[TR] Independent air filter test

[thenicholls at verizon.net]

Justin, Randall and list,

Did some searching around and found this test very interesting:  http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/airfilter/airtest1.htm 

Craig
1972 Triumph TR6

On Apr 22, 2010, Justin Wagner <jmwagner at greenheart.com> wrote: 

Hey Randall...

Some racers don't use filters at all... just open velocity stacks. Some racers just put some mesh over their velocity stacks. Fact is, there's always trade offs between flow and the density/effectiveness of the filter medium. I could put a cork in my carbs and that would stop all the filter particles, much better than K&N's, but somehow, I think I'd prefer the K&N's. 

Your boy looked through a microscope and determined it was filter particles? Gosh, a regular CSI story! Did he run it through one of those machines in his lab to determine if it actually had the same chemical make up of the filter? 

You said, "The fact is that every independent test shows the K&N filters are inferior at keeping dirt out of the engine."

Can you provide links for "every independent test"? Or could you scan all the reports and data that you must have at your desk there? I'd love to see them...all of them! Also, I'd like to see the relative performance data too. Pleae make sure you get all of them. I'm curious to see the results of every independent test. I'd also like to forward them to K&N and see if they reply. Thanks. 

--Justin





Message: 4
Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2010 14:12:36 -0700
From: "Randall" <tr3driver at ca.rr.com>
Subject: Re: [TR] K&N Filters
To: "'Triumphs'" <triumphs at autox.team.net>
Message-ID: <042101cae197$5ea42f10$1bec8d30$@rr.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"


>> The smaller particulates that might have passed through the
>> filter otherwise, are caught, like flypaper, to the the oiled medium.
> 
>

The independent tests I've seen (and quoted) say otherwise.


>> It's truly "apples and oranges" to compare filter media without
>> comparing the benefits versus the disadvantages.
> 
>

Certainly one should weigh benefits and disadvantages. All I suggested was
to be aware that one of the disadvantages is more dirt in your engine.


>> the water the material trapped in the oil of the filter was released in
>> the form of a mud. 
> 
>

I wasn't there, but he examined the carbs under a microscope, and decided
they were filter fibers. He didn't believe it either, seemed more
reasonable that it was dirt in the rainwater, but that was his conclusion.


>> Don't mount filters where they
>> can be hit by water
> 
>

A 914/6 doesn't give a lot of choice in that area, unless you want to cut
the body apart to install a Baja-style air intake. The filters were at the
top of the engine compartment (on top of the downdraft carbs), comparable to
where most of us have our air filters.


>> and keep the filters clean! 
> 
>

Again, I wasn't there. But knowing my friend and how fanatic he is about
his Porsche, I seriously doubt that he had not been servicing them as
recommended by K&N.


>> If the K&N's sloughed off fibers to the extent that they'd
>> block engine parts, by being hit by water just once, why would there
>> even be a filter left after years of cleaning and, supposedly, casting
>> off of fibers? 
> 
>

Perhaps they stop sloughing after a certain number of washings? Or perhaps
it has to do with the water being forced through the filter by the suction
of the engine, rather than being "gently drained by gravity" as K&N
specifies.


>> Yes, I'm biased... I like the K&N system.
> 
>

And I have no problem with that. Get the facts, then make your own
decision. The fact is that every independent test shows the K&N filters are
inferior at keeping dirt out of the engine.

-- Randall 

_______________________________________________
Triumphs at autox.team.net
Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
Suggested annual donation $11.47
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/triumphs/thenicholls@verizon.net