K&N Air filter vs Paper: Test results - The 1947 - Present Chevrolet & GMC Truck Message Board Network

Zonaman · 11-28-2006, 10:04 PM

I wanted to see for myself what the difference was between K&N Air filter vs Paper (NAPA). So here's what I did. I ran each filter about 5500 miles then sampled the oil (Mobil 1 10w30) and sent it to a lab for analysis. Here's the particle count results:

K&N
SIZE NUMBER/ML
4 um 37960
6 um 1449
14 um 139
21 um 33
38 um 20
70 um 13

ISO 11171 CODE: 22/18/14

Paper:
SIZE NUMBER/ML
4 um 419920
6 um 4860
14 um 113
21 um 75
38 um 45
70 um 30

ISO 11171 CODE: 23/19/14

If I'm reading this right, the paper filter (which actually had a few hundred less miles on it) was dirtier! Same truck, same driving conditions. Only difference: I was using a Delco oil filter on the K&N and a NAPA Gold oil filter with the paper.

I was really suprised! I expected the opposite results. So it looks like the K&N is superior- at least on my truck. What say you?

Rick Mills · 11-28-2006, 10:14 PM

Wow....
Hmmmm. I'm running a K&N air filter. This is good to see. Thanks for your efforts

TP from Cntl PA · 11-28-2006, 10:21 PM

That is the first one I seens that slants towards the K&N............Have friends with diesels and it was the exact opposite.

Longhorn Man · 11-28-2006, 10:31 PM

yep, every test i've seen..which were all done in controlled environments, show the K&N as being next to worthless.

71swb4x4 · 11-28-2006, 11:01 PM

Since you sent the oil in I am assuming that the particle counts are from the oil correct?

Zonaman · 11-29-2006, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 71swb4x4

Since you sent the oil in I am assuming that the particle counts are from the oil correct?

Correct, the particle counts are from oil samples. As I said, I was surprised. A bunch of very experienced contributers to this forum are adamant about K&N's and the amount of particles that get through. I have no reason to doubt their experience. Longhorn Man points out the controlled tests he's seen support the idea that these things speed up ring wear. Still others have been into their blocks and report no appreciable wear!

I am fascinated by this. All I can say is that I'll contiune to take oil samples- this time with the same oil filter. To be sure this is not a controlled environment but it is real life, everyday, on the truck I drive. A few more tests should produce a reliable picture. I'll be sure to post results so you guys can scratch your heads along with me.

One side bar. My tests showed a moderately high lead count (around 90 ppm on each test) I have around 25000 on that engine. Bearing wear I presume. I occasionaly haul a 1000 pound trailer in 100+ degree heat. Other than that, every day driving. Any ideas on slowing the wear?

Thanks.

1BadSS · 11-28-2006, 11:16 PM

It appears to me that the paper filter is superior to the k&n on your truck, as the el-cheapo filter was dirtier, thus it caught more sediment and particles within your oil system.

Ram-Man · 11-28-2006, 11:34 PM

My daily driver goes faster and better mpg with a K & N only because my wallet is lighter.

Zonaman · 11-29-2006, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ram-Man

My daily driver goes faster and better mpg with a K & N only because my wallet is lighter.

I've not noticed any difference in mine either in git up & go or mileage. I suppose if I dyno'd the thing I see something.

panhandler62 · 11-29-2006, 09:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1BadSS

It appears to me that the paper filter is superior to the k&n on your truck, as the el-cheapo filter was dirtier, thus it caught more sediment and particles within your oil system.

It was the oil, not the filter element, that was sampled.

brak · 11-28-2006, 11:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zonaman

Only difference: I was using a Delco oil filter on the K&N and a NAPA Gold oil filter with the paper.

That shouldn't matter.

My buddy works for a company near Forest City Iowa, they make oil filters.

I just learned the other day, that they supply filters to all the major companies (Fram, Napa, purolator, etc), the filters come down the line, and then the outer casing get's painted to the specifications of the brand.

Aparently they all use the same filter, the only difference is the paint job.

Longhorn Man · 11-29-2006, 05:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brak

That shouldn't matter.

My buddy works for a company near Forest City Iowa, they make oil filters.

I just learned the other day, that they supply filters to all the major companies (Fram, Napa, purolator, etc), the filters come down the line, and then the outer casing get's painted to the specifications of the brand.

Aparently they all use the same filter, the only difference is the paint job.

there is absolutly no way that is acurate. Cut them open...they aren't the same.

**CMars45000** · 11-29-2006, 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Longhorn Man

there is absolutly no way that is acurate. Cut them open...they aren't the same.

agreed...There is a HUGE difference between the FRAM's and the Wix (well I guess Afinia owns them now so it says Afinia instead of Wix on the filer.)

I personally will not run a K&N air filter. Their oil filters are okay but not worth the extra money in my opinion by any means. I use Napa Gold (Wix aka afinia) on everything I own. Starting to make the switch to Royal Purple too (already switched my DD to Royal Purple and WHAT A DIFFERENCE...)

just my $.02

bryanw1968 · 11-29-2006, 06:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CMars45000

agreed...There is a HUGE difference between the FRAM's and the Wix (well I guess Afinia owns them now so it says Afinia instead of Wix on the filer.)

I personally will not run a K&N air filter. Their oil filters are okay but not worth the extra money in my opinion by any means. I use Napa Gold (Wix aka afinia) on everything I own. Starting to make the switch to Royal Purple too (already switched my DD to Royal Purple and WHAT A DIFFERENCE...)

just my $.02

What DIFFERENCE did you notice from the royal purple?

crazy longhorn · 11-29-2006, 07:33 PM

I have run K&N's for yrs, & while I have not seen the tests on them, I was told that the filter does a better job with a layer of dirt buildup.....but does not restrict the flow much at all (dirty). In light of what I am reading, I will probably add the foam prefilter to help the situation. I dont think the cost on the K&N is too big an issue tho.....he!! for 45 or 50 bones on a 14x4, the filter is pretty much lifetime(unless you take it off & run it over with the truck)

(done that before!) If you figure 5-7 bucks a pop on the paper filters, after a while that adds up....

L

**CMars45000** · 11-29-2006, 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bryanw1968

What DIFFERENCE did you notice from the royal purple?

Well I am using royal purple in my 96 Cherokee that has a 4.0 and it is touching the 175,000 mark... With 5w30 royal purple, it cranks easier (especially now that we are getting to the single digits at night) the tick that was present with dino oil (probably a little piston slap b/c it went away when hot with dino oil) is non existent. It idles smoother too...

I will be switching my 454 to Royal Purple in another month or so when it needs changed. That thing only has 8,000 miles on it so i am unsure of what will change...

stllookn · 11-30-2006, 02:47 PM

Zonaman, A good baseline should include a sample of the oil before you run it in the engine just to see what is already there.

cooters · 02-02-2007, 04:19 PM

the only reason royal purple make more power (according to testing ) is because it thins out emensily when heated. i have not tested it but this is what ive come across. supposed to be a bad product. I believe K&N air filters are good for dusty enviroments but they deposit oil onto sensors and causing computer grief so the car companies dont warranty problems associated with this

**WorkinLonghorn** · 02-02-2007, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Only difference: I was using a Delco oil filter on the K&N and a NAPA Gold oil filter with the paper.

I was really suprised! I expected the opposite results. So it looks like the K&N is superior- at least on my truck. What say you?

I say nice try but you should have at least used the same brand oil filter and installed a new one at the start of the test.This test says more about oil filtration than air filtration.

Orange · 11-30-2006, 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by brak

That shouldn't matter.

My buddy works for a company near Forest City Iowa, they make oil filters.

I just learned the other day, that they supply filters to all the major companies (Fram, Napa, purolator, etc), the filters come down the line, and then the outer casing get's painted to the specifications of the brand.

Aparently they all use the same filter, the only difference is the paint job.

Much information on oil filters here:
Read the entire site for interesting stuff!
http://minimopar.knizefamily.net/oilfilters.html

Zonaman · 11-30-2006, 01:51 PM

How's this Royal Purple stack up to Mobil 1? Would it help significantly more with bearing wear?

Thanks.

corn · 11-29-2006, 02:09 AM

Interesting. Ive never really heard anything bad about K&N's before. Spent all that money for them in both trucks & had myself believing that those ugly expensive filters looked ok. Now I find out I can put a paper element back in & feel better about the filtering quality & the looks...

Americanrider · 11-29-2006, 02:40 AM

I noticed a big difference in perfomance with a K&N on my 91 Silverado 350 EFI. No more bogging out on long hills in 5th gear.

stllookn · 11-29-2006, 03:24 AM

I think someone missed the point. Very interesting results! I ran K&N's on my desert racer for years. The paper air filters resulted in less time between re-ring jobs and more dirt in the inlet passages.

pkj · 11-29-2006, 11:37 AM

untill i joined this forum i always went k&n. now all i hear is how bad k&n is. where did the K&N does not stop dirt come from? i hade a 5.0 mustang that ran up and down about 10 miles of sandy, red clay road daily for 3 years. i tore the motor down at 114000 miles, it was a waste of time, nothing wrong and showed almost no wear. that car had k&n on it from day 1. pkj

11-28-2006, 10:04 PM	#1
Zonaman Registered User Join Date: May 2004 Location: Chandler, AZ Posts: 519	K&N Air filter vs Paper: Test results I wanted to see for myself what the difference was between K&N Air filter vs Paper (NAPA). So here's what I did. I ran each filter about 5500 miles then sampled the oil (Mobil 1 10w30) and sent it to a lab for analysis. Here's the particle count results: K&N SIZE NUMBER/ML 4 um 37960 6 um 1449 14 um 139 21 um 33 38 um 20 70 um 13 ISO 11171 CODE: 22/18/14 Paper: SIZE NUMBER/ML 4 um 419920 6 um 4860 14 um 113 21 um 75 38 um 45 70 um 30 ISO 11171 CODE: 23/19/14 If I'm reading this right, the paper filter (which actually had a few hundred less miles on it) was dirtier! Same truck, same driving conditions. Only difference: I was using a Delco oil filter on the K&N and a NAPA Gold oil filter with the paper. I was really suprised! I expected the opposite results. So it looks like the K&N is superior- at least on my truck. What say you? __________________ 69 C-10 LWB, 350, 700r4, 3.73 posi-traction, front disc brakes. Built for the desert- She can take the heat! Vivat Rex Chevus!

11-28-2006, 10:14 PM	#2
Rick Mills Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Colorado Posts: 351	Re: K&N Air filter vs Paper: Test results Wow.... Hmmmm. I'm running a K&N air filter. This is good to see. Thanks for your efforts __________________ The Fastor Pastor '68 swb, 447 BBC/ 6-71 Weiand, Dual 950 Bigs Carbs/ 2 1/2" Header tubes - 4" collectors/ M-21 4speed: '70 swb; TH-400 - bagged & shaved. Looking for new engine or parts. Wife - Original {A Real Classic!}

11-28-2006, 10:21 PM	#3
TP from Cntl PA Registered User Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Central PA....In the Berg of Nisbet Posts: 790	Re: K&N Air filter vs Paper: Test results That is the first one I seens that slants towards the K&N............Have friends with diesels and it was the exact opposite. __________________ '72 K-20 EFI'ed 250 Inline/4spd stake body, Farm Truck '71 C-20 Cummins Diesel Powered, In storage thanks to $5.00 diesel! '69 3500 GMC 305V-6/4spd, Still under reconstruction.......... Inlines Rule! 6 soldiers standing is better than 8 laying down!!!!!!!!

11-28-2006, 10:31 PM	#4
Longhorn Man its all about the +6 inches Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Hilliard Ohio Posts: 2,690	Re: K&N Air filter vs Paper: Test results yep, every test i've seen..which were all done in controlled environments, show the K&N as being next to worthless.

11-28-2006, 11:01 PM	#5
71swb4x4 Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Brookings, SD Posts: 10,497	Re: K&N Air filter vs Paper: Test results Since you sent the oil in I am assuming that the particle counts are from the oil correct? __________________ Some people are like slinkies, they aren't good for anything, but you can't help but smile when you see one tumble down the stairs.

11-28-2006, 11:16 PM	#7
1BadSS NOT REALLY BANNED! Join Date: Jul 2004 Location: Shawnee, KS Posts: 1,072	Re: K&N Air filter vs Paper: Test results It appears to me that the paper filter is superior to the k&n on your truck, as the el-cheapo filter was dirtier, thus it caught more sediment and particles within your oil system. __________________ 1987 Mustang Coupe - 2.7 Stroker, 78mm turbo, Stainless header, 3" Exh, FMIC, 160lb/hr Injectors, MS3, twin walbro 255's, 34psi. Eating V8's daily. 04 Pontiac GTO 04 Ford Mustang GT 68 C20 LWB stripper truck 73 K5 Cheyenne 76 C20 Sierra Crew SRW 88 K20 Suburban I'm not hammering on metal just to hammer, i'm creating a piece of art.

11-28-2006, 11:34 PM	#8
Ram-Man Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Minnesota Posts: 943	Re: K&N Air filter vs Paper: Test results My daily driver goes faster and better mpg with a K & N only because my wallet is lighter.

11-29-2006, 07:33 PM	#15
crazy longhorn Fabricate till you "puke" Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Ill Posts: 9,402	Re: K&N Air filter vs Paper: Test results I have run K&N's for yrs, & while I have not seen the tests on them, I was told that the filter does a better job with a layer of dirt buildup.....but does not restrict the flow much at all (dirty). In light of what I am reading, I will probably add the foam prefilter to help the situation. I dont think the cost on the K&N is too big an issue tho.....he!! for 45 or 50 bones on a 14x4, the filter is pretty much lifetime(unless you take it off & run it over with the truck)(done that before!) If you figure 5-7 bucks a pop on the paper filters, after a while that adds up.... L __________________ 69 longhorn,4" chop,3/5 drop, 1/2 ton suspension/disc brakes,1 1/2" body drop,steel tilt clip, 5.3/Edelbrock rpm intake/600 carb, Hooker streetrod shorties,2 1/2" exhaust/ H pipe/50's Flows , 6 spd Richmond trans,12 bolt/ 3.40 gears....

11-30-2006, 02:47 PM	#17
stllookn Saving 1 truck at a time! Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Kent, WA Posts: 6,465	Re: K&N Air filter vs Paper: Test results Zonaman, A good baseline should include a sample of the oil before you run it in the engine just to see what is already there. __________________ '68 C20 Longhorn 50th Anniversary 400/TH400 '68 C20 Longhorn 50th Anniversary 468/TH400w/buckets '72 C20 Halfhorn (Longhorn w/o cab and front clip) '69 Flxible Cruiser (look up ugly in the dictionary)

02-02-2007, 04:19 PM	#18
cooters Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Edmonton Alberta Posts: 458	Re: K&N Air filter vs Paper: Test results the only reason royal purple make more power (according to testing ) is because it thins out emensily when heated. i have not tested it but this is what ive come across. supposed to be a bad product. I believe K&N air filters are good for dusty enviroments but they deposit oil onto sensors and causing computer grief so the car companies dont warranty problems associated with this Last edited by cooters; 02-02-2007 at 04:22 PM.

11-30-2006, 01:51 PM	#21
Zonaman Registered User Join Date: May 2004 Location: Chandler, AZ Posts: 519	Re: K&N Air filter vs Paper: Test results How's this Royal Purple stack up to Mobil 1? Would it help significantly more with bearing wear? Thanks. __________________ 69 C-10 LWB, 350, 700r4, 3.73 posi-traction, front disc brakes. Built for the desert- She can take the heat! Vivat Rex Chevus!

11-29-2006, 02:09 AM	#22
corn Registered User Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: here Posts: 5,789	Re: K&N Air filter vs Paper: Test results Interesting. Ive never really heard anything bad about K&N's before. Spent all that money for them in both trucks & had myself believing that those ugly expensive filters looked ok. Now I find out I can put a paper element back in & feel better about the filtering quality & the looks...

11-29-2006, 02:40 AM	#23
Americanrider Registered User Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: NW, WA. Posts: 1,421	Re: K&N Air filter vs Paper: Test results I noticed a big difference in perfomance with a K&N on my 91 Silverado 350 EFI. No more bogging out on long hills in 5th gear.

11-29-2006, 03:24 AM	#24
stllookn Saving 1 truck at a time! Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Kent, WA Posts: 6,465	Re: K&N Air filter vs Paper: Test results I think someone missed the point. Very interesting results! I ran K&N's on my desert racer for years. The paper air filters resulted in less time between re-ring jobs and more dirt in the inlet passages. __________________ '68 C20 Longhorn 50th Anniversary 400/TH400 '68 C20 Longhorn 50th Anniversary 468/TH400w/buckets '72 C20 Halfhorn (Longhorn w/o cab and front clip) '69 Flxible Cruiser (look up ugly in the dictionary)

11-29-2006, 11:37 AM	#25
pkj Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: waycross ga. Posts: 438	Re: K&N Air filter vs Paper: Test results untill i joined this forum i always went k&n. now all i hear is how bad k&n is. where did the K&N does not stop dirt come from? i hade a 5.0 mustang that ran up and down about 10 miles of sandy, red clay road daily for 3 years. i tore the motor down at 114000 miles, it was a waste of time, nothing wrong and showed almost no wear. that car had k&n on it from day 1. pkj



Register or Log In To remove these advertisements.

Register or Log In To remove these advertisements.