Thoughts on K&N air filters

Disclaimer: Links on this page pointing to Amazon, eBay and other sites may include affiliate code. If you click them and make a purchase, we may earn a small commission.

BatsTDK

Full Access Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2016
Posts
300
Reaction score
273
Location
Orange County, CA
What are y’all’s thoughts on the reusable K&N air filters? I currently have a Purolator One filter as a read great things about how well they filter. But I also know with good filtration comes less air flow.

Is the K&N filtration good enough? I understand they’re meh at filtration but have excellent air flow.
 

ivin74

05 NBS Nali
Joined
Aug 3, 2014
Posts
2,420
Reaction score
2,557
Location
Htown, Texas
What are y’all’s thoughts on the reusable K&N air filters? I currently have a Purolator One filter as a read great things about how well they filter. But I also know with good filtration comes less air flow.

Is the K&N filtration good enough? I understand they’re meh at filtration but have excellent air flow.

I've been using them for years without any issues. Like other said don't use oil.
 

iamdub

Full Access Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2016
Posts
20,821
Reaction score
45,013
Location
Li'l Weezyana
What are y’all’s thoughts on the reusable K&N air filters?

By reusable, I assume you mean the oiled ones that you wash, reoil and reuse. IMO, they're not worth the hassle. The filter itself flows very well because it's almost like letting your engine breathe through a cheesecloth, making it barely a filter at all. It'll catch the larger objects, but the finer dust and debris get sucked right into your engine. To help with its insufficiency, it's soaked in oil so the finer particles will stick to it. This is better, but still a bit of a crapshoot. Then, there's the common problem of them being over-oiled. The tiny oil particles ride the air stream and get stuck on the MAF sensor wires, skewing its readings. Even if you oil it perfectly to the manufacturer's specs- how do you know none of that oil, even in the "proper" amount, being sucked on for thousands of miles still doesn't gum up the MAF? You won't find out for a long time. You're introducing another maintenance item that now makes your MAF a regular maintenance item as well as subjecting it and your engine to more dirt/damage.


I currently have a Purolator One filter as a read great things about how well they filter. But I also know with good filtration comes less air flow.

Is the K&N filtration good enough? I understand they’re meh at filtration but have excellent air flow.

Generally speaking, yes- reduced flow. Flow is volume. This is why the air filter panel is so large compared to the size of the throttle body inlet. Even though the filter media reduces the flow, it's multiple times larger than that little 3" hole the engine is sucking through. Even then, the engine is only sucking through a fraction of that 3", unless you constantly drive around with the pedal to the metal. So, the stock filter design can flow more than sufficient volume while adequately cleaning the air- as a filter should do. Say you did slap a higher-flowing, but lesser-effective filter in there. What would you get- maybe 2-5 horsepower at wide open throttle at 5,000 RPM or higher? Great. For the 99.9% of your other driving, you're not getting any benefit of any extra airflow over the stock setup. But, what you are getting at idle, at WOT and anywhere in between is dirtier air.

Is reduced oil and engine life worth the power that isn't there until you're revving to near redline, and, even then, aren't likely to feel?

Would you rather have 300 horsepower for 300K miles or 305 horsepower for 200K miles?



If you absolutely wanna use a reusable filter, I can strongly recommend the AEM DryFlow. K&N owns AEM (or vice versa) so the dry/oilless K&N might be the exact same filter. I've been running one for over 50K miles. I've had my intake tube off four times since installing that filter and, every time, that tube is spotless on the inside. It passes the white glove (actually a white paper towel) test with flying colors.
 
Last edited:
OP
OP
BatsTDK

BatsTDK

Full Access Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2016
Posts
300
Reaction score
273
Location
Orange County, CA
If you absolutely wanna use a reusable filter, I can strongly recommend the AEM DryFlow. K&N owns AEM (or vice versa) so the dry/oilless K&N might be the exact same filter. I've been running one for over 50K miles. I've had my intake tube off four times since installing that filter and, every time, that tube is spotless on the inside. It passes the white glove (actually a white paper towel) test with flying colors.

That sounds more promising. I recently replaced the stock air intake tube with the Airaid one and can definitely notice a sound difference so I know I'm getting more flow now. Just wondering if a higher flow filter is a worthy addition to increase it even more.
 

iamdub

Full Access Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2016
Posts
20,821
Reaction score
45,013
Location
Li'l Weezyana
That sounds more promising. I recently replaced the stock air intake tube with the Airaid one and can definitely notice a sound difference so I know I'm getting more flow now. Just wondering if a higher flow filter is a worthy addition to increase it even more.

The sound difference is because the Airaid doesn't have the Helmholtz ("resonator") chambers that the factory intake has. It's not because of the extra flow. GM engineers added those chambers to quiet the intake growling sound as it's not appreciated by most drivers. For people like us, Airaid and many other aftermarket air tube manufacturers have our backs.

The Airaid tube (MIT) was shown to give something like 6-8HP. Of course, this is on a dyno and at WOT at high RPM. The most you really get out of it is a healthy, strong growl when the engine is under load.

I have the Airaid along with that AEM DryFlow filter.
 
Joined
Apr 11, 2018
Posts
7,124
Reaction score
14,376
Location
St. Louis
How is the airflow and filtering quality in your opinion?
The airflow is better than a paper element and while it's hard to compare it to the filtering ability vs a paper element, it seems to filter well enough. These filters are all in daily driven vehicles and I haven't noticed any adverse effects of running them. I like that they're reusable. A replacement paper filter is ~$20 while a reusable AEM Dryflow is about $70-80
 
OP
OP
BatsTDK

BatsTDK

Full Access Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2016
Posts
300
Reaction score
273
Location
Orange County, CA
The Airaid tube (MIT) was shown to give something like 6-8HP. Of course, this is on a dyno and at WOT at high RPM. The most you really get out of it is a healthy, strong growl when the engine is under load.

I'll be honest... I do LOVE the extra growl. Even if it's placebo, I feel like I'm getting something extra :p
 
OP
OP
BatsTDK

BatsTDK

Full Access Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2016
Posts
300
Reaction score
273
Location
Orange County, CA
The airflow is better than a paper element and while it's hard to compare it to the filtering ability vs a paper element, it seems to filter well enough. These filters are all in daily driven vehicles and I haven't noticed any adverse effects of running them. I like that they're reusable. A replacement paper filter is ~$20 while a reusable AEM Dryflow is about $70-80

Thank you for your input... and for the intake! It's well loved already.
 

iamdub

Full Access Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2016
Posts
20,821
Reaction score
45,013
Location
Li'l Weezyana
I'll be honest... I do LOVE the extra growl. Even if it's placebo, I feel like I'm getting something extra :p

Agreed! My plans for a louder muffler were bumped down the list of priorities after installing my MIT. It's only loud when you're on the throttle. Any other time, it's like stock. Couldn't ask for a better setup.


Of course, I still got the muffler a couple years later. :D
 
Joined
Apr 11, 2018
Posts
7,124
Reaction score
14,376
Location
St. Louis
Thank you for your input... and for the intake! It's well loved already.
That intake tube used to be on my 2001. I put it on around 2008 and took it off about 3 years ago and put the stock intake tubing back on when my son started driving it and took it with him to college. I didn't want aftermarket parts on it for him to have to worry about when/if he had it serviced or if it got wrecked.
 
OP
OP
BatsTDK

BatsTDK

Full Access Member
Joined
Apr 7, 2016
Posts
300
Reaction score
273
Location
Orange County, CA
That intake tube used to be on my 2001. I put it on around 2008 and took it off about 3 years ago and put the stock intake tubing back on when my son started driving it and took it with him to college. I didn't want aftermarket parts on it for him to have to worry about when/if he had it serviced or if it got wrecked.

Wouldn’t think the intake tube would cause too much of an issue though?
 
Joined
Apr 11, 2018
Posts
7,124
Reaction score
14,376
Location
St. Louis
Wouldn’t think the intake tube would cause too much of an issue though?
Not for servicing, but if it was wrecked/totalled and being away from home it'd be one less thing to worry about swapping out while sitting in the tow yard.

We were also thinking about trading it in before my son said that he would drive it. So I put the stock intake back on and uninstalled the Diablo tune it had.
 

iamdub

Full Access Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2016
Posts
20,821
Reaction score
45,013
Location
Li'l Weezyana
Yep that's what I was looking at. Love that Amazon says it does NOT fit my truck. They're the worst with fitment compatibility.

I'd trust the info on AEM's site above Amazon's. :rolleyes:

By the way, I bought mine from a guy that bought it on Amazon. He posted a review of how he lost about 2 MPG. He said he drove the same trip every time, same season, same fuel, etc. He put his stock filter back in and immediately got his MPG back. I read where he offered it to someone replying to his review for the cost of shipping. It had been a few months and that person never responded so I asked if it was still available. Scored my DryFlow for $15.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
138,048
Posts
1,997,864
Members
102,987
Latest member
Charlie21ny
Back
Top