BMC air filters

From a previous post:

Look at the K&N documentation. They NEVER claim to have better filtering characteristics or technology. They NEVER claim certain particulate/filtering standards. They DO try to claim more HP. This claim is sometimes true and sometimes.... not. Our club did several dyno days and found out that, on average for most modern cars, the filter cartridge made no significant difference (i.e. engineers have properly designed the intakes so the filter is NOT the weakest link).

K&N is a sham. If I go through a dusty situation I want the best possible filtering options in front of my $30,000 engine not one that has suspect claims of giving me 10 more HP!

If your seriously intersted there have been many compeling and honest studies done between several makes of air filters all available to review on line. K&N type filters ALWAYS finish at the bottom of the heap.

One of many such studies can be found here: http://duramax-diesel.com/spicer/index.htm Big diesel engines need a lot of airflow and are very expensive to replace. They are intended to last a LONG time so they are VERY interested in long term performance/filtering. Have a look with an open mind and tell me you'd use K&N? I doubt it.

And:

Of course K&N has found a market.

The reality is that foam based air filters gained popularity for off road and off road racing applications that exposed the filters to a myriad of conditions including mud, water, etc. Paper filters failed when deluged with water so the off road racers started putting foam based filters on their machines as "something was better than nothing". Company's such as K&N started developing a better filter for THESE applications. Next thing you know people started buying these filters for their street cars, thinking it was cool to bolt "racing parts" on their cars.

For street cars... it's a triumph of marketing over physics. It's a triumph of "court room proof" vs. the basic science.

Do what you like. Just know you are sucking more stuff into your engine with K&N. That is not disputed. Is it enough to grenade your engine? Probably not. But I'd rather spend the extra few dollars to have the best filtration I can buy to protect my engine.... whether it be my sportscar, truck, boat, RZR or even lawn mower

We have a free country to make stupid (IMHO) decisions!

 

I went through this same thing 6mths ago, K&N, OEM BMC....at the end of the day the improvements (if fitted with air boxes) is 0.000000000001% increase. Now offset that with needing two new MAF sensors or anything more serious and the risk/reward chart just didnt look worth it to me - OEM it was.

As above though, just my $0.02.

 

I did a back to back dyno test on my Dodge Ram SRT-10 back in '09. With the only change being a drop-in K&N air filter, I gained 4rwhp and 7rwtq. The gain was throughout the rev range. I put BMC's in my Gallardo and now my CS. The extra induction sound would tell me it's sucking in more air. Either way, to each his own. I like it and if their good enough for F1 teams, they're good enough for me.

 

I have BMCs in my scud, did it purely to try to enhance the exhaust note not for performance. The note is noticeable higher-pitched and there is less hesitation on initial throttle.

I also noticed a cool (to me) suction sound, almost like a turbo spooling but not as loud.

No MAF errors, nor do I expect any...have had BMC & AFE filters on all my past exotics without issues.

 

You do realize how often F1 teams rebuild their engines though, right?

 

Al you are correct. I'm sure these filters are cool but I am somewhat scared to use myself from all the stories i read about oiled filters.

 

Sure. As soon as I'm in the same position (can use up to 8 engines per year; manage each OUNCE of weight, etc) I'll consider moving to inferior filtration. Until then... I rather protect my engine.