I have sent an email to tech@knfilters.com (the only public email address I saw at knfilters.com) with my concern. I recently purchased the FIPK Gen II (not installed yet) from them and now wonder whether I made a wise decision.
I have had the filter on all my vehicles and I don't do my own oil changes (lazy) so I cannot comment on the dirt deposits. I do my filters cleaning religiously enough, but has my effort been worth it?
Frankly, the more I think about it, the more P.O.'d I get.

As soon as K&N responds, I'll post my response here.

G'Luck

------------------
...my first "big" truck
'99 Ford F-150 Lariat
4WD, 4DR...absolutely stock (I guess)

 

WOW...the battle begins. This is the response I got from K&N ("Blum, Richard" <RichardB@knfilters.com> ):
=======================
Dear customer,
The post from Sean's page and that construction equipment statement are incorrect. First, the one from Sean is an out right lie. The "test" they did shows a 1% difference in filtration ability yet they do some tricky math and state there is a 224% difference. Where I come from 99.2% - 98.1% = 1.1% not 224%. Who do they think they are fooling? The next one about the
construction equipment is a fake that has been around for over 5 years. How do I know, we do not make filters for construction equipment. Use a 6" conical filter for a Honda on a turbo charged V12 and I guarantee you'll have problems. Furthermore, who would put an oil based filter on paper.
Ever seen what oil or grease will do to paper? Even if it where true, how often did they service the filter? Our pleats are not deep enough to be used on that kind of equipment. We are talking about large canister filter, 12" diameter x 20" tall with pleats 4"-6" deep. You'd have to clean the filter several times a day!!! Here are the facts.
Our filters are tested by an outside, independent laboratory. They have been proven to stop at least 99% of particles on a SAE dust test. This test uses particles as low as the 0 - 5 micron range and goes up to 20 microns. For comparison, a paper filter also stops 99% on the same test and the OEM minimum standard is 96%. Foam is generally the worst media with a typical efficiency rating of 75 - 85%. To get higher ratings, the foam must be more dense and therefore way more restrictive. The "tack" characteristic of a K&N allows for increase filtration without loss of flow as well.
The testing procedure used is SAE J-726 using ISO Test Dust. This test is the standard of the air filter industry. The test procedure consists of flowing air through the filter at a constant rate (airflow rate is determined by the application) while feeding test dust into the air stream at a rate of 1 gram per cubic meter of air.
As the filter loads with dust the pressure drop across the filter is increased to maintain the prescribed airflow rate. The test is continued until the pressure drop increases 10" H2O above the initial restriction of the clean element (in this case .78" to 10.78" H2O). At this point the test is terminated. The dirty filter element is then weighed. This weight is compared to the clean element weight to determine the total Dust Capacity.
The amount of dust retained by the filter is divided by the total amount of dust fed during the test to determine the Cumulative Efficiency.


The K&N filter achieved the following results:

Dust Capacity: 305 grams

K&N Cumulative Efficiency: 99.05%

Paper Cumulative Efficiency: 99.29%

Holding the filter to the light is useless, pin holes are normal. That is what makes a K&N filter. There are actually hundreds of microscopic fibers that cross these holes and when treated with oil, capture and hold
the very fine particles. On the same hand, they allow the filter to flow more air than paper or foam. The filter is 4 ply cotton gauze unlike some competitors synthetic material filters. The synthetics do not have the very small fibers that natural cotton does. Also, the oil can be pulled off of a foam filter contaminating electronic sensors. It will absorb into cotton and stay in the media. In fact, Honda and Toyota only recommend K&N filters
when using aftermarket high flow filters as K&N is the only brand of filter the oil does NOT come off of. They will not cover a failed sensor if foam filters were used.
We got started over 30 years ago making filters for motorcycles and off road racers. The filters did so well that these guys wanted them for their cars and trucks. We started making filters for these applications and here we are today. If they did not work, we would not still be here and growing every year.
We now make filters for Chrysler/Mopar, Ford Motorsports, Edelbrock, Rotax Engines, and Harley Davidson. We come as original equipment on the 2000 Ford Mustang Cobra-R. We even made filters for the Apache helicopters used in Desert Storm because of maintenance problems with the original paper
design. If they work in these conditions they will work for you. You may post any or all of this if you like, in fact, it would be appreciated. I would be interested in seeing the responses.
Thanks for writing, Rick
===================================
OK, I see now that K&N stands by their product, as they should. This satisfies my general concern over my decision to purchase the FIPK Gen II and the numerous K&N filters I've purchased in the past.
I didn't realize they used K&N's in the Apache during Desert Storm...these were probably a very custom application or a testimony to K&N's filtration. Either case, I think the decision to purchase the filters is not an un-wise decision.

I am impressed with K&N responding so quickly and dismissing rumors and lies and actually posting solid, quotable numbers.

G'Luck


------------------
...my first "big" truck
'99 Ford F-150 Lariat
4WD, 4DR...absolutely stock (I guess)

 

You guys had me worried for awhile there! This web-site is AWESOME I love my Screw and have been happy in the past with K&N products. This is the best reply I have heard reguarding alagations of aftermarket product short-comings. For you K&N newcomers the first time you clean Your filter you will be amazed at the amount of dirt it holds. Thanks for all the info. and by the way fellas, the dirtier the oil is when you change it (within reason) the more dirt and combustion by-products it is removing from your engine! Just PAW-PAWS .02 worth

------------------
2001 Super Crew Built 10/00 purchased12/00 Lariat 5.4 4X4 Bright Red, Factory Steps, Tow Package, K&N air filter, A.R.E. LS II, Rear Seat Entertainment System, Sound System Upgrades, DRL'S, Vent Shade Vent Visors, Stampeede bug Deflector. Hope to upgrade soon to Gibson SS or Dual Sport! Factory skid plates and "Off Road" Decal

 

I'm using the K&N but am considering the AMSOIL Air Filter. Loking for feedback from you guys on this. Also started a separate thread on this today.

Check out the info below (I sent the one at the bottom).

From: Tech@Amsoil.com | Block address | Add to Address Book
To: mpocrats
Subject: RE: Technical Service Contact Form
Date: Wed, 7 Mar 2001 12:51:11 -0600

Yes, you can order it line just by typing in the number. It costs $32.30.
In the event you have trouble with the web ordering, you can call toll free at 800-956-5695.

Using the SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers) test method J726 performed by an independent test lab, the K & N filters were tested against the AMSOIL air filters.

Simply explained, the test introduces fine test dirt into the filter until the test machine shows restriction of 5 inches of vacuum. The filters are then weighed. The AMSOIL filter held 200 grams of dirt and the K & N filter held 79.3 grams. This indicates that more dirt went through the
filter. In real life this dirt would be going into your engine. The AMSOIL website has this test result posted in the product
information section under air filters. It clearly shows AMSOIL air filters to be
superior in efficiency as well as offering providing much better flow rate than the paper filters also tested.


-----Original Message-----
From: mpocrats
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2001 7:59 AM
To: Tech@Amsoil.com
Subject: RE: Technical Service Contact Form

Two more questions:

1. What is the cost of the TS49 and can I order it online?

2. How does this stack up against OEM filters and/or the K&N?

Thanks in advance again.

Mike

 

I must say that report had me shocked- initially. However, after further analysis, it does appear that some of his statements are based on questionable conversions of the data.

Based on his own experimentation, this statement is false. His data shows the K&N filtration improving at a rate higher than the paper- they both finish at >98%. So, this "ratio" cannot be held across the entire experiment.

He's already given the number to be 224%. Why speculate a range of 200-300%? Plus, we see an interesting "switch" to equivalent area analysis. Prior to this, data had been given based on the "entire filter". My only conclusion is that this switch better represents the desired outcome. Given the larger surface area of the paper filter, it seems that more dirt (quantitatively) would appear in the engine under equivelent dust flow rates for "entire filter" comparisons.

Hmmm... notice in this statement, we're going to test at the same "loading". Earlier, the K&N was subjected to a higher "loading" (41.38 vs 38.8 gm/sq ft for paper). Plus, by his own admission, the K&N flows more air. Wouldn't this lend to the faster clogging? I can also guarantee that the loading will not be exactly 5.25 times slower. Instead of extrapolation, measurements should have been taken.

 

My .02 cents.....

I've used K&Ns on several cars, trucks and bikes over the years. I would have to estimate the total cumulative miles at 250,000 or more.

My last truck alone logged over 130,000 miles with a K&N. Total mileage when sold was just shy of 150,000. The truck was used in a wide variety of applications. On two trips to Mexico off road, and while living in Southern California, the dust was that fine silty, get everywhere crap.

On one trip to Mexico, we logged just shy of 700 miles mostly on dirt roads. The silt would choke you. One of the guys mentioned checking his filter, and I thought it would be smart to do the same. The inside of the canister (old round type) had a layer of silt and dust in it, as did the intake tube which had pockets of dirt in the bottom of the corrogated hose. To the inside of the filter area everything was spotless.


As far as the tests (both K&N and Amsoil) they are based on feeding "dirty air" until a set amount of restriction occurs. The fact that it isn't a set amount of air and dirt applied to both filters could change the results considerably.

 

I also have been using a K&N airfilter for several months with no problems. I am second guessing the purchase now, but until there is substantial evidence that it will damage my motor, I will not change it.

I have looked into purchasing an Amsoil air filter and have even contacted their tech dept. I use thier oil and filter and am more than pleased with it, so I looked into thier air filters. I have read several posts stating that Amsoil makes a foam filter for F150's. Here is what I found for the 5.4's (sorry, didn't ask on the 4.6's):

From Amsoil-

We don’t currently market one of our AMSOIL foam air filters for this engine, but we do offer a paper filter from Hastings which is the LF484.



-----Original Message-----
From:
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2001 4:53 PM
To: tech@amsoil.com
Subject: Technical Service Contact Form

Hope this helps and if anyone has found anything different from Amsoil, please post it.




------------------
F150 SCREW LARIAT 4WD -White with Harvest Gold two-tone, 5.4L, LSD, skid plates, bed extender, cd changer, rear av entertainment center, sport bucket seats, rear sliding window.

 

I agree that there is nothing wrong with K&N. But there has been an independant study by a racing outfit (I think Mopar but I might be wrong) where Wix filters actually flowed a little more than K&N and the air flow from the filter into the induction port was much smoother allowing a slightly greater fill. Wix was the only paper filter to do this, K&N & accell were very close to each other.

------------------
Member: Never trust a person over 40 who drives a Chevy club
Flatheads ain't so bad!
Certified backyard mechanic I & II

 

im not sure if you guys are talking about the whole airbox removal filter system or just a plain drop in k&n like i have. i put one in my 98 and i know for a fact that there is a little extra grunt there. on may way to work, which is all four lane @70mph, there is a long uphill grade at one point where just like clock work, on cruise, the truck would have to kick out of overdrive to maintain 70 up the hill. now with the k&n filter installed, it gave it just that extra oomph to pull the hill without downshifting.
proof positive. so i am really happy for that fact. just keep it cleaned with the charger kit and i dont think there should be a concern.

------------------
1998 xlt off road 5.4lsupercab auto pacific green clearcoat power drivers seat, keyless remote with factory alarm, tow package