 'Technical' started by ray23, Sep 11, 2008.

  1. RE: K& N Air Filter/FASTCORNERWednesday, September 10, 2008 11:32 PM
    From: "sakchai" View contact details To: [email [email protected]][email protected][/email] MR.RAY,



    By the way they wanted 6,000 baht for the same filter here in Udon.
  2. K. Sakchai is one of the really good guys in the Thai Bike Biz,
    with a unique view to customer service.
    He also has a branch in CNX @ Parnthip Plaza.
  3. Personally I can't say enough about the guy, he has been a tremendous help to me. Even tried to find a sourse for a Cobra exhaust for me.

    That was a dead end doesn't looks like I don't need it anyway. that wouldn't put one bhat in his pocket just helpful.
  4. Regarding K&N Filters, I have one short piece of advice...DON'T.

    There have been numerous tests performed comparing K&N oiled gauze filters against standard pleated paper filters, and the K&N looses on all accounts. Just Google K&N filter test and you will find all sorts of good info. The K&N does flow air better for a short time, because it has far less filter surface area, and therefore less resistance. The K&N also passes more fine grained dust than the paper element. Also, due to the decreased surface area, it clogs up far quicker, and subsequently flows air far worse. Considering the work involved in cleaning the K&N every 1500km, as well as the expensive 'oil' they want you to use, the K&N is far more expensive to use than just replacing the paper version.

    Another consideration if you have a fuel injected bike (or car for that matter) is that sucking air through the oil soaked filter causes a deposit on the air mass meter, and that totally screws up the fuel mixture ratio. Not a good thing.

    If you care about the longevity of your engine, as well as good performance, step away from the K&N.
  5. Apparently the filtering capacity info is probably correct.

    But the above oil soaked bit I am not so sure. I am in the process of sending an OEM PCX filter to a manufacturer to see if they are interested in making one of theirs for PCX. I have it in my hand. It is a standard pleated paper filter but it is soaked in oil. If I touch the paper element I get oil on my fingers.

    If Honda were worried about the oil depositing on the internals of the throttle body they wouldn't oil there filters.

    That being said if I get one for PCX it won't be "oiled"
  6. I GOOGLED about and found some info on the filter test that Jim Conforti did a few years ago. Jim is a BMW tuner of some renown in the US, and he is pretty famous for getting more power out of BMW engines. He got a testing lab to do a scientific test of the K&N vs the stock BMW paper element. Here is his report of the lab's results.

    One way to give a little bit more air to the Bmw E34 engine is to change the air filter to a less restrictive one like K&N or by removing the filter box and replacing it with a cool air induction filter (more expensive).
    Pros: If you have a sport exhaust, the sound will be deeper. Maybe a little increase of acceleration. It is the last time that you'll buy an air filter (if you clean and oil it).
    Cons: I must warn you that some people think that the K&N type filters do not filter the air as good as the stock filter and might harm your engine.
    Cold air intakes non insulated are getting the warm air of the engine. This will LOWER your HP.

    Rob Levinson from UUC Motorwerks says that "it is really doing every E34 owner a disservice for three reasons:
    • First, conclusive tests from independent labs show that K&N filters, no matter how well-oiled and cleaned, let through huge amounts of large particulate that damages engines. Oil analysis shows 5x as much silicate contamination. Additionally, the oil from these filters tends to muck up the MAF and cause an engine-damaging lean-run condition.
    • Second, an open element filter like that sucks in hot underhood air and subjects the filter to "fan wash", the swirl that creates a vacuum effect. On the E36 M3, we measure a 15hp loss from open cone filters.
    • Third, the E34 airbox is designed with an integral velocity-stack style venturi at the opening. Running one of these engines on a dyno, you can cause a 5hp drop just from putting your finger on the stack lip. Removing that airbox undoes a lot of good BMW engineering. Yes, these filters make a "really cool" noise... but noise does not equal power. Stick with a stock paper element in the factory airbox, you're not getting any more power with a K&N garbage-filter, just damaging your motor."
    Jim Conforti (AKA the Land Shark) did some testing:
    This was a scientific test, not one done by filter manufacturer X to show that their filters are better than manufacturer Y. The test results are pretty irrefutable as the test lab tests and designs filters where "screw ups" are absolutely NOT allowable (I can't say any more for security. Think "Glow in the Dark").
    A scientific test was done on TEST filters where air was loaded with ACCTD (some standardized "test dust" called AC Co**** Test Dust) and sucked through the TEST filter then through an analysis membrane. From the Quantity of dust injected and the amount that gets through the TEST filter and is then captured on the analysis membrane we can calculate the efficiency of the TEST filter in Question.
    BMW Stock Filter, Eff. Area of Media: 8.4 sq ft.
    K&N Replacement, Eff. Area of Media: 1.6 sq ft.
    The filters are the SAME size. They both fit in the STOCK BMW M3 airbox. The difference is that the STOCK filter has 65 pleats 1.5" deep and the K&N only 29 pleats each 0.75" deep.
    Now, remember this ratio: " 5.25:1". It's the ratio of the AREA of STOCK to K&N. It's very important and will come into play later.
    The STOCK filter efficiency started at 93.4% at 0 loading and increased to 99.2% efficiency as the loading increased to a max tested of 38.8 gm/sq ft of dust.

    The K&N filter efficiency started at 85.2% at 0 loading and increased to 98.1% at the max tested loading of 41.38 gm/sq ft.
    Now, I hear you. "Jim, that's only a FEW PERCENT". But is it?
    Let's look. If we had 100 grams of dust on a new BMW filter we would let through a total of 6.6 grams of dust in. If we used the new K&N filter we get 14.8 grams of dust. That's 224% (TWO HUNDRED TWENTY FOUR PERCENT!!) more dust ingested initially, stock vs. "free flow" and this ratio is pretty much held. Somewhere between 200-300% more dirt gets "ingested" anywhere across loading equivalence. The more INTERESTING thing is when you look at what happens to the DP or Differential Pressure at a constant airflow as you dirty both filters equally with time.
    The test used a rate of 75gr of dust per 20 min. Here's where the AREA difference comes MAJORLY into play. See, even though the BMW filter flows a bit less at the SAME loading, it also LOADS UP 5.25 times SLOWER due to it's LARGER effective area. So what happens is that the K&N initially flows better, but as the dirt continues coming in, the K&N eventually flows WORSE while still letting MORE dirt in.
    Now, does any of this additional dirt cause problems? I dunno. I suppose we could have a few people do some independent oil analyses on different motors using both K&Ns and Stock filters. Get enough of them, and you'd have a good statistical basis. For me though, it's simple: More DIRT = BAD.
    The additional short-term airflow might make sense on a track car. IMHO, it doesn't for the street.
    -- Jim Conforti

    As for the Honda PCX air filter, I have no data on that, therefore I can not make any science based conclusion. I will speculate however that perhaps the PCX does not use a hot wire MAF sensor, I have no idea. I have personally seen MAF hot wires that were crapped up, and cleaning them with CRC MAF cleaner restored lost throttle response. That person dumped his K&N and had no further problems.

    I will add to this that a bunch of BMW enthusiasts sent oil samples to a testing lab for analysis, and the results showed a significant amount of silica in the oil run in the K&N filtered engines, and amazingly enough, no silica in the stock filtered engines. Try to use critical thinking in your choices and don't believe all the marketing BS you read. I'm just saying...
  7. Good stuff! I have to agree that generally speaking, it's hard to improve upon the flow and filtering capabilities of stock air filters on many vehicles. Or, to put it another way, you can improve one if you sacrifice the other. I'm always a bit surprised when folks spend BIG MONEY on aftermarket filters without any evidence that they perform better than stock...
    Ride On!
  8. I have used KN filters on older carbed bikes with no air box fitted and I never noticed any damage to the cylinders or head on the occasions the motor was pulled down. The usual carbon build up in the head but nothing else showing.
    I little bit of dust or fibers from the filter material are not going to cause noticeable damage, if at all over the life time of the engine. With the high compression ratios the combustion process will destroy most of the particles and they will probably clog up your exhaust more than damage your engine. As long as the filter is keeping out large particles it is working.
    I choose an air filter based on its air flow rate versus filtering performance to try to gain engine performance. Otherwise I would just stick with the stock air filter
    I am fortunate enough to have electronics on my bike where I can monitor with a lap top, my air fuel ratio (AFR) and after changing from a standard Honda air filter to a BMC filter I noted a small change in the AFR giving a slightly leaner mixture. I increased the fuel by about 3%. This means with the BMC filter the combustion chamber was getting more air, hence running leaner.
    I then changed to a Piper cross filter and it created a significant change in the air fuel ratio. I was able to increase the fuel supplied across the rev range by about another 10%.
    What does this mean? I certainly gained in power, but have I allowed more foreign particles to enter the engine?
    I don't think so as all name brand filters do a pretty good job of keeping out the large particles that can cause engine damage.
    All the filter above would still work on an off road bike but would need frequent cleaning with high pressure air.
    I stay completely away from filters that require oiling. They quickly change the AFR supplied to the engine due to inconsistent oil distribution over the filter and partial clogging as the oil accumulates the dust.
  9. My S4 Ducati has a K&N filter with heavily modified airbox with that mod alone completely standard I Had it dynoed it at 105HP which is 4 more than the 101HP standard , then i fitted Termi Carbon Fibre open cans and got 107HP then I fitted a PC3 and started writing custom fuelling maps 112HP-115HP and megacycle rockers and Ducati Performance ECU, at the last test the bike was developing 119 HP it also runs a lot smoother than standard and is more tractable at low revs , so much so that my recent maps have become defacto among Ducatisti for any S4 with PC3 and cans and opened airboxes Even Power commander are distributing 4 of my S4 maps .

    some people say is Like a Honda VFR ......I think thats going a bit far its not that smooth or bland .

    i have had the engine and heads apart for valve relapping and they are in excellent condition , i change the oils every 3-4000 km using Motul 15-50w synthetic bore wear is also minimal and the bike had now done 33,000km in dusty Thai conditions I clean the filter twice yearly and re oil it lightly .

    My experience of K&N has been positive however as I mentioned on another post In reply to Steve Albrecht i am now going to experiment with a different type of POD filter mainly for ease of access as Ducati airboxes are a pain to remove and install quickly and get in the way of other tuning and maintanance .

    I am not a Pro tuner or a scientist so I could be wrong about K&N in other scenarios..
  10. Interesting - Ive got 280,000 kms up on my AT using a K&N air filter for about 240,000 of those kms. They work ok for me.
  11. Scientists and lab tests using false data and computer models .... not real life experience ...are we talking Gobal Warming crap ha ha

Share This Page