Club 80-90 Forums

gti mad man wrote:mayeb a waste of money then , k+N being about £45 and a normal one being £8

ringo wrote:Personally, i find it too noisy (a K&N that is) and im going to see if i can re-fit the original (its an AAZ conversion so not that straight forward)

I dont understand how it can affect noise bit apparently its called induction noise.

Ringo

jamesc76 wrote: Induction noise is all ways gonna be there, its just standard filters silence it out, where as k&n's etc dont have that muffleing effect, thats why they breath more easy with um on too!! You can get replacement panels filters from k&n that might fit into the standard filter housing that will quiten it down!!!

T'Onion wrote:I do believe that CJ is doing them , phone him

jamesc76 wrote:

gti mad man wrote:mayeb a waste of money then , k+N being about £45 and a normal one being £8

but you forgot that a k&n you'll never need to replace them!!

(Arlen) SPICER wrote:
"Now that I am not doing the tests and my objectivity is not necessary, let me explain my motivation. The reason I started this crusade was that I was seeing people spend a lot of money on aftermarket filters based on the word of a salesperson or based on the misleading, incomplete or outright deceiving information printed on boxes and in sales literature. Gentlemen and Ladies, Marketing and the lure of profit is VERY POWERFUL! It is amazing how many people believe that better airflow = more power! Unless you have modifications out the wazoo, a more porous filter will just dirty your oil! Some will say " I have used aftermarket brand X for XXX # years with no problems. The PROBLEM is you spent a chunk of ching on a product that not only DID NOT increase your horsepower, but also let in a lot of dirt while doing it! Now how much is a lot? ANY MORE THAN NECESSARY is TOO MUCH!

Others are persuaded by the claims of aftermarket manufacturers that their filters filter dirt "better than any other filter on the market." Sounds very enticing. To small timers like you and me, spending $1500 to test a filter sounds like a lot. But if you were a filter manufacturer and you believed your filter could filter dirt better than any other media on the market, wouldn't you want to prove it? Guess what. Test your filter vs. the OE paper. It will cost you $3000 and for that price you will have the data that you can use in your advertisements. Your investment will be returned a thousand fold! EASIER than shooting fish in a barrel! So why don't these manufacturers do this? Hmmm? Probably not because they would feel guilty about taking more market share.

Now I am not saying that ALL aftermarket filters are useless. A paper filter does not do well if directly wetted or muddy. It may collapse. This is why many off-road filters are foam. It is a compromise between filtering efficiency and protection from a collapsed filter. Now how many of our trucks collapse their filters from mud and water? However, if a filter is using "better airflow" as their marketing tool, remember this....Does it flow better? At very high airflow volumes, probably. BUT, Our trucks CAN'T flow that much air unless super-modified, so what is the point? The stock filter will flow MORE THAN ENOUGH AIR to give you ALL THE HORSEPOWER the engine has to give. And this remains true until the filter is dirty enough to trip the air filter life indicator. At that point performance will decline somewhat. Replace the filter and get on with it.