K & N Filter Yes or No ?

K & N Air Filter Yes or No ?

I was thinking about switching to a K& N filter in my St1300 the next time it needs one and today I was reading on a BMW forum that they did not like them because they feel it lets too big of particles thru and wears out the engine faster.

Does anybody have high miles on their bike that have a K&N disproving this line of thinking ?

I cannot deny that the K7N probably has bigger openings and is made for racing.

This is going to be a matter of personal choice (and chance) since you will hear from both sides on this one - A LOT! If saving a few bucks overrides any peace of mind that using an OEM filter may give, then you will choose a K & N. How often do you need to change the filter anyway? Unless you ride on a lot of dusty gravel roads, changing once every 30,000 to 40,000 miles (my routine) isn't going to break the bank and you avoid that hassle of cleaning and re-oiling the K & N, which, if not done properly, will cause you more problems than it's worth.

Decide for yourself:

http://forums.nicoclub.com/debunking-the-k-n-myth-why-oem-is-better-t180100.html

wjbertrand said:

Decide for yourself:

http://forums.nicoclub.com/debunking-the-k-n-myth-why-oem-is-better-t180100.html

Click to expand...

Well, that should be "case closed" on the K & N debate and that report is over 10 years old! But I doubt it will be!

Buckaroo said:

they feel it lets too big of particles thru and wears out the engine faster.

Click to expand...

It seems some folk have a hard time understanding that filter media, (whether air filters in a car, oil filters, vacuum filters, etc...) can flow better and filter finer simultaneously. They seem to be stuck in a 2 dimensional world and think the media is flat plate and has lot's of holes in it. So if you flow faster the holes must be bigger because the distance between hole centers does not change. Right?

Well... the filter isn't 2d, it's 3d. Hole size changes, center spacing changes, capacity to trap changes. You can have lot's more holes in different types of media via different production process. A huge increase in significantly smaller holes can still flow adequately, filter finer and not clog as easily.

Does an K&N do this and do it well? I have no idea! But from my previous work with other filtration media in other applications I can tell you that the potential is there.

I switched to a K&N on my '05 at around the 30k mile mark. Have 110k on it now. Still running strong and still solid.
YMMV

See, now I read this and thought that the OP was talking about an oil filter. You all are answering as if it's the air filter. Hmmm.

Dennis

Rode Weary said:

See, now I read this and thought that the OP was talking about an oil filter. You all are answering as if it's the air filter. Hmmm.

Dennis

Click to expand...

Good observation!!!!! Which one is it??????

I go stock on all filters........FYI
ToddC

FYI if it was really that bad of a filter the company would have gone out of business decades ago from all the law suits resulting from blown engines.
Can it dust an engine? answer is any filter can do that under the right circumstances

I use one in the ST that I bought used for $10US from some lunatic who made me sign a waver LOL
It's like oil, use what works for you and keeps you riding

202,000 miles on the ST1300 since bought new. Probably 185,000 with a K&N filter installed. Cleaned and re-oiled every 50,000 miles.

Hmmm . . . air filters. I was thinking oil filters too until clarified.

FWIW
2007 Honda ST1300A, 44,518 miles . . . air filter? It has an air filter? OEM until its demise, no problems.
2008 Honda ST1300A, 99,470 miles . . . well, I thought about changing the OEM filter, but . . . never got around to it. Ran fine until it's demise.
2010 Honda ST1300A, 97,500 miles . . . replaced the filter with a K&N filter about 40K miles I think. Ran fine until . . . yep, it's demise.

Shuey

Shuey said:

Hmmm . . . air filters. I was thinking oil filters too until clarified.

Click to expand...

When the name K & N comes up it is 99% of the time about air filters.

What the heck are you doin' to all those machines?? Are you on a one man mission to eradicate ST1300's from the state?

Though it may have happened I've never seen K&N oil filters discussed just the air filters so I assumed that's what the OP meant.

I don't know about any scientific comparison of filtering media and efficacy/efficiency. I do know they flow a lot of air. When I put them on my 750-K4 it ran way waaaay too lean and I had to fatten the mixture at the carbs. (First one filter in the air cleaner box then without the box one filter on each carb.)

I just got tired of cleaning and oiling the filter(s). The ROI just didn't feel significant once I factored in my time. Under WFO they did sound great though.

ST Gui said:

I just got tired of cleaning and oiling the filter(s). The ROI just didn't feel significant once I factored in my time.

Click to expand...

people clean them more often than necessary. The small amount of dirt they attract and hold allows them to trap smaller particles than when freshly cleaned and oiled, without lowering the flow rate enough to warrant the cleaning. Every 50k miles is often enough, as Ziamon mentioned in his post.

Buckaroo said:

Does anybody have high miles on their bike that have a K&N disproving this line of thinking ?

Click to expand...

A few examples of long lived bikes does not definitively answer your question. Its just anecdotal evidence.

Shuey said:

Hmmm . . . air filters. I was thinking oil filters too until clarified.

FWIW
2007 Honda ST1300A, 44,518 miles . . . air filter? It has an air filter? OEM until its demise, no problems.
2008 Honda ST1300A, 99,470 miles . . . well, I thought about changing the OEM filter, but . . . never got around to it. Ran fine until it's demise.
2010 Honda ST1300A, 97,500 miles . . . replaced the filter with a K&N filter about 40K miles I think. Ran fine until . . . yep, it's demise.

Shuey

Click to expand...

Ahhhh Haa!. Shuey has proved that K & N filters wreck engines - do you see how his bike with the OEM filter went more miles (nearly 2,000 more)? (lol). Hey Shuey, what are you doing to those bikes? I thought an ST was a 200K to 300K machine......

SMSW said:

A few examples of long lived bikes does not definitively answer your question. Its just anecdotal evidence.

Click to expand...

everything you read here is anecdotal evidence, so you could say the same thing regarding proponents of OEM filters who have lots of miles accumulated. To me its a non-issue, I've run K&N for almost 40 years.

I must have at least 6, like new, cleaned and oiled, K&N air filters on my shelf, that the owners ask me to remove and replace with OEM filters.
I've built a lot of HD motors, which included drag racing and dirt track XR's and used K&N filters due to fitment and space issues...of course they were rebuild after a couple runs, or a few races
Working around the Mines in Arizona, ANY fleet vehicle was not allowed to run ANY filter other than paper due to the cost of repairing damaged engines.
I never found K&N filters to be worth their cost on street bikes, and most California lean bikes run like poop with them unless they are remapped or re-jetted.
ymmv.
Anybody wanna buy several like new, clean and oiled, ready to be installed filters?

Igofar said:

I must have at least 6, like new, cleaned and oiled, K&N air filters on my shelf, that the owners ask me to remove and replace with OEM filters.

Click to expand...

...which does make you wonder what problem they thought they were trying to solve by installing the K&N.

It can't be performance, because these bikes are heavy enough that making any kind of noticeable improvement in the torque- and power-to-weight ratios requires the addition of a heck of a lot of both.

--Mark

dwalby said:

everything you read here is anecdotal evidence, so you could say the same thing regarding proponents of OEM filters who have lots of miles accumulated. To me its a non-issue, I've run K&N for almost 40 years.

Click to expand...

Not exactly. There is a lot of info here that comes from solid research. I'm not taking a stand on KnN's vs OEM (I have a preference, of course). My point is only that our opinions are just that, absent a well designed study (that would probably turn up what everyone has been saying.)

Blrfl said:

It can't be performance, because these bikes are heavy enough that making any kind of noticeable improvement in the torque- and power-to-weight ratios requires the addition of a heck of a lot of both.

--Mark

Click to expand...

I've wondered why most performance chasers go only after more hp and don't try to lighten their bikes. (Leaving out racers here - I know the vintage guys used to pull alternators, generators, anything they could off the bike and run on a total loss pared down ignition system with a small battery). It would be a trip to see how much metal guys could remove with a drill, grinder and dremel - sort of the reverse of what chopper guys do.

SMSW said:

Not exactly. There is a lot of info here that comes from solid research. I'm not taking a stand on KnN's vs OEM (I have a preference, of course). My point is only that our opinions are just that, absent a well designed study (that would probably turn up what everyone has been saying.)

Click to expand...

Jeff B. posted a good study on the topic in an earlier post, which confirmed that K&N allows more dust to pass through compared to paper element filters, nobody should dispute that point. However, it did not include any data on engine wear, which is what really matters. Like you say, I'm not trying to sway opinions either way, but let's not condemn a product that many here have used for years without negative effects either. I've put over 100k miles on each of two bikes I've owned over the years, and neither seemed to suffer from K&N filtration. Other bikes also ran K&N, but for less miles before I sold them, so not as meaningful a data point.

My rationale was simple math, $50 once for K&N, vs $40 every 15k miles with paper. Internet pricing has narrowed the price differential over the years, but in the '80s/'90s the local dealerships wanted way too much for OEM replacement filters.

I never thought my K & N filter fit well within the ST1300 airbox as I had to add significant grease around the edges to get a good seal. After using one, and spending the $$, I realized I should have never done it and stayed with the stock air filter even though it costs $40 to replace.

And, on the cost to service one must remember that the K&N filter requires a maintenance kit that consists of a cleaner and oiler which adds to the on-going cost. So, the K&N may save you about $5 over the course of two years assuming you ride 12,000 miles/year. Plus I found the K&N to be a pain and take too much time in that you had to clean it, wait for it to dry, and then oil it before you could reinstall it. I found it much easier, faster, and less messy to pull the old filter, wipe the airbox, and install the new filter. Done.

$40x2 = $80 for stock filter
$50+25 = $75 for K&N filter