Home
What's new
Latest activity
Authors
Store
Latest reviews
Search products
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New listings
New products
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Cart
Cart
Loading…
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Change style
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
Articles and News
Front Page Articles
SVTPerformance 2012 GT : K&N Replacement Filter Test
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="WhiteKnite" data-source="post: 12485268" data-attributes="member: 144269"><p>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. </p><p></p><p>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?</p><p></p><p>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:</p><p></p><p>By the way, has K&N responded to your articles?</p><p></p><p>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. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite8" alt=":D" title="Big Grin :D" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":D" /></p><p></p><p>Not saying that K&N has gone this far. I just tend to be cautious about marketing claims.</p><p></p><p>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).</p><p></p><p>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. </p><p></p><p>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</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="WhiteKnite, post: 12485268, member: 144269"] 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 [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Articles and News
Front Page Articles
SVTPerformance 2012 GT : K&N Replacement Filter Test
Top