Page 1 of 1

Re: K&N filter myth

Posted: Tue May 06, 2014 3:00 am
by canav8
What is interesting to note is that an aircraft filter operates in a much cleaner environment. Airborne particulates are a lot lower then what a car is exposed to. I prefer the more airflow in an aircraft application. I do not stand behind any sales hype but I am a huge fan of the Challenger Air Filter and Oil Filter as well. I have worked with Dyno tests on boat and car engine applications. The question you must ask is what is the job you seek a product to do for you best in the environment you will use it. IMO. D

Re: K&N filter myth

Posted: Tue May 06, 2014 12:32 pm
by GAHorn
The clean air found at altitude is not when you need the most air flow.
The most critical time for achieving most power is at takeoff and landing/go-around,....
down on the dirt strip,... down in the dirty places, ...which is also where you need better filtering and
where the engine suffers the most likely exposure to damage,...and where the engine failure is
most hazardous.
Additionally, filtration is not the only consideration when making the selection. One should also consider physical structure and support. If a filter collapses and is sucked into the intake plenum, the loss of power can be almost total.

Re: K&N filter myth

Posted: Tue May 06, 2014 1:40 pm
by bagarre
gahorn wrote: Additionally, filtration is not the only consideration when making the selection. One should also consider physical structure and support. If a filter collapses and is sucked into the intake plenum, the loss of power can be almost total.
That exact thing happened to my Dad on takeoff. A section of the filter separated, clogged the intake and reduced the motor to idle power. Luckily, he walked away and the plane was repairable. The soybeans stopped him in 60 feet.

Re: K&N filter myth

Posted: Wed May 07, 2014 12:46 am
by minton
After reading over the data and testing I'm wondering where "Brackett" filters stand in the mix?

Re: K&N filter myth

Posted: Wed May 07, 2014 2:58 am
by GAHorn
I don't know about where Brackett fits for filtration in that comparison, but their construction includes a wire-screen to prevent the material from being sucked into the intakes.

Some folks complain about the Brackett filter reducing air-flow, claiming they've witnessed it after switching to the Brackett. I don't see that (I have the Brackett), but I follow the Brackett instructions to blot the excess "wettant" using a dry cloth or paper towels.

Re: K&N filter myth

Posted: Wed May 07, 2014 3:19 am
by hilltop170
I gained 1/2" manifold pressure at takeoff power on my C-180 after switching from the stock paper filter to the Brackett.

I haven't used any of the Gucci filters so don't know how they compare to the Brackett.

Re: K&N filter myth

Posted: Wed May 07, 2014 5:34 pm
by 170C
I know a couple of 170 members/owners that switched from the Bracket filters to K&N and "say" they could tell a difference in takeoff performance. Maybe, maybe not :?: Might be after spending all that $ they felt it had to increase something :roll:

Re: K&N filter myth

Posted: Wed May 07, 2014 6:13 pm
by bagarre
Couldn't afford to top off the tanks so, there was a weight savings there too :lol: