Aftermarket air filter comparison test!
#31
Evolved Member
iTrader: (4)
Originally Posted by sparky
I read a air filter test done by Option magazine in Japan a few years ago, they test about 6-7 different brand air filter and the Apexi filter got the highest HP gain, since then I use the Apexi filter on my EVO 8 and now the EVO 9.[/QUOTE
I was curious about this test so I did a search on the Lancer Register Forum(our British cousins) and there was sharp debate on the methods used in this particular filter comparison test. It seems that the results were obtained by strapping the filters onto vaccuum cleaners and not onto automobiles.
Also, the brits found the Apexi filter be restrictive in applications above 350 whp, due to its small size. At any rate, I just thought you guys might wanna know before selling your K&N's and buying a new Apexi.
Look I wish I could link you to the thread but I am a computer moron....sorry. Maybe someone else can go on Mitsubishi Lancer Register Forum and do a search for "induction kit", w/o the quotation marks, and post the link. Thanx
I was curious about this test so I did a search on the Lancer Register Forum(our British cousins) and there was sharp debate on the methods used in this particular filter comparison test. It seems that the results were obtained by strapping the filters onto vaccuum cleaners and not onto automobiles.
Also, the brits found the Apexi filter be restrictive in applications above 350 whp, due to its small size. At any rate, I just thought you guys might wanna know before selling your K&N's and buying a new Apexi.
Look I wish I could link you to the thread but I am a computer moron....sorry. Maybe someone else can go on Mitsubishi Lancer Register Forum and do a search for "induction kit", w/o the quotation marks, and post the link. Thanx
#32
EvoM Guru
iTrader: (50)
Here is a test comparing some high performance air filters to a Napa Gold filter. The tests include both air flow and filtration results:
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/airfilter/airtest1.htm
There is another excellent study on the internet that examines both filtration efficiency and flow efficiency as the filter fills with dust/dirt. I can't find the link now though. What I remember most from the study was that while the clean K&N flows better than a new paper element, K&N flow efficiency quickly drops below that of a paper element as the paper element and the K&N element are given the same dust/dirt loading. If I can ever find the link, I'll post it.
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/airfilter/airtest1.htm
There is another excellent study on the internet that examines both filtration efficiency and flow efficiency as the filter fills with dust/dirt. I can't find the link now though. What I remember most from the study was that while the clean K&N flows better than a new paper element, K&N flow efficiency quickly drops below that of a paper element as the paper element and the K&N element are given the same dust/dirt loading. If I can ever find the link, I'll post it.
#33
Evolving Member
iTrader: (1)
not to knock the vacum cleaner & stopwatch test, but how about some real scientific data from an ISO 5011 test?
http://www.duramax-diesel.com/spicer/index.htm
http://www.duramax-diesel.com/spicer/index.htm
#34
Originally Posted by CharlieGsanD
not to knock the vacum cleaner & stopwatch test, but how about some real scientific data from an ISO 5011 test?
http://www.duramax-diesel.com/spicer/index.htm
http://www.duramax-diesel.com/spicer/index.htm
I'll summarize some of the errors, ommissions, and cheats.
For one thing, it was not apples to apples comparison - they failed to disclose that the part numbers they were comparing were not for the same application.
Why is it that the capacity, effificency, and fine dust test on 7/13 of the AFE use a prt number 72-90008 rather than the 73-10062 filter that was used in other tests?
Why was the AC Delco used as a benchmark, yet there is no test data for it?
Why were some tested with fine dust, and some with coarse dust? Shouldn't they all be tested the same?
The report says that they conducted testing on three different days - 7/6, 7/12 and 7/13). Were new K&N filters used in each test or was one K&N cleaned and reused?
They claim the test costs $1,700 per filter, and that Testand (right down the road from FRAM) conducted the test, yet FRAM was not tested.
-- DavidV
#36
Originally Posted by CharlieGsanD
good to know, definatly some disturbing inconsistencies there.......
i wonder.......was the test not up to ISO standards & just slipped under the radar, or are the requirments really that lax that there could be that many inconsistencies?
i wonder.......was the test not up to ISO standards & just slipped under the radar, or are the requirments really that lax that there could be that many inconsistencies?
-- DavidV
#38
EvoM Guru
iTrader: (50)
Originally Posted by DavidV
It was based on the ISO 5011 test, but they never ran the full test (would have been impossible for the number of filters tested over such a short period of time) and Arnold Spicer admitted to extrapolating the results. K&N has its own SAE/ISO lab on site, and when they re-ran the full test and made all the filters apples-to-apples (same application) the results were very different.
-- DavidV
-- DavidV
#39
Evolved Member
iTrader: (16)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,580
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by CharlieGsanD
not to knock the vacum cleaner & stopwatch test, but how about some real scientific data from an ISO 5011 test?
http://www.duramax-diesel.com/spicer/index.htm
http://www.duramax-diesel.com/spicer/index.htm
I've seen this test before and felt that is was a good test.
However it was shot down by one of the original founding principals
of a major vendor on this forum.
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...3&page=9&pp=15
.
#40
EvoM Guru
iTrader: (50)
Originally Posted by Spec'd
I've seen this test before and felt that is was a good test.
However it was shot down by one of the original founding principals
of a major vendor on this forum.
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...3&page=9&pp=15
.
However it was shot down by one of the original founding principals
of a major vendor on this forum.
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...3&page=9&pp=15
.
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...&page=10&pp=15
Starts at post #146. In the end, the only thing that I could agree with him on was that neither of us had any information on whether or not the reduced filtration capacity of a K&N filter would have a significant effect on engine life.
#41
Evolved Member
iTrader: (16)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,580
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by mrfred
After DavidV tossed out some general criticism of that test in another thread without providing specific examples of the flaws in the testing methodology, I went through the Duramax air filter test with a fine tooth combo, and determined that its totally legit. I went point for point with DavidV in another thread, and none of his criticisms had any basis.
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...&page=10&pp=15
Starts at post #146. In the end, the only thing that I could agree with him on was that neither of us had any information on whether or not the reduced filtration capacity of a K&N filter would have a significant effect on engine life.
https://www.evolutionm.net/forums/sh...&page=10&pp=15
Starts at post #146. In the end, the only thing that I could agree with him on was that neither of us had any information on whether or not the reduced filtration capacity of a K&N filter would have a significant effect on engine life.
Why not have a test on all filters specifically used on the Evo.
i.e. K&N, WORKS, HKS, Blitz and all others available ... both cone and dropin.
This would put the debate to rest once and for all.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
golgo13
Evo Engine / Turbo / Drivetrain
441
Jun 11, 2024 10:05 AM
Speed Element
Evo 'For Sale' Services
3
Jun 12, 2013 10:44 AM
golgo13
Evo X Engine / Turbo / Drivetrain
1
Nov 23, 2012 03:43 AM