SVTPerformance 2012 GT : K&N Replacement Filter Test

Turbo810

New Member
Established Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2012
Messages
138
Location
Willowick, Ohio
I am going on experience not writen. I have used a lot of K&N filters on my motorcycles. The K&N's are always dirty before the stock ones.

I also used to be a bike tech. So I have seen a lot of filters. Many of them being similar models riden together.
 

WhiteKnite

New Member
Established Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2012
Messages
25
Location
Columbia, MD
Can you please provide a source for your claims? Remember, we're talking about two basically new filters here.

I'm actually glad that Turbo810 brought that up. Seems like the air filter manufactures are dealing with a double edged sword here. On the one hand an air filter is supposed to FILTER (clean), while at the same time trying to provide as much cool air through.

Your conclusion is that the K&N restricts the air more than the paper filter (understandably) and thus loses HP. Although, the K&N's re-usablity (durability) is plus, but at the cost of more restriction. Correct?

Would you also say that the K&N produces more turbulence as well vs the paper one. Or just a tad more restrictive than the paper filter and that's the reason for the hp loss? I would guess that they probably go hand-in-hand. :dw:

By the way, has K&N responded to your articles?

I don't mind air filter companies and their engineers designing a more durable filter. But I do not like it when the marketing department slaps on outrageous, yet luring claims, such as "Super Boost Air" or "10-30HP power boost" as if the air it's self is infused with extra coolant or higher "octane" oxygen just by passing through their filters. :D

Not saying that K&N has gone this far. I just tend to be cautious about marketing claims.

I seem to remember that decades ago K&N, and other brands, got their names because of their durability and reuse for daily drivers (cost savings and bumper-to-bumper traffic conditions).

Couple that with road racers (and drag) that experienced hostile and dusty road environments on the track. K&N tried to serve both audiences under two different conditions.

Fast forward to today, and the :bowdown: legendary name lives on. Yet, with a bit of hyperbole and misunderstanding in the proper application. I don't think their finance department wants to rock the boat, though. lol
 
Last edited:

SID297

OWNER/ADMIN
Administrator
Joined
Mar 27, 2003
Messages
55,705
Location
Myrtle Beach, SC
I'm actually glad that Turbo810 brought that up. Seems like the air filter manufactures are dealing with a double edged sword here. On the one hand an air filter is supposed to FILTER (clean), while at the same time trying to provide as much cool air through.

Your conclusion is that the K&N restricts the air more than the paper filter (understandably) and thus loses HP. Although, the K&N's re-usablity (durability) is plus, but at the cost of more restriction. Correct?

Would you also say that the K&N produces more turbulence as well vs the paper one. Or just a tad more restrictive than the paper filter and that's the reason for the hp loss? I would guess that they probably go hand-in-hand. :dw:

By the way, has K&N responded to your articles?

I don't mind air filter companies and their engineers designing a more durable filter. But I do not like it when the marketing department slaps on outrageous, yet luring claims, such as "Super Boost Air" or "10-30HP power boost" as if the air it's self is infused with extra coolant or higher "octane" oxygen just by passing through their filters. :D

Not saying that K&N has gone this far. I just tend to be cautious about marketing claims.

I seem to remember that decades ago K&N, and other brands, got their names because of their durability and reuse for daily drivers (cost savings and bumper-to-bumper traffic conditions).

Couple that with road racers (and drag) that experienced hostile and dusty road environments on the track. K&N tried to serve both audiences under two different conditions.

Fast forward to today, and the :bowdown: legendary name lives on. Yet, with a bit of hyperbole and misunderstanding in the proper application. I don't think their finance department wants to rock the boat, though. lol

The K&N is flows more efficiently than stock. The loss of power is now a result of more flow resistance.

It may have been on the hotter side at the begining of the K&N runs.
24.jpg
8.jpg
25.jpg
26.jpg

It was not. We hold everything as constant as possible and do multiple runs in order to weed out outliers.
 

ceh5460

New Member
Established Member
Joined
Jul 3, 2013
Messages
17
Location
Pennsylvania
Awesome test. Just saved me 60 bucks! Some people just take their waste of money too personally. Keep up the great work. From what I read the intakes are even questionable on whether they are worth the 300 bucks. I'll be sticking with my stocker.
 

cobrakidz

High mileage R
Established Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2008
Messages
4,634
Location
Nor Cal
On another forum an engine builder for years has said K&N's are not HP gainers--this finally confirms it. Thanks for the info.
 

Users who are viewing this thread



Top