K&N vs OEM Paper Airfilters - Page 2 - Ranger-Forums - The Ultimate Ford Ranger Resource


General Technical & Electrical General technical and electrical discussion for the Ford Ranger that does not fit in any other sub-forum.

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
  #26  
Old 03-10-2009
Level I Supporter
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 3,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by Npierce View Post
I always hate these OEM is better threads... Always telling me stock is better than this and that... This forum i snot about running a stock truck. It was developed for people who wish to modify their vehicle to their liking and the way they want to run it. If they keep it stock then no big deal but if they spend hundreds or thousands or modifying it to what they want you shouldn't give them crap for it...

  #27  
Old 03-10-2009
bucky919's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Minot, ND
Posts: 1,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by pace51 View Post
Ok by saying this then you are saying I need to buy the big fat cheap roll of paper towels instead of spending the extra dollar on bounty because it has more sheets. Nevermind the fact that I can ring out and reuse the sheet of bounty.


More is not always better.
I don't remember, Bob saying on is really better than the other in this thread, he just took then apart to compare them.

You guys are way to quick to jump to conclusions....
  #28  
Old 03-10-2009
Motorcraft's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Franklin MA
Posts: 240
i dont run K&N's they let in alot of water vs a factory style paper filter
  #29  
Old 03-10-2009
99XLTman's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Bradenton Fl
Posts: 411
Quote:
Originally Posted by FireRanger View Post
Placing them side-by-side and comparing filter media square footage does not accomplish anything. That's like saying an apple tastes better than a grape because it is bigger. They are two totally different devices that work in totally different manners. This comparison proves nothing for either side.
Agreed 100%
  #30  
Old 03-10-2009
pace51's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: on da puter
Posts: 711
All I know is I did fell a difference in the ranger with my drop in k&n, my '94 5.0 not so much. However the k&n cold air intake worked wonders on my new truck. It gave the 5.4 some freaking life and got rid of 95% of the throttle lag. Now it jumps when I mash the pedal.
  #31  
Old 03-10-2009
97ranger xlt's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Mass.
Posts: 459
my truck had a k&n drop in when i got it... changed it out promptly to a paper filter after cleaning the oily MAF..
  #32  
Old 03-10-2009
Dangerranger01's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (6)
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Boring/Corvallis, Oregon
Posts: 2,011
The joke is on Bob, he ruined two good filters.

But nice pictures though...makes for an excellent *physical* comparison of the two. If i were buying on physical appearance, I'd totally rock the OEM...I get more paper!!!
  #33  
Old 03-10-2009
zabeard's Avatar
who?
iTrader: (8)
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: IN
Posts: 26,045
Quote:
Originally Posted by Motorcraft View Post
i dont run K&N's they let in alot of water vs a factory style paper filter
Ah have you seen a stock filter in water? lol A K&N has saved my truck numerous times from water. Oil blocks water. Paper soaks it up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by pace51 View Post
All I know is I did fell a difference in the ranger with my drop in k&n, my '94 5.0 not so much. However the k&n cold air intake worked wonders on my new truck. It gave the 5.4 some freaking life and got rid of 95% of the throttle lag. Now it jumps when I mash the pedal.

Really? Way to make me want to spend more money!


Actually I like the stock filters, on both but my ranger being supercharged cant take a stock paper filter.
  #34  
Old 03-10-2009
pace51's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: on da puter
Posts: 711
Zach I got this one and the thottle lag is almost none existant. The programmer did ok for it but I really noticed the difference after I installed the cai. Wierd part is this one comes with a throttle body relocater. It lifts it up and points tiwards the grille. Keeps the air moving nice and smoth no hard bends.
  #35  
Old 03-10-2009
FireRanger's Avatar  
Join Date: May 2004
Location: CT
Posts: 0
Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeda View Post
I disagree, what it does prove is if the K&N flows more air with that much smaller filter media area, it's going to pass more dirt.
No, it proves no such thing. All it proves is the filter media is not the same size. The material and the manner in which it does the filtering are COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. You therefore can NOT use the size of the element to compare function. An apple doesn't taste different than a grape because the apple is bigger.
  #36  
Old 03-10-2009
Lord Of War's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Thornton, Colorado
Posts: 4,599
Quote:
Originally Posted by 04blackedge View Post
I wish I did, I'm curious. For me the K&N has a bigger risk with over oiling it and screwing the MAF up. For those very few extra horsepower I'll just stick with the paper one.
How ****ing retarded do you have to be to mess up oiling a filter? A person with downs could do it.
  #37  
Old 03-10-2009
crazymikey's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: your mom
Posts: 4,008
I can't even tell the difference between my K&N and the Fram I have in there now.
  #38  
Old 03-10-2009
Motorcraft's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Franklin MA
Posts: 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by zabeard View Post
Ah have you seen a stock filter in water? lol A K&N has saved my truck numerous times from water. Oil blocks water. Paper soaks it up.




Really? Way to make me want to spend more money!


Actually I like the stock filters, on both but my ranger being supercharged cant take a stock paper filter.
yes i have hydrolocked a engine with a k&N and the person behind me also stalled out but 90% of the water was blocked by the paper filter in his truck were all the water went into my engine on my k&N
  #39  
Old 03-11-2009
BlutoBodine's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 543
Quote:
Originally Posted by bucky919 View Post
Same here, if the paper ones where so bad and the K&N ones are so good wouldn't Ford put them in there vehicles from the factory????

They did

http://www.pickuptrucks.com/html/sto...underbolt.html

...still do, if you know the right option codes or if you include special builds like properly optioned Shelby cars and Ford cars/trucks sold with factory Ford part numbered power packages. Many with a "warranty available" note attached.
  #40  
Old 03-11-2009
rolsmojave3's Avatar
Level III Supporter
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 2,852
All I know is I properly cleaned and oiled my K&N. I drove it for 5000 miles in the semi dusty conditions, not heavy dust, somedays no dust. Opened up the airbox and looked in the lid to see a slight film of oily dust, in other words, stupid to run. Cleaned out the whole intake, used OEM filter, havent' seen dirt in the intake since.
  #41  
Old 03-11-2009
seed60's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (15)
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Mooresville, NC
Posts: 5,584
I run a k&n and haven't had any problems but things like this, http://duramax-diesel.com/spicer/index.htm ,get me thinking.
  #42  
Old 03-11-2009
IN2 FX4's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Costa Mesa, CA
Posts: 855
I have put around 500,000 miles on various vehicles since the early 1980s without any problems. One of those vehicles was an 89 Ranger that had nearly 200,000 miles on it with a K&N. That 2.9L engine was as good as new when I sold it in 2002 and it is still running strong today. I never found any dust on the filtered side of the intake and also had the oil analyzed. Silicon is an indicator of dirt getting through the filter. It always had a normal amount of silicon.

If K&N filters pass dirt, it must of a size that does not hurt the engine.
  #43  
Old 03-11-2009
Level I Supporter
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 3,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by IN2 FX4 View Post
I have put around 500,000 miles on various vehicles since the early 1980s without any problems. One of those vehicles was an 89 Ranger that had nearly 200,000 miles on it with a K&N. That 2.9L engine was as good as new when I sold it in 2002 and it is still running strong today. I never found any dust on the filtered side of the intake and also had the oil analyzed. Silicon is an indicator of dirt getting through the filter. It always had a normal amount of silicon.

If K&N filters pass dirt, it must of a size that does not hurt the engine.
K&N is well aware of the amount of dirt their filters pass! One indicator of this
is this "pre-wrap" they sell to use with their filters in "very dusty conditions":

http://www.knfilters.com/search/wrap.aspx

And this in their warranty statement:

"K&N will not be responsible for any other expenses incurred by the customer under the terms of this warranty, nor shall it be responsible for any damages either consequential, special, contingent, or otherwise; or expenses or injury arising directly or indirectly from the use of the K&N Air Filter."
  #44  
Old 03-11-2009
edgeman4.0's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: All Over
Posts: 1,475
good example bob, looking at the 2 filters strung out across the driveway kinda makes me wonder. then again, my k&n works well as far as keeping things clean on the intake side of the filter... my theory still remains on this one "if it aint broke... dont fix it".
  #45  
Old 03-11-2009
graniteguy's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,221
Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeda View Post
"K&N will not be responsible for any other expenses incurred by the customer under the terms of this warranty, nor shall it be responsible for any damages either consequential, special, contingent, or otherwise; or expenses or injury arising directly or indirectly from the use of the K&N Air Filter."
By stating that are you stating that Motorcraft WILL be responsible for any damages either consequential, special, contingent, or otherwise; or expenses or injury arising directly or indirectly from the use of the Air Filter?
  #46  
Old 03-11-2009
whippersnapper02's Avatar
RF Veteran
iTrader: (1)
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Earth, Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 7,415
Quote:
Originally Posted by Takeda View Post
K&N is well aware of the amount of dirt their filters pass! One indicator of this
is this "pre-wrap" they sell to use with their filters in "very dusty conditions":
I'm sure that if you drive in really dusty conditions any filter will eventually clog up and pass dirt.
  #47  
Old 03-11-2009
edgeman4.0's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (2)
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: All Over
Posts: 1,475
Quote:
Originally Posted by graniteguy View Post
By stating that are you stating that Motorcraft WILL be responsible for any damages either consequential, special, contingent, or otherwise; or expenses or injury arising directly or indirectly from the use of the Air Filter?
why should motorcraft assume responsibilty? if you're beating on your truck, offroad (where it shouldnt be) according to them, they'll most likely say its not their products fault and assume no responsibility.

thats kinda like buying a playboy and then trying to get money out of them claiming its their fault you now have tennis elbow...
  #48  
Old 03-11-2009
BlutoBodine's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 543
From K&N:

"ENGINE PROTECTION LIMITED WARRANTY

Unlike many companies, our warranty for O/E replacement air filters and intake systems does extend beyond the replacement of a defective K&N part. For the original purchaser of the product, our warranty covers any engine damage or related costs incurred as a direct result of the use of a properly installed and maintained K&N O/E replacement air filter or intake system on the specific vehicle for which the product was designed to be used by K&N. This includes reasonable vehicle repair costs, sensor replacements, car rental fees or other incidental expenses directly related to an engine problem caused by the failure of a K&N product. Furthermore, we warrant that using our product will not result in a vehicle warranty denial. K&N will not be responsible for any indirect, consequential, special, contingent, or other damages not listed above.

We will promptly reimburse the consumer for the cost of the repair if a service provider denies warranty coverage as a result of a K&N product or claims that a K&N product has caused harm to your engine or vehicle. In order to receive reimbursement, we require each of the following:



The consumer must provide a written statement or repair order from the dealership or service provider in which the dealership or service provider blames the problem or warranty denial on a K&N product;
The service provider or consumer must provide K&N with all allegedly damaged parts. Many states have laws that require a service provider to retain all parts replaced during a vehicle repair, unless given consent to dispose of the parts by the consumer. K&N will pay the shipping cost to recover these parts; and
The consumer must provide proof of purchase of the K&N product along with cooperation in helping us investigate the claim.
Once these steps have been completed, K&N will contact the service provider and collect evidence to support their claim. In the event we are not provided with sufficient evidence, we reserve the right to reject the claim and will use our best efforts to assist in establishing your rights toward the service provider under warranty or other provisions.

We strive to exceed consumer expectations. Customer service can be reached at 1-800-858-3333."
  #49  
Old 03-11-2009
BlutoBodine's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Tulsa, OK
Posts: 543
Quote:
Originally Posted by edgeman4.0 View Post
why should motorcraft assume responsibilty? if you're beating on your truck, offroad (where it shouldnt be) according to them, they'll most likely say its not their products fault and assume no responsibility.

thats kinda like buying a playboy and then trying to get money out of them claiming its their fault you now have tennis elbow...

Or perhaps graniteguy's original statement was just trying to point out the hypocrisy of worrying about a company policy that may be standard practice used by other manufacturers?
  #50  
Old 03-11-2009
Level I Supporter
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Durham, NC
Posts: 3,657
Quote:
Originally Posted by fddriver02 View Post
I'm sure that if you drive in really dusty conditions any filter will eventually clog up and pass dirt.
Even with the K&N, when it gets dirty, it filters better!!!!
Closed Thread

Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Charging / Starting issues... (forget the morning paper) sawred General Technical & Electrical 21 08-04-2006 09:48 AM
Sand Paper Question 00RANGER00 Exterior Semi-Tech 5 09-02-2005 10:34 AM
Most expensive piece of paper I've bought yet... Gearhead61 General Ford Ranger Discussion 26 06-09-2005 04:11 PM


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:24 AM.


We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.