http://home.usadatanet.net/%7E...R.htm


That link pretty much says it all


conclusion from article

(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.

Hopefully the results of this test will do 2 things. Shed some light on the misleading marketing claims of some aftermarket manufacturers and/or give us new insight on products already on the market that are superior to our OE filter. I stand for truth and will eat my words publicly if my statements prove wrong. I appreciate all of the help and support that you members have offered in this project. It would simply be impossible without your help. A huge thanks to Ken at Testand for his willingness to take on this project. I would be spinning my wheels from here to eternity without his help… SPICER”

 

that test is quite old

It's true that cotton filters filter worse than paper, but it's not really clear that a little bit more dirt is going to noticeably affect engine life. My coworker has a high mileage 03 G35 with a cotton cone filter on it for most of its' 80K+ life, and the car is still pretty strong, auto for auto it eats my other coworkers 05 TL every time.

For drop in filters, k&n doesn't really make sense anyways, there isn't significant gain in power from just a drop in and the supposed cost savings from reusability vanish when you consider it takes .5-1 hr to clean it not to mention downtime while cleaning. It's only cheaper if your time is worthless.

For intakes/cone filters, AEM now makes synthetic media dry filters which supposedly filters better than cotton.




Modified by outersquare at 2:26 PM 5/29/2006

 

quiet old indeed. good info nonetheless. will noobs listen? no.

 

They will never listen Yeu. But nice try.

 

given that a new engine costs upwards of $6K, I would not even think about using aftermarket air filter........

 

i'm a noob to this forum, but i know a little about cars. and the test makes sense: better airflow=less filtration. i agree, i'm pretty sure everyone can agree on those test results. but i gota argue about the

"It is amazing how many people believe that better airflow = more power! "

cause, yea, better airflow does = more power. how is it amazing that many people believe that? its the truth more air means more O2 means more fuel can combust which means more power

also, i'm wondering how much does it really hurt the engine putting on an aftermarket filter? it would dirty up the oil a little, but it its changed every 3000 miles, whats the problem? there is an oil filter to filter those little dirt particles out i agree that less filtration is worse, but is it even a noticable difference? any proof?