I got such great responses to my Rock Auto question I thought I would ask something else I have been wondering about.

My Jeep is about 18 years old and it has always used throwaway air filters. Well, now I have been having some trouble finding air filters for it locally. I found them on-line, but in the process I noticed several companies offer lifetime washable filters. They cost more up front, but I plan to keep the Jeep as long as I can so "buy once cry once" makes a lot of sense.

Anybody here use them? Advice about best manufacturers, etc. ?

K&N are probably the most well-known & they work well, but washing them & waiting for them to dry is a pain in the ass. get 2 so you can swap while you wash the other one.

Air filter hype is about the same level as 'which oil brand' and 'which caliber'. Ignore most of the performance comparisons.

I would advise against any of these types of filters - whether they are oil, non-oil, etc. My Dodge 2500 Cummins had an aftermarket AFE air filter kit on it which, in the market for these things, is a good brand. However, I did some research and reading about these filters vs. the stock paper air filter and the performance increase was negligible over the stock filter and housing, while the filtration was not as good as the stock unit. Read up on "dusting" when it comes to vehicle air filtration.

I chose to go with better filtration over minor increases in power and throttle response so I eliminated the aftermarket kit and put everything back the way it came from the factory.

quote:

Originally posted by snidera:
K&N are probably the most well-known & they work well, but washing them & waiting for them to dry is a pain in the ass. get 2 so you can swap while you wash the other one.

Air filter hype is about the same level as 'which oil brand' and 'which caliber'. Ignore most of the performance comparisons.

Long time user of K&N for both auto and motorcycle. For the auto, I just put the original paper filter back in for the day or two it takes to clean and re-oil the filter.

I’ll respectfully disagree with the above post on K&N not providing as good of filtration. Everything I have read describes equal or better filtration without particles blocking airflow through the media, hence the better air flow/performance.

The gain comes from a media that continues to allow air flow after stoping particulates vs. paper which gets clogged as it collects particulates and then restricts air flow.

I've used various oiled-gauze filters (K&N, etc.) on both highly modified engines and stock daily drivers as well. When cleaning/re-oiling, you can always speed up the drying process by using a hair dryer. The innards are mostly cotton gauze; it dries pretty quickly with low-heat dry air rushing over it.
Or, set it in the driveway and let the sun hit it.

No one has mentioned oiling your mass airflow sensor, so I will.

I ran a K&N for about 200k on a '00 Expedition, cleaning it roughly 3 times. I was careful to let the oil set up and even out before reinstalling. I would also gently clean the bulb off once a year or so. I never had a problem that I know of. The truck is still running, the filter is still lnstalled as far as I know and has over 245k on the clock.

I don't plan on putting one in my new truck. I don't think I solved any problems with the first K&N. Sounds like you can though, I'd not be afraid of them just go in with eyes open to the potential pitfalls.

My AEM on my truck doesn't require as much cleaning as the K&N oiled ones (have a K&N on my BMW).
The AEM is a whole intake though, although I think they might have straight filters now.
YMMV

If you look at the Used Oil Analysis results over on bobistheoilguy.com, the majority (but not all) oil analysis results show increased amounts of silicon and associated wear metals when using these re-usable filters. The ones that have to be oiled must be oiled very carefully - you have to strike a balance between the right amount of oil to catch particles, but not so much that it contaminates the air flow sensor.

If you are considering one of these filters, I would advise having a used oil analysis performed with the OEM filter, and one with the new filter, to ensure the new filter is doing its job adequately.

K&N are great. They are less restrictive than paper filters so you gain back a little power but the trade off is you get high silica content in your oil. I run them on two of my vehicles.

I used one (K&N) for a year or so on my F250 (at the suggestion of a trusted mechanic at the Ford dealership) but after noticing fine powdery dust getting past the filter and being deposited in the intake I went back to OEM. We drive on dirt roads quite a bit, that issue might not crop up in street driving.

My son’s used truck came with one. The MASS was oiled and had to be replaced. I prefer a high quality paper filter like Wix changed at regular intervals.

If you drive on roadways as opposed to dusty dirt or gravel roads, the K&N will serve you well. If you are in a dusty environment, you will need to keep a close eye on the filter as it will get clotted quickly due to th oil doing what it is designed to do. I have had them on sport bikes and vehicles and they do work.

K&N type filters let more air into the engine because the holes in the media are larger . No other way to do it . The oil is used to hopefully trap the fine stuff that might get through . It ain't rocket science . You decide which type is right for you .

quote:

Originally posted by reflex/deflex 64:
No one has mentioned oiling your mass airflow sensor, so I will.

I ran a K&N for about 200k on a '00 Expedition, cleaning it roughly 3 times. I was careful to let the oil set up and even out before reinstalling. I would also gently clean the bulb off once a year or so. I never had a problem that I know of. The truck is still running, the filter is still lnstalled as far as I know and has over 245k on the clock.

I don't plan on putting one in my new truck. I don't think I solved any problems with the first K&N. Sounds like you can though, I'd not be afraid of them just go in with eyes open to the potential pitfalls.

General Motors issued a TSB about ten years ago on the same issue, excessive oil coating the MAF.

I have a K&N on one car for 15 years and an aFe Dryflow on another one. I do UOAs on both through
Blackstone.

No report for either vehicle has even been flagged or tagged with elevated or high silicon numbers. The wear numbers are below the universal averages for the respective engine types. They are both good.

That said, they are a waste of money if you are looking for a HP gain. You need a lot of RPMs to see any increase and no one drives their daily driver at a sustained level to see a noticeable difference in an urban setting. Increased airflow is fine and dandy although the engine can only accept so much without other mods on the intake and exhaust. Also consider that your car has an EGR valve that's putting dirty air downstream of the filter so there's that to consider..

I use them because I don't need to clean them before 2-3 years. Less maintenance time, excellent filtration but at a cost that's about 4x of a paper one.

K&N style filters provide better particulate protection and better mass airflow than paper or other filters. I prefer them in all vehicles. We even run a version of them in some aircraft. I use them in the Air Tractor. We get less restriction, more power, and better engine protection.

Silicon in an oil spectrometric analysis is not the fault of the air filter, nor the fault of the air filter to remove particulates like sand or dust. Silicon in oil spectrometric analysis is the result of the oil base stock, oil additives, silicon gaskets, coolant leaks, wear from aluminum alloys, and other sources, but typically not from material that bypasses the filter.

The air filter catches most of what goes in the intake. Air filters reduce power and manifold pressure by creating a restriction; the less restriction, the better and the more power available and the more responsive the engine will be; any oiled filter which is properly cleaned and prepared will produce better airflow while providing better engine protection.

Oil attracts dust and dirt particles, rather than using a paper element or matrix to stop the particles. Both filters retain particulates, but the oil filter holds them by sticking them in place and uses a more flowable matrix to do so, whereas the paper filter is a barrier to airflow.

Particulates which make it beyond a filter, and there are very few, pass through the engine and are exhausted, rather than winding up on cylinder walls and in the oil. Therefore, when someone says that high-flow oil reusable filters are resulting in higher silicon content, I know they're not understanding the oil analysis. It's one of the reasons that oil analysis is sometimes seen as a bad thing; because people who don't understand them interpret the and react according to the misunderstanding. Elevated silicon in an oil analysis can come from a number of sources, poor engine filtration is not one of them, as a rule, but the oiled reusable filters provide better filtration and airflow and are generally speaking, a better choice.

Even Pratt & Whitney has approved sticky high-flow filters for their PT6AG on firefighting AT802 aircraft, which operate in heavy smoke, dust, and sand much of the time, to say nothing of ash and pollen, and other particulates, including insects, birds, and so forth. There's a much lower loss of power over time as the filter sees use, and they provide superior protection. There's much less airflow restriction, and ongoing SOAP analysis programs don't show increased wear or levels of contaminants.

I use reusable oiled filters on all my vehicles.

K&N, put on on my 03 F150 when I bought it new, it's still there, as to cleaning and needing extra filters, I do mine at home after work when the trucks going nowhere, simple to clean, oil let the oil setup and you're done, it's more like a few hours not overnight.

I run them on Motorcycles and vehicles.

The Motorcraft pleated paper filter on my 6.7 PowerStroke costs $15 on amazon. The book says to change it every 45,000 miles which I did even though the airflow indicator on the airbox was still in the green and the filter looked fine. It might be 5 minutes to change. I seriously doubt there's enough performance improvement to out weigh the added expense and maintenance time. Besides, the air going into my engine is already pressurized: turbocharged.

I have four K&Ns and a Vance & Hines exhaust my Yamaha FJ1200. I jetted the carbs after installing them and pulled 111hp at the wheel on a dyno. I could tell when I needed to clean and oil the filters, about every 3,000 miles, because the motor would start to run rough.

The stock airboxes and exhausts 30 years ago were not as good as the ones today. Without jetting, you couldn't take advantage of the better airflow. Same holds true today, except you need to reprogram the ECU, a tune, to take advantage of the better airflow.

That being said, Steeda had a Labor Day sale and I picked up there CAI and a tuner for my Focus ST for the normal price of the tuner alone. Maybe it'll change my mind. Of course I'll be installing a much larger than stock FMIC, so my charge temps should be much lower and more consistent as well.

You trying to start a fight? Seriously... One of the great hot debates of all time on car forums. I've run both and I have followed this debate for decades.

Not worth the trouble to me to use the reusable, plus, I had one K&N split wide open along a pleat allowing unfiltered air into my engine for who knows how long until I removed it for a regular cleaning cycle. Don't forget to figure in the cost of cleaning and oiling products.

Just order and keep a spare, then reorder when you put the spare in. I do my oil and filters that way... on the shelf and ready whenever I get the notion and time to use.

Would this be a straight-up replacement, in the original airbox, for the paper filter? Then, provided you don't mind setting aside the time for washing, drying and oiling, a reusable filter should be fine. I'm 99% certain an 18-year-old Jeep only has a MAP (manifold absolute pressure) sensor, not a MAF (mass air flow), so oil contamination isn't a concern. That, or find a good price on half a dozen or so paper filters and stock up. I do not recommend a "cold air intake." Total waste of money. Many of them actually are not cold air; the filter sits in the middle of the hot engine bay, whereas the original system brought air in from outside. Of the ones that do work, any horsepower gain is on the top end of the rpm scale, where you seldom run.