Air filter

[spike45]

Originally Posted by mbrandt1402

A question for Gary -

Technology continues to change and most retired types don't necessarily keep up. I think the current media for the K&N "big diesel" air filters is relatively new. For sure it is vastly different than their oiled cotton filters for most gas engines.

Are your comments about K&N drawn from experience prior to the new media, or do you have specific experience with the K&N washable synthetic non-woven media?

Thanks for clarifying!

Are you saying their new media is so much better? And your source is?

[Mr_D]

Originally Posted by moisheh

Tom: I would like to know how one can ACCURATELY test MPG and show a .10 increase. For starters it would have to be on the same road and at the same speed. same wind direction and speed and same temperature. The answer to my question is that the test is impossible for a layperson. There is an SAE test for 18 wheelers. I doubt you used their test as some highly technical equipment is required. I would say that anytime we see .10 or even .25 differences that we are just seeing what we want to see. No trip computer is that accurate.

Or on the dyno under controlled conditions. It's entirely possible to show 1/10 gal. increase using this method

[Mr_D]

Originally Posted by spike45

Are you saying their new media is so much better? And your source is?

I think that "new" media is some 4-5 years old now, if so it's not that new.

[mbrandt1402]

Gary - Manufacturers change base material in a product typically for two reasons: to save money or to improve performance. I can only hope that the "new" K&N media was introduced because it works better, but for all I know it was because they could make another $1 per filter.

But that is neither here nor there. If your experience is all based on their prior product, then your comments are rock-solid in regard to their prior products.

I'm just trying to clarify if you are speaking to the current products or their former ones. I've put a few hundred miles on my rig with a K&N. If someone has data that shows the new media is still a bad product, I'll replace it immediately. But to throw it out because the old media was bad is more or less guesswork.

[spike45]

I am weary of this endless discussion with you aficionados of K&N. You bash me because I have messed with your golden calf. It is your coach. I really do not care what you use. I weighed in and gave my very experienced opinion based on 23 years as a filter field service engineer plus 29 previous years with Caterpillar.

For the rest who stick with the OE air filter or some suitable replacement air filter system that meets Caterpillar and Cummins application engineering requirements, you are doing the right thing. But if you can, ditch the Farr Ecolite system. It is prone to failure. Of all the dusting complaints I have seen on iRV2 in Caterpillar and Cummins groups, it is always a Farr product. I have had the same experience with tilt cab fire trucks operating in dry climates like Arizona. This air cleaner system is bad news and it has a decent particle removal efficiency when it is not pushed too hard. By too hard, I specifically mean running on an ISL 400, 425. The ISL at these ratings is drawing nearly as much air at rated load/RPM as a 15 liter Cummins ISX 500!

I can never understand why somebody would spend so much for a coach and risk it on some gimmicky air filter.

And as a 'retired type', seriously I have likely forgotten a lot but still know more on this topic and many others than those of you who have made disparaging remarks.

[mbrandt1402]

I seem to have offended you, and for that I apologize.

Nothing in my question is disparaging, nor have I promoted the K&N. I simply asked if your experience encompasses their current technology.

I think it is a fair question. I worked in manufacturing management all of my life. I spent the last 10 years consulting with manufacturers on the software systems they use to run their business. At various points in time, I was a credentialed expert on 3 different systems. All of these systems evolve and I wouldn't think of giving advice today on the first two that I worked with and I know my relevance is slipping away on the third system as well.

Filtration may or may not evolve at a similar pace, but I still think it is a fair question since the current K&N media is significantly different than their oiled cotton filters. If you know the current media is bad, your silence is a great disservice to the people that make up this forum.

[spike45]

Originally Posted by mbrandt1402

I seem to have offended you, and for that I apologize.

Nothing in my question is disparaging, nor have I promoted the K&N. I simply asked if your experience encompasses their current technology.

I think it is a fair question. I worked in manufacturing management all of my life. I spent the last 10 years consulting with manufacturers on the software systems they use to run their business. At various points in time, I was a credentialed expert on 3 different systems. All of these systems evolve and I wouldn't think of giving advice today on the first two that I worked with and I know my relevance is slipping away on the third system as well.

Filtration may or may not evolve at a similar pace, but I still think it is a fair question since the current K&N media is significantly different than their oiled cotton filters. If you know the current media is bad, your silence is a great disservice to the people that make up this forum.

Mbrandt,

I should have addressed as a general rant. All I needed to do was enter it as a new post instead of a reply. But every time the K&N matter comes up, there is always some who through personal experience tries to tell me that I have it wrong. That the experience of one outweighs the experience that is much broader and backed with the ability to test air cleaner efficiencies. In the software and IT business I can agree that things change quickly and keeping up is challenging especially if you retired from it and do not wish to resume that career. In air filter technology, it is not nearly as fluid. Same for most filtration technology or even engine coolant. It is not difficult to keep up especially when you still have solid contacts in the business.

I really need to find another hobby besides this one!

[mbrandt1402]

Actually, business software at the user interface level changes far less dramatically than physical products do. There are no revelations on accounting practices, a bill of material might pick up a new attribute that facilitates more efficient scheduling but 80 or 90% of what I knew in 2000 still works exactly the same way today. It might be written in a different programming language, but I don't deal with it at that level. It is the 10 or 20% new stuff that keeps me from giving recommendations - I no longer have that near-100% confidence that I would be giving out the right answer today. I know I would be ballpark, but the people asking the questions deserve better than ballpark, so I don't do it. Stuff I worked on just last year is another story.

Physical products, on the other hand, can change dramatically. New materials are developing constantly. The newest exotic sportscars have carbon fiber chassis that used to be steel and aluminum. The challenges are the same, but all those years of experience with metal chassis are suddenly a lot less relevant. The world's best expert on carburetors is pretty helpless faced with troubleshooting a computerized fuel injection system. It is still all about getting the air/fuel ratio right, but the two processes are day and night different. Physical products can go through sea-changes that render prior experience far less valuable.

The current oil-less media K&N and others are using is significantly different than oiled cotton. The much deeper non-woven media does all of the filtration in the new media. If I've absorbed info on the oiled cotton filters correctly, oil is the "active ingredient", with the cotton just providing a matrix. That sounds like a significant design change to me.

I don't doubt your knowledge of filtration on the broad scope. I've asked if your criticism of K&N is based on experience with the current media, since it seems to be such a departure from their prior products for diesels. I can't think of any good reasons why you would decide to not answer that question if you have experience with that media, but you won't answer the question.

Lest you continue to judge me a K&N zealot, I'll be deciding the fate of my K&N filter when I get my oil test results. I'm concerned, but I want to make an informed decision.

[tom chelbana]

spike45 has had nothing to say positive about AFE and K&N Truck air filter and was recommending paper Farr filters until just the last week when we were seeing the problems with them. He was telling irv2 forum readers that they would be "dusting" their engines if they used AFE and K&N filters. Now he is recommending irv2 RVer's not to use the Farr air filters which are what almost all chassis makers are using. spike45 has changed his position on Farr air filters and he should also change his position on AFE and K&N filters. Tom

[moisheh]

Tom Chelabana: Give it a rest! I think w are all tires of this whole thread and in particular the constant questioning of Spike's knowledge. Anyone who claims those huge increases in MPG would be laughed out of a forum where the posters had some common sense. I am surprised the forum moderators have permitted this to continue. Spike has helped a ,lot of people on this forum and I don't see where the K&N lovers have done much for anyone. Next you will be telling us to use Amsoil.

Moisheh

[Steve Ownby]

Originally Posted by tom chelbana

spike45 has had nothing to say positive about AFE and K&N Truck air filter and was recommending paper Farr filters until just the last week when we were seeing the problems with them. He was telling irv2 forum readers that they would be "dusting" their engines if they used AFE and K&N filters. Now he is recommending irv2 RVer's not to use the Farr air filters which are what almost all chassis makers are using. spike45 has changed his position on Farr air filters and he should also change his position on AFE and K&N filters. Tom

I can tell you with 100% certainty that Gary (Spike45) has not been a fan of the Farr system and was advising many months ago to investigate changing to a filter housing with replaceable elements if there was available space. In the next few months I intend to change to a Optiair 1300 housing / element. It's taken some time with a tape measure to come up with a suitable orientation in that crowded engine compartment but I'm doing it.

Gary is not even an RVer but gives his time on these forums as a way to help many who have no idea about the truly important issues of fluids/filters and coolant. I have learned a lot reading Gary's posts.

Thanks Spike45, I'm glad I know you.

[tom chelbana]

Gary has had good information for all irv2 forum users. But back in the start of this air filter emailing he stated something to the effect that diesel motor home owners that use AFE and K&N air filters should only have Class C motor homes. I hope he continues to add to our information base by sharing his suggestions with us but his personnel thoughts like Class C motor homes isn't needed. I for one would ask him to continue with his expertise in filters.

[mbrandt1402]

Originally Posted by tom chelbana

... I for one would ask him to continue with his expertise in filters.

So would I, beginning with a clear answer to my question about his experience with the current K&N media.

[spike45]

Originally Posted by mbrandt1402

So would I, beginning with a clear answer to my question about his experience with the current K&N media.

You never bothered to reply to my requests as to your source of info/data about K&M's oiless media. I have been searching the Internet re k&n new media and why it should be so much better. So, take a look at their website....K&N Washable Heavy Duty Replacement Air Filters

What do they stress on this page for HD air products? Higher air flow, 'more power'.....what! Apparently air cleaning ability is not a selling point. They tell you the usual story about how paper filters Increase in restriction throughout their run life, which they do AND still provide required air flow to produce rated power while cleaning the air per Caterpillar and Cummins specs. You have not made your case for their superiority in anything that matters to the engine, CLEAN air flow. I see they added new spin to their pitch...good for the environment!! No paper air filters to dispose of in a landfill. Scrap metal dealers will take them for the steel and burn the paper and plasisol off in the reclamation process. Granted you save money on not buying paper disposable air cleaners. That, my friend, is all you have to crow about.

Check out this web page for somebody else telling you about air filter performance.K&N Air Filter Review - Debunking the Myths (and why OEM is better)

If you bought a chip to make your engine burn more fuel, you need more air to go with it or you just get black smoke to impress the gearheads. Since it is difficult but not impossible to put in a bigger air assembly, the easy thing to do is the k&n route.

You cannot make the case for air that is just as clean as paper AND have a big increase in air flow. You can understand that there is no free lunch here.

You and Tom Chelbana have drawn your line in the sand and press me to support your decision...get real mlbrandt! No way. They are poor air cleaners at best. They are excellent products for increasing your air flow and reducing your air filter maintenance costs. Do I sound like I am writing their advertising copy? That is all they are selling. Everybody else who reads this forum gets 'it'.

Kind regards,