any problems with oil air filters?

[chazexl]

ant trouble with sensors?

[Tim]

Originally posted by chazexl
ant trouble with sensors?

no, can't say that I've had any trouble...........

[5Gs]

any specific problem you're referring to? I haven't had any problems, but then again I've only had the pilot for less than 3 weeks.

[chazexl]

iwa srefering to air filters like perrin k & n ect . ones that are oiled

[humanoid]

On some of the Toyota Tacoma boards I frequent, many have had problems with the K&N being over oiled and the oil fouling up the MAF sensor, but that can be cleaned with some electrical contact cleaner that can be found at any auto parts store.

[whizmo]

I don't think thin is any problem with sensors - the MAF measures the same air whether it is downstream of an OEM paper filter or an oiled foam or gauze filter.

But... despite all the planted propoganda on the net, these filters just don't filter as well as OEM paper.

Whizmo

[A6Pilot]

But they do 'straighten' the air out for gobs of power, don't they?

There's a Tornado in your future........

[chazexl]

hey yea thanks for your input but was looking for how the mas worked with such a setup.and why are you in this forum again what experience do you have with performance.please do tell. or a6 pilot have you fallen for the tornado since you show no intelligence in performance but to mock others

[CMasten]

I have tried the K&N filters several times and always had the same experience.

- they start off great seem to help performance etc, but quickly gum up and then I was never able to get them clean again like they were the first time, (even trying K&Ns proclaimed filter cleaner).

I have since gone back to OEM filters and just toss them out a regular intervals and always clean them off and vaccum out the air intake when I change the oil.

If I was a race car driver and used it for 3 hours and then tossed it out, I am sure they would be great, but Im not so I dont...

[Sportymonk]

I think he was kidding, you know, good natured kidding. Geez.

Originally posted by chazexl
hey yea thanks for your input but was looking for how the mas worked with such a setup.and why are you in this forum again what experience do you have with performance.please do tell. or a6 pilot have you fallen for the tornado since you show no intelligence in performance but to mock others

[andyschneider]

The "success factor" of a K&N filter depends totally on the specific vehicle you use it on. I've used a K&N replacement (non- FIPK) filter on the following:

- 95 Saab 900 - big difference vs stock - you could feel it at all RPM ranges
- 03 Pontiac Aztek - no difference vs stock
- 01 Chevy Tahoe - noticable difference at low-rpm performance, not so much as you get the engine happier

I will disagree about the "gumming" up of a K&N - I drove each of the above for 30-40k miles, and while they did get dirty, their performance never suffered, and cleaning it with the K&N kit (with the aerosol oil, NOT the bottle of oil) did the trick. I think the reason folks have trouble with these is that they put too much oil on the gauze. You put just enough oil with the spray to give the gauze a pink tint and stop. Any more and you create a gummy/oily situation where you could possible start clogging it up a bit.. When oiled correctly, you don't impact any electronics downwind from the filter.

andy

[N_Jay]

Originally posted by andyschneider
. . . .
- 01 Chevy Tahoe - noticable difference at low-rpm performance, not so much as you get the engine happier

. . .

Now this really makes no sense.

More evidence for the placebo effect.

[A6Pilot]

chazexl-

I was only half kidding. Please check out the following link, and see if you can still recommend a K&N filter.

http://home.usadatanet.net/~jbplock/ISO5011/SPICER.htm

[andyschneider]

Originally posted by N_Jay


Now this really makes no sense.

More evidence for the placebo effect.

Actually, it sort of makes sense (in a warped kind of way). When you're doing low-rpm, grunt pulls (like on the highway caught in a higher gear), the increased air flow helped it to be smoother and not need to downshift and rev higher. Once you got on the gas real good, it was sucking enough thru the filter to not make a difference. I know what you're saying - and I would have agreed to the placebo effect - but I certainly felt the difference going back and forth between the stock (new) filter and the K&N (which I did do a couple of times to make sure I wasn't imagining it).

go figure...

andy

[N_Jay]

Originally posted by andyschneider


Actually, it sort of makes sense (in a warped kind of way). When you're doing low-rpm, grunt pulls (like on the highway caught in a higher gear), the increased air flow helped it to be smoother and not need to downshift and rev higher. Once you got on the gas real good, it was sucking enough thru the filter to not make a difference. I know what you're saying - and I would have agreed to the placebo effect - but I certainly felt the difference going back and forth between the stock (new) filter and the K&N (which I did do a couple of times to make sure I wasn't imagining it).

go figure...

andy

Now you are trying to say that the flow through the filter is non-linear!

Lets see the paper is restrictive to low flow rates, but gets better at high rates?

I'll give you a little hint; All the "improvement" felt, is a result of how your brain interprets the noise!