I've had a K&N drop in filter (barely used) in my garage since I got my car back in 2006. Have been running a stock Mahle paper filter since then (20,000km/ 12500 miles).
Finally got around to do a back to back test with these. I did not expect much difference, and that was the result as well.
These are 2nd gear pulls, so power and especially torque are much lower than when testing in 3rd and 4th, due to low load and drivetrain inertia in the low gear.
NB: Power measured at the wheels.
However, it is the difference that is the issue here.
The light red and light blue lines are for the well used stock paper filter, dark lines for K&N drop in.
These are the middle runs of out three runs with each setup.
As expected, the K&N made zip difference even on an engine that pushes north of 500hp at the flywheel. Only good thing is that it is reusable, but it lets in more crap and there is a risk of damaging the MAF due to oil contamination.
On a flow bench, a K&N will flow ever so slightly better than a new paper filter.
[img][/IMG]
Finally got around to do a back to back test with these. I did not expect much difference, and that was the result as well.
These are 2nd gear pulls, so power and especially torque are much lower than when testing in 3rd and 4th, due to low load and drivetrain inertia in the low gear.
NB: Power measured at the wheels.
However, it is the difference that is the issue here.
The light red and light blue lines are for the well used stock paper filter, dark lines for K&N drop in.
These are the middle runs of out three runs with each setup.
As expected, the K&N made zip difference even on an engine that pushes north of 500hp at the flywheel. Only good thing is that it is reusable, but it lets in more crap and there is a risk of damaging the MAF due to oil contamination.
On a flow bench, a K&N will flow ever so slightly better than a new paper filter.
[img][/IMG]
Comment