What Brand Of Air Filter Element?

[bionic]

Paper elements have vary little restriction when in good shape. The power gain from a K&N is not worth the filtering loss.

I wonder if when it was commented that paper is clogging faster in a dusty enviroment versus a K&N is because the K&N does not have as much surface area for filtering and hence fills up sooner. In that case, the paper would be better all around because of more filter surface area.

This is a real study done by the Oakridge National Labs:
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/pdfs/Air ... 6_2009.pdf

Agreed, but at the average cost of $22-27 for a paper element for an L300, and 59.00 for a reusable cloth K&N clone, the math is pretty easy. Performance gains are doubtful, but future savings are guaranteed. Here's the one I bought...works great.

http://www.ebay.ca/itm/121060666948?ssP ... 1497.l2649

[yojimbo]

Paper elements have vary little restriction when in good shape. The power gain from a K&N is not worth the filtering loss.

I wonder if when it was commented that paper is clogging faster in a dusty enviroment versus a K&N is because the K&N does not have as much surface area for filtering and hence fills up sooner. In that case, the paper would be better all around because of more filter surface area.

This is a real study done by the Oakridge National Labs:
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/pdfs/Air ... 6_2009.pdf

Agreed, but at the average cost of $22-27 for a paper element for an L300, and 59.00 for a reusable cloth K&N clone, the math is pretty easy. Performance gains are doubtful, but future savings are guaranteed. Here's the one I bought...works great.

http://www.ebay.ca/itm/121060666948?ssP ... 1497.l2649

Is that a drop in replacement to the original in the oem filter holder thing?

[bionic]

Paper elements have vary little restriction when in good shape. The power gain from a K&N is not worth the filtering loss.

I wonder if when it was commented that paper is clogging faster in a dusty enviroment versus a K&N is because the K&N does not have as much surface area for filtering and hence fills up sooner. In that case, the paper would be better all around because of more filter surface area.

This is a real study done by the Oakridge National Labs:
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/pdfs/Air ... 6_2009.pdf

Agreed, but at the average cost of $22-27 for a paper element for an L300, and 59.00 for a reusable cloth K&N clone, the math is pretty easy. Performance gains are doubtful, but future savings are guaranteed. Here's the one I bought...works great.

http://www.ebay.ca/itm/121060666948?ssP ... 1497.l2649

Is that a drop in replacement to the original in the oem filter holder thing?

yes, thats correct...its a drop in -no modifications.

[yojimbo]

Cool thanks, I'd looked in the onloine catalogue before but didnt find anything, of course I wasnt looking at forklift filters

[Yokohama]

Agreed, but at the average cost of $22-27 for a paper element for an L300, and 59.00 for a reusable cloth K&N clone, the math is pretty easy. Performance gains are doubtful, but future savings are guaranteed. Here's the one I bought...works great.

http://www.ebay.ca/itm/121060666948?ssP ... 1497.l2649

Only if you never go on gravel/dirt roads; for pure filtering ability paper is far superior!

Besides, how often do you really need to change the filter under normal driving? If I needed to be that cheap, then I should probably think about owning something normal like a Toyota Camry that takes a cheap normal filter.

I have switched everything I drive back to paper.

[bionic]

Agreed, but at the average cost of $22-27 for a paper element for an L300, and 59.00 for a reusable cloth K&N clone, the math is pretty easy. Performance gains are doubtful, but future savings are guaranteed. Here's the one I bought...works great.

http://www.ebay.ca/itm/121060666948?ssP ... 1497.l2649

Only if you never go on gravel/dirt roads; for pure filtering ability paper is far superior!

Besides, how often do you really need to change the filter under normal driving? If I needed to be that cheap, then I should probably think about owning something normal like a Toyota Camry that takes a cheap normal filter.

I have switched everything I drive back to paper.

Yokohama.. you are either totally uneducated or a complete fool. I offroad as much- or more than most. I do not have to change, or wash my K&N any more often than I replaced the paper before it. And something else, your Delica is no Bentley, and not worth much more than a Camry relative in its class, so avoid the ridiculous comparisons, wow, people...

[nxski]

Let me step-in before this becomes hostile...

I believe what Yokohama is trying to state is that we've chosen vehicles which cost more to maintain because we like them and do not mind spending a little bit more in maintenance so as to have the vehicle we want. There are alternatives out there that are less functional, but would also cost less in the long-run. Yokohama's opinion is that paper filters are such a minor expense that the savings are not enough of a reason to sway a person towards K&N if one fears having a filter that clogs more easily and may not filter as well.

I love my K&N and find that I clean it roughly as often as I would have replaced my paper filter (meaning both seem to be filtering equally well). The difference is that dust seems to stick to one specific area of the filter since the oil seems to attract dust. Knowing this, I just make sure to rotate my filter every once in a while. In the long run I can save some money, and not have to go to the hassle of buying new filters on an on-going basis. It's not much, but it adds up. When I fist put it in, it seemed like I had more power, but having switched back and forth since, I'm not so sure anymore.

[Firesong]

I think we need to clean it more often than we think. At least in Saskatchewan. Last summer 1 x a month and I could tell the difference. But that's with some dusty crazy winds in our province.

[bionic]

I think we need to clean it more often than we think. At least in Saskatchewan. Last summer 1 x a month and I could tell the difference. But that's with some dusty crazy winds in our province.

Sounds like it could have been about $50 in paper that was saved;)

[FalcoColumbarius]

Thinking back to 2010 where we had the dead pine forest fires that had a great deal of fine ash floating about the atmosphere, even in the Lower Mainland (of BC), not to mention the fine ash sitting an inch thick on some FSRs that I drove that year. I found my Sakura paper element filling up at an alarming rate. What I did? I took it out periodically and blew it out, worked fine.

Regarding costs being cheaper over time with an oiled filter, there are a lot of valid arguments against these, as pointed out by Spearo and Yokohama. In the case of the (stock) Starwagon air filter we have the benefit of two drop out traps before the air even gets to the element, which is a bonus. Still, over time small particles getting into the turbocharger and engine could potentially cause collective damage. Just an observation.

Falco.

[Firesong]

I have a standard filter. I just vacuum it out.

[bionic]

Let me step-in before this becomes hostile...

I believe what Yokohama is trying to state is that we've chosen vehicles which cost more to maintain because we like them and do not mind spending a little bit more in maintenance so as to have the vehicle we want. There are alternatives out there that are less functional, but would also cost less in the long-run. Yokohama's opinion is that paper filters are such a minor expense that the savings are not enough of a reason to sway a person towards K&N if one fears having a filter that clogs more easily and may not filter as well.

I love my K&N and find that I clean it roughly as often as I would have replaced my paper filter (meaning both seem to be filtering equally well). The difference is that dust seems to stick to one specific area of the filter since the oil seems to attract dust. Knowing this, I just make sure to rotate my filter every once in a while. In the long run I can save some money, and not have to go to the hassle of buying new filters on an on-going basis. It's not much, but it adds up. When I fist put it in, it seemed like I had more power, but having switched back and forth since, I'm not so sure anymore.

...ok, I need to clean or "filter" this post before the original context is totally lost. As stated at the top of the post, I installed a snorkel...this changes things a bit. I installed the snorkel because of continuous clogging of the OE filters. (I tend to do most of my offroading in the Okanagan) At $22-27 each, this became too expensive, and way too inconvienient for my taste.
I found an industrial "clone" cotton/oil copy for a little over 50.00. Do I believe a cotton/oil filter is as protective as paper?? No, I personally do not. Do I think it needs to be in this case?..no I don't. So I have accepted a slightly lesser filtration ability for an increase in air flow and reusability. I don't find it needs a lot more maintenance than the paper it replaced, but its an unfair comparison as I went with a snorkle at the same time. Therfore I guess Im stating....If you off-road and are going through too many air filters, then perhaps a snorkle or bridge seal to your air canister (closing the debris opening) might be the best performance option than just the concentrating on the filter itself.

[nxski]

Let me step-in before this becomes hostile...

I believe what Yokohama is trying to state is that we've chosen vehicles which cost more to maintain because we like them and do not mind spending a little bit more in maintenance so as to have the vehicle we want. There are alternatives out there that are less functional, but would also cost less in the long-run. Yokohama's opinion is that paper filters are such a minor expense that the savings are not enough of a reason to sway a person towards K&N if one fears having a filter that clogs more easily and may not filter as well.

I love my K&N and find that I clean it roughly as often as I would have replaced my paper filter (meaning both seem to be filtering equally well). The difference is that dust seems to stick to one specific area of the filter since the oil seems to attract dust. Knowing this, I just make sure to rotate my filter every once in a while. In the long run I can save some money, and not have to go to the hassle of buying new filters on an on-going basis. It's not much, but it adds up. When I fist put it in, it seemed like I had more power, but having switched back and forth since, I'm not so sure anymore.

...ok, I need to clean or "filter" this post before the original context is totally lost. As stated at the top of the post, I installed a snorkel...this changes things a bit. I installed the snorkel because of continuous clogging of the OE filters. (I tend to do most of my offroading in the Okanagan) At $22-27 each, this became too expensive, and way too inconvienient for my taste.
I found an industrial "clone" cotton/oil copy for a little over 50.00. Do I believe a cotton/oil filter is as protective as paper?? No, I personally do not. Do I think it needs to be in this case?..no I don't. So I have accepted a slightly lesser filtration ability for an increase in air flow and reusability. I don't find it needs a lot more maintenance than the paper it replaced, but its an unfair comparison as I went with a snorkle at the same time. Therfore I guess Im stating....If you off-road and are going through too many air filters, then perhaps a snorkle or bridge seal to your air canister (closing the debris opening) might be the best performance option than just the concentrating on the filter itself.

Great summary, I'm planning to add a snorkel (not that the K&N isn't doing fine as-is) but its good to hear that it will change how often I need to clean the filter.

[Manitoba deli]

Blowing out a paper element filter with compressed air is no longer a recommended practice. This can dislodge particles that have actually pierced their way into the paper. Removing them leaves a small hole in their place. Recommended practice is to gently tap the filter to clean it. I'm not sure who funded the studies that came up with this, very possible it was the paper filter makers in an attempt to sell more filters, maybe it's true. Hmmmmm now what.
Jason

[bionic]

Blowing out a paper element filter with compressed air is no longer a recommended practice. This can dislodge particles that have actually pierced their way into the paper. Removing them leaves a small hole in their place. Recommended practice is to gently tap the filter to clean it. I'm not sure who funded the studies that came up with this, very possible it was the paper filter makers in an attempt to sell more filters, maybe it's true. Hmmmmm now what.
Jason

X2