[urq] K&N filters bad?
javadog at worldnet.att.net
Fri Mar 12 11:46:20 EST 2004
Once upon a time, there was something posted on the net about a company that
tested the K&N filters for use in heavy equipment in a mine, or some such
use. They concluded that they weren't a good filter.
This doesn't really surprise me, as the filters were never originally
designed for these types of applications, or for use in street cars. It
just so happens that one of the two founders of K&N is a good freind of
mine. Way back when they started making these things, they intended them to
go on sprint cars and keep the large chunks out of the engines. As the
engines were frequently rebuilt, long engine life wasn't an issue. They
began to use them in off-road events like Baja, where making it to the end
of the race was the only concern. Again, the filter was better than nothing
but far from perfect.
Now, you can get them to fit virtually anything and they are better than no
filter at all but not as good as a typical stock paper filter. And that is
if they are used correctly, which is almost never the case. Many idiots
never oil them at all and those that do don't clean them often enough. On
many engines (not necessarily an Audi 5 cylinder) there is enough fuel
standoff at certain points in the prm band that the filter gets essentially
washed with gasoline, which does nothing good for the filter oil. Take a
look at a carburetted motorcycle on a dyno sometime - you'lll be amazed.
When you are looking to find a better filter for your car, you have to ask
yourself only one question. Given that the car manufacturers are having to
warranty engines on new cars for a lot longer than they would like to, and
since the quality of the air filtration is a major determinate of engine
longevity, if they could find a better filter than the one they use, don't
you think they would use it?
Go count how many engines are supplied new with a K&N filter.
More information about the urq