"TDi Safe" K&N Intake?!?

[dubidoobs]

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/K-N-...r_Truck_Parts_Accessories&hash=item335df20b16

There's an existing thread here that someone mentioned NOT (suggested) to use oiled/K&N-type, but I came across the above and it looked interesting.

(I foresee getting fire for this, but what the hey...)

Opinions, please...TIA!

 

[JERMS]

It still uses an oiled K&N filter, so it not really a good idea. It's the oil from the filter that can ruin the MAF. Also, these filters have been known to not filter as well as a quality paper filter while the performance increase is minimal at best.

 

[scurvy]

There's an existing thread here that someone mentioned NOT (suggested) to use oiled/K&N-type, but I came across the above and it looked interesting.

(I foresee getting fire for this, but what the hey...)

Opinions, please...TIA!

Hi, new guy. You need to do some more reading here to understand why K&Ns are terrible ideas. The first thing you should read is how to perform searches on TDIClub so you can find the question that's already been answered a hojillion times. The usefulness & validity of a K&N being one such.

While you're reading, leave the stock, oversized, efficient air filter installed in the factory true cold air intake alone and forget any ideas about installing an aftermarket undersized rock catcher with a hot air intake.

Good luck.

 

[ymz]

...sigh...


I should know better than to ask this, but... Why do so many people think they need to spend money in order to buy an inferior air filtration/intake system???


Yuri

 

[shizzler]

I'll tell you why: because they are a proven way to make power on nearly every other car.

Everyone here is way to hard on newbs. It is not illogical to think about upgrading an intake system to add some power. On our finely engineered TDIs, it may not make sense, but it is not a stupid idea in general. Now, if people would just go take a look at the diameter of their intake piping, area of filter, etc and think logically... but that is probably expecting too much.

Can we just get an intake discussion sticky already?

 

[Honeydew]

Can we just get an intake discussion sticky already?

Excellent idea. Maybe retire the "smoke with bigger holes" thread from sticky status and replace with this one or another like it.

 

[kooyajerms]

+1 Shizzler/Honeydew. When's the last time we talked about non oem crush washers?

 

[thebigarniedog]

Number 2 for the month of August ....... 8 more to go

 

[darkhorse]

+2 Shizzler.

 

[scurvy]

I'll tell you why: because they are a proven way to make power on nearly every other car.

No it isn't.

http://www.honda-tech.com/showthread.php?t=1768602
No gain in HP or torque (tiny bit more torque with stock system)

http://forum.e46fanatics.com/archive/index.php/t-378208.html
'The Porsche Club of America dyno-tested K&N filters in a variety of new Porsches in 2001 and found no power increase whatsoever.'

http://www.apriliaforum.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2312729&postcount=3562
'On my old 1999 Mille I did a dyno test with full EGA on the stock filter, EVO, K&N, a Foam one I made and none at all. The dyno graphs all directly overlaid one another as did the mixture trace lines.'

http://www.gadgetonline.com/Dyno.htm
' It looks like TRD is right about this one, or close anyway. They told me that they have seen a slight reduction in power, to no improvement with the installation of the K&N FIPK.'

http://tl.acurazine.com/forums/showthread.php?t=601091
'The reality is 4.6 RWHP and ZERO gain in torque is PEAK number. The 4.6 additional horsepower did not increase the entire length of the curve...only a small peak at the high rpm.
...
Notice the red and blue line pulls are identical to each other with the difference of 4.6 RWHP [at one point, approximately 5400 RPM]. This peak number would not be felt on the street or shown in the 1/4 mile.
...
Then you have to consider how the K&N works in the first place. It allows more air to travel through it so no matter how many ways you look at it, the K&N filters less particles. It has been proven that an engine equipped with a K&N filter will show more silicate in it's oil than an engine with a "paper" element. Don't believe me? Analyze you own oil before and after a K&N install. I did.'

http://webspace.webring.com/people/mt/technisign/kn.html
' I know of at least one Si/SiR owner who dynoed their car before and after installing a K&N drop-in like yours and mine, and saw horsepower losses.'

I could go on, but your claim of these oiled MAF-ruining bugcatchers making power 'on nearly every other car' doesn't hold water. Even if you don't believe the HP gains, the lack of filtration is my biggest concern. Price out a replacement MAF & turbo for S&G, or a valve job.

And this is 'hard'ly being rough on noobs. Shall I call the waaaaaaaambulance to kiss their bruises & boo-boos?

 

[darkhorse]

Very colorful, Scurvy.

 

[dubidoobs]

[/QUOTE]

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/K-N-AIR-INTAKE-57S-9501-JETTA-TIGUAN-TOURAN-PASSAT-/220619475734?cmd=ViewItem&pt=Motors_Car_Truck_Parts_Accessories&hash=item335df20b16

(I foresee getting fire for this, but what the hey...)

Opinions, please...TIA!

i saw this coming, but i will accept the newb fire, even thought i'm only a TDi newb...thanks for the opinions, all!

 

[fnjimmy!]

http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/K-N-...r_Truck_Parts_Accessories&hash=item335df20b16

There's an existing thread here that someone mentioned NOT (suggested) to use oiled/K&N-type, but I came across the above and it looked interesting.

(I foresee getting fire for this, but what the hey...)

Opinions, please...TIA!

 

[fnjimmy!]

I'll tell you why: because they are a proven way to make power on nearly every other car.

Wrong, and the cars that do see HP gains also see accelerated wear evidenced in oil analysis and leakdown testing.

 

[ruking]

I think what a lot of folks do NOT realize, is the so called "oem restrictive design myth " sometimes occurs because of the (unadvertised unreported) snow prophalactic requirement. The basic concept is that it is a hydrolock preventative measure to starve off rain ingestion and probably "more" importantly running into a say 3 ft tall snow embankment and not causing hydro lock by snow injestion. So because of unimaginative design, a certain hp/.torque loss is ok: to having been given special mpg/emissions, etc, dispensation for the design.

Now in this regard, VW does a VERY good job. However, even I would concur with those who may be critical, that while elegant, good functionality included in the price, best filtering, etc. , the oem version is ... BUTT ugly!

 

[shizzler]

Ok, excellent refuting of my claim that power increases are common on other vehicles. But you are isolating your evidence to K & N systems. Other manufacturers, often specific to each type of vehicle, are finding some actual power gains....

But nonetheless this is the common perception. We are seeing less and less gain over OEM systems as power train designs evolve and engineers leave less on the table. 15 years ago there was a lot of room for improvement - some of the AEM systems on older Hondas found 15 bhp! Comments about increased wear are besides the point - this is of little concern to rice rockets and boy racers.

 

[ruking]

It is not a refuting of your claim.

The power loss is in effect "engineered IN", due to , if I can use a metaphor ... lack of engineering imagination. It can also be the fact the oem might want the exemption. Or... the design is expedient. So when you remove the parts that EFFECT the loss... voila !! more power !!!

A technical example (if you or others really want to hear it) is the 2001 Corvette Z06. This is FAR from isolating it to K& N products.

 

[fnjimmy!]

Ok, excellent refuting of my claim that power increases are common on other vehicles. But you are isolating your evidence to K & N systems. Other manufacturers, often specific to each type of vehicle, are finding some actual power gains....

LOL

But nonetheless this is the common perception.

Because marketing is effective, and people want to believe there's a such thing as a free lunch. The ads are in your face "zOMG UP TO FIFTYEEN PURSENT OF TEH GAININGS!!1!!1oneone". More on that in a sec.

We are seeing less and less gain over OEM systems as power train designs evolve and engineers leave less on the table. 15 years ago there was a lot of room for improvement

Not really, Techtonics put a new VR6 (introduced here in 1992) on an engine dyno and saw no gains after removing the cat and airbox completely.

- some of the AEM systems on older Hondas found 15 bhp! Comments about increased wear are besides the point - this is of little concern to rice rockets and boy racers.

Peak gains do not unequivocally mean better performance. There's more to induction and exhaust than a single peak power number on a dyno. The Japanese are not new to engineering. Many of the "gains" realized by monkeying with stock intake and exhaust on a conventional car are offset by losses in hp and torque elsewhere. Tuning these systems effectively allows a smaller engine to feel like a larger one yet operate more efficiently.

With the advent of advanced variable valve timing, the intake and exhaust themselves don't have to be tuned as specifically, sacrificing high-end for low-end and vice-versa in order to maintain driving dynamics and efficiency, they need to flow adequately. This is one reason there are little gains to be had by messing with a well-engineered system.

In the case of "performance" air "filters" the cost of the "performance" is less filtration. The way around this with a quality filter is area. If we're going to write-off engine damage, why not take a holesaw to your car and lighten it? I hear there's quite a bit of ugly, excess, useless metal that could be removed to help 0-60 times.

 

[Diesel_Benz]

$285 is very expensive for a screen door, especially one that doesn't have even one single point in its favor.

 

[Farfromovin]

$285 is very expensive for a screen door, especially one that doesn't have even one single point in its favor.

Yeah, put that $285 towards an ECU reflash from MaloneTuning. Get some real hp gains, while protecting your engine

 

[ruking]

$285 is very expensive for a screen door, especially one that doesn't have even one single point in its favor.

Indeed @ 12/15 per oem/vendor air filter that would buy 19-23 air filters. Being as how I run them 60,000 miles each that would be 1.14M miles !!!!!???

 

[n1das]

I'll tell you why: because they are a proven way to make power on nearly every other car.

Everyone here is way to hard on newbs. It is not illogical to think about upgrading an intake system to add some power. On our finely engineered TDIs, it may not make sense, but it is not a stupid idea in general. Now, if people would just go take a look at the diameter of their intake piping, area of filter, etc and think logically... but that is probably expecting too much.

Notice the sunlight passing through a K&N filter!

K&N filter "lie detector":

Notice the first dyno run labeled "Base" is with NO FILTER at all in the airbox.

How will upgrading the intake add power when the OEM paper air filter is already over-sized to way outflow the engine?

"A K&N filter just HAS to be better!" OK, based on what?

 

[zoompastu]

What have I done...

I know this is going to realy open the flood gates but I'll say it anyway. I will be adding a TRUE cold air intake down into the bumper in front of the vent of my Jetta. I will be using a foam filter. I do know that it will not add HP or TQ to the car. I'm cool with that. The reason why is 1. I like the indution sound. 2. Even though the factory intake works great, removing the airbox removes a small restriction allowing slightly better spooling times and slightly faster revs. If you do a dyno pull and the power and torque stay the same but the pull time is slighlty quicker then your acceloration has increased. I've seen this often. Not good enough for you ok then think of it this way. If you put a t-shirt over your mouth you can still breath through it. You will not passout and die. You can perform just fine. But if your take that off then you can breath slightly better. So $50 for a True CAI is worth it. $300 is not. I have a MKV. I wouldn't mess with it if I had a MKIV. Ok... Let my beating commence!!

 

[fnjimmy!]

I know this is going to realy open the flood gates but I'll say it anyway. I will be adding a TRUE cold air intake down into the bumper in front of the vent of my Jetta. I will be using a foam filter. I do know that it will not add HP or TQ to the car. I'm cool with that. The reason why is 1. I like the indution sound. 2. Even though the factory intake works great, removing the airbox removes a small restriction allowing slightly better spooling times and slightly faster revs. If you do a dyno pull and the power and torque stay the same but the pull time is slighlty quicker then your acceloration has increased. I've seen this often. Not good enough for you ok then think of it this way. If you put a t-shirt over your mouth you can still breath through it. You will not passout and die. You can perform just fine. But if your take that off then you can breath slightly better. So $50 for a True CAI is worth it. $300 is not. I have a MKV. I wouldn't mess with it if I had a MKIV. Ok... Let my beating commence!!

Is the mk5 air box not a "real cold air intake" like the mk4? I know a lot of so-called "cold air intakes" are actually warm air intakes because they remove an air box that takes in cold air from the headlight area and place a cone filter somewhere in the engine compartment.

Paper cone filters are available, I would only use foam exclusively if I knew there was a reasonable chance of the filter getting liquid on it, not a significant concern with the stock air box.

 

[IndigoBlueWagon]

FWIW, I bought a K&N filter for IBW in '03 when I had it chipped for the first time (Upsolute!). At the time I didn't know about potential MAF issues. When I learned more, cheap as I am, I didn't take it out until I'd been through the initial 50K interval. Didn't re-oil it, threw it out. I got 155K out of the original MAF on this car, and it shows no signs of excessive wear or oil consumption at 231K.

I'm just sayin...

 

[Ben Dur]

i do not believe that a cone type air filter adds anything at all...
and after being a long time fan of K&N, im converting to the idea that it filters less particles

__________

ON THE OTHER HAND

the stock "cold air system" on my mk4 ALH just looks restrictive, even after removing the snow screen...
the only modification that i can possibly imagine to the air intake on my mk4 would be

with quality, clean, PAPER FILTER in STOCK AIRBOX

-to open the hole going into the STOCK airbox, and either fit larger "cold air" piping in the stock location

- open inlet hole, and fit piping going into the STOCK airbox coming directly from the driver side lower mini grill to "ram" air into the airbox

'think pre filter Old Man Intake'

________________

keep in mind that neither of these options would increase fueling nor max boost so the only gain possible would be lower intake air temp and/or very slightly reduced spool up

either would be noticeable AT BEST, with equipment to measure such improvements

_______________
point?
the paper filter is not the restriction rather the piping

 

[Diesel_Benz]

I know this is going to realy open the flood gates but I'll say it anyway. I will be adding a TRUE cold air intake down into the bumper in front of the vent of my Jetta.

"Flood" is literal in that case. You're describing whats known as a "cold water intake".

I will be using a foam filter.

Thats WORSE than a K&N!

removing the airbox removes a small restriction allowing slightly better spooling times and slightly faster revs.

False. It will provide ZERO difference in everything except noise.

If you do a dyno pull and the power and torque stay the same but the pull time is slighlty quicker then your acceloration has increased.

That is physically impossible without an increase in torque.

So $50 for a True CAI is worth it.

False. You paid for one when you bought the car!

 

[hevster1]

No it isn't.

http://www.honda-tech.com/showthread.php?t=1768602
No gain in HP or torque (tiny bit more torque with stock system)

http://forum.e46fanatics.com/archive/index.php/t-378208.html
'The Porsche Club of America dyno-tested K&N filters in a variety of new Porsches in 2001 and found no power increase whatsoever.'

http://www.apriliaforum.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2312729&postcount=3562
'On my old 1999 Mille I did a dyno test with full EGA on the stock filter, EVO, K&N, a Foam one I made and none at all. The dyno graphs all directly overlaid one another as did the mixture trace lines.'

http://www.gadgetonline.com/Dyno.htm
' It looks like TRD is right about this one, or close anyway. They told me that they have seen a slight reduction in power, to no improvement with the installation of the K&N FIPK.'

http://tl.acurazine.com/forums/showthread.php?t=601091
'The reality is 4.6 RWHP and ZERO gain in torque is PEAK number. The 4.6 additional horsepower did not increase the entire length of the curve...only a small peak at the high rpm.
...
Notice the red and blue line pulls are identical to each other with the difference of 4.6 RWHP [at one point, approximately 5400 RPM]. This peak number would not be felt on the street or shown in the 1/4 mile.
...
Then you have to consider how the K&N works in the first place. It allows more air to travel through it so no matter how many ways you look at it, the K&N filters less particles. It has been proven that an engine equipped with a K&N filter will show more silicate in it's oil than an engine with a "paper" element. Don't believe me? Analyze you own oil before and after a K&N install. I did.'

http://webspace.webring.com/people/mt/technisign/kn.html
' I know of at least one Si/SiR owner who dynoed their car before and after installing a K&N drop-in like yours and mine, and saw horsepower losses.'

I could go on, but your claim of these oiled MAF-ruining bugcatchers making power 'on nearly every other car' doesn't hold water. Even if you don't believe the HP gains, the lack of filtration is my biggest concern. Price out a replacement MAF & turbo for S&G, or a valve job.

And this is 'hard'ly being rough on noobs. Shall I call the waaaaaaaambulance to kiss their bruises & boo-boos?

Very true, well put.

 

[hevster1]

"Flood" is literal in that case. You're describing whats known as a "cold water intake".

Thats WORSE than a K&N!
False. It will provide ZERO difference in everything except noise.
That is physically impossible without an increase in torque.
False. You paid for one when you bought the car!

Just curious, in what way is a foam worse than k&n? If you mean that it can do MAF damage you are correct but I do not find them worse.
Every dirtbike and Atv made has one and if properly oiled they filter extremely well.

 

[White Crow]

Typical of any thing that one would buy you are going to see results damn it! How ever the truth may not be self evident over the years there have been billions of fuel saving devices with outrageous claims and the only improvements are in the driving habits not the device. The surface area of a stock filter far excides the area of the intake port so regardless of how hard you try your are not going to succeed in getting more air into the engine by changing the filter or removing it.