> > or carb, and air paths kept clean. I'll use one on my Stag when it
> is done
> > too! So you say... where is your proof in testing?
>
> There was a very long and detailed scientific study posted on
> the web, which unfortunately is gone. However, many listers will
> remember it, it was bantered about.
>
> It was a study done on industrial equipment, machines that are
> worth six figures and have their oil lab analysed every month
> to keep them in top shape.
>
>
I remember this test, along with some information from my MB list that
provided similar results for use on Mercedes, with various filter types
tested, and filtration specifics rated on a 1 to 5, with 1 being lowest.
The K&N rated a 1 for effectiveness of filtration ( and 5 on freedom of
flow ). This is not necessarily bad, unless one lives in a very dusty
environment. The K&Ns that I have seen achieve their performance by
having a fairly porous, fairly long straight-through filtration path,
without any direction or density changes. The hope here is to
statistically catch the majority of dust particles in the filter oil,
and I think that given a light loading and frequent refreshment of the
filtration oil, that they will work fine for most situations. However,
when they get loaded up, there is nothing left to trap the dust, unlike
a true oil-bath filter or paper filter, and so the user had better make
sure that he or she is aware of this, and cleans the filter regularly.
In a heavily dusty environment, an oil bath provides the best
protection, in a dust-free environment, a K&N style oil-soaked foam
filter works best, and naturally, the paper element filter is somewhere
in between.
Stuart Steele
|