Aftermarket Air Filters...

[BigBlueChevy]

There was a test done using quite expensive equipment and over the course of a few days that involved all the major filter brands like K&N, S&B, Wix, AcDelco, and... a bunch of others. (I really need to find the article). Essentially all of the filters where run through a series of differernt tests such as filtration percentile, flow in water, flow in air, and flow as time goes by with "crap in the filter"

Essentially the verdict remained true that K&N is one of the worst filters to own(again this is based on the test results.) Suprisingly, AcDelco's filter had the greatest capturing percentile of particulates, best flow in both water and air, and maintained the highest filtration and flow in severre conditions(sandy, dusty generally places you want the best filtration possible).


In reguards to filtration, I would personally recommend a filter of equal, or greater size than the stock cylinder filter in the 97+ trucks. Reason being, if your sucking in 300cfm of air through a filter that is 150 cubic inches squared, your going to want a filter that is equal to or larger than 150 cubic inches squared. If you go and buy these "cone filters" that seem to be the "big thing" right now, you are effectivly reducing the area in which air can be drawn in. Instead of 150 cubic inches squared, your using a filter half that size, lets say 75 cubic inches squared.

Now, instead of sucking 2cfm per square inch through X brand filter, you now sucking 4cfm per square inch through Y brand filter.

Again this is really just my own observations and calculations. There is no "approved" theory out there by some college buff that states what I just did(that i know of) Just a younger guy running his mind finding ways to further improve an engines capabillities. Also, the numbers i used are just... numbers. Not actually flow amounts.

 

[schiker]

Please do post a link to any and all tests.

I looked for Spicer's test and think it is a fair evaluation. I read some of a thread over on the place. I only read a bit but I interpretted it as K&N had least restriction to flow but did allow more "stuff" to pass through (in comparison to others - I don't know significant or appreciable harmful level comparisons).

I think its hard to say exactly how much air passes through them but you can measure restriction or pressure difference somewhat easier and or more accurately and infer flow.

Then its hard to say how much performance gain there is for more air especially on a near stock engine (or the 6.5 which isn't really an air hog). High performance engine and or with appreciable mods is a little different discussion.

 

[BigBlueChevy]

haha I finally found it! This thing is getting linked in my sig so others can find and use it. The name Spicer showed up quite a few times as he was the one that organized it.

Here it is
http://duramax-diesel.com/spicer/index.htm

Like I said, AcDelco definatly won this one. But I'll have to say that in reguards to "performance" gain the 6.5 really should be more so focused on the absolute best filtration possible to ensure long and trouble free life. Especially since the 6.5 ISN'T an air hog drawing in massive amounts of air, or runnin 40+ psi of boost.

 

[Big T]

haha I finally found it! This thing is getting linked in my sig so others can find and use it. The name Spicer showed up quite a few times as he was the one that organized it.

Here it is
http://duramax-diesel.com/spicer/index.htm

Like I said, AcDelco definatly won this one. But I'll have to say that in reguards to "performance" gain the 6.5 really should be more so focused on the absolute best filtration possible to ensure long and trouble free life. Especially since the 6.5 ISN'T an air hog drawing in massive amounts of air, or runnin 40+ psi of boost.

Thank you for posting that. I for one never bought into the marketing hype of the others, particularly the oiled cotton gauze cleaners. My problem is being able to find AC Delco Air Filters on a consistent basis. I can find their oil filters at Autozone, but not the air filters.

Steve

 

[BigBlueChevy]

Thank you for posting that. I for one never bought into the marketing hype of the others, particularly the oiled cotton gauze cleaners. My problem is being able to find AC Delco Air Filters on a consistent basis. I can find their oil filters at Autozone, but not the air filters.

Steve

Thats cause there just so good lol.):h Actually if you check out rockauto you can find a great selection of different filters(quite a few AcDelcos to choose from as well)

Just reading through the entire document I found this little bit of information. After all, everybody loves quick and to the point info rather than 15 pages of graphs, charts and yapping


"Compared to the AcDelco filter, the K&N filter "plugged up" nearly 3 times faster, passed 18 times more dirt and captured 37% less dirt." It should also be noted that the AcDelco filter can capture 573.9 grams of "dirt" before reaching its max(IE requires filter to be changed) VS the K&N which maxes out at 211.6 grams.

Now I'm no engineer. But I'm pretty sure I see a problem there... Isn't it K&N who floods the world with how great flow is with there filter? I've never seen a commercial for an AcDelco air filter...:nono:

 

[Big T]

I checked RockAuto and they only had Fram and Wix listed for my '95 6.5TD.

 

[BigBlueChevy]

I checked RockAuto and they only had Fram and Wix listed for my '95 6.5TD.

97+ has the cylinder style air filter VS the flat box type your truck has. you may need to upgrade to the cylinder style air filter(again 97+) in order to be able to use that filter. Or try contacting ACDelco and give them your filter dimmensions, they may have one with those same dimmensions if you don't want to upgrade the air box.

 

[bobbiemartin]

haha I finally found it! This thing is getting linked in my sig so others can find and use it. The name Spicer showed up quite a few times as he was the one that organized it.

Here it is
http://duramax-diesel.com/spicer/index.htm

That is the test I was referring to. Anyone that wants to know more should really read the subsequent test here.

Some thoughts on the filter test. The first filter test claims to be done under careful scientific conditions, but they used different sized particles to test the K&N and AFE filters, and the temps & humidity were not the same. Everything I can find about what was then known at Testand Corporation in Rhode Island, where the test was claimed to be run, says that they manufacture filter testing equipment. They are not in the testing business, at least I can find nothing that would indicate they had a testing facility. They have now been bought out by Emprise Corporation. They are still in the filter testing manufacturing business, they are not a testing facility. So I don't know how the initial test were run to ISO standards for testing air filters. Having a testing rig is one thing, having and maintaining a testing facility is quite another. I would think that maybe someone could have taken a picture or video when the test were being run or maybe of the testing facility, equipment or something. At least then we may have something to go on as to the validity of the testing facility.

The initial filter test - the one most referred to on the typical K&N bashing threads so common on the internet - incorrectly says "The ISO 5011 Standard (formerly SAE J726) defines a precise filter test using precision measurements under controlled conditions. Temperature & humidity of the test dust and air used in the test are strictly monitored and controlled. As Arlen learned in attempting his own tests, there are many variables that can adversely affect filter test results. A small temperature change or a small change in humidity can cause the mass of a paper filter to change by several grams. To obtain an accurate measure of filter efficiency, it's critical to know the EXACT amount of test dust being fed into the filter during the test. By following the ISO 5011 standard, a filter tested in Germany can be compared directly compared to another filter tested 5 years later in Rhode Island. The ISO 5011 filter test data for each filter is contained in two test reports; Capacity-Efficiency and Flow Restriction.

However in his subsequent writeup, Mr. Arlen Spicer states "ISO 5011 is the International Standard for testing automotive air filters. The standard outlines all aspects of testing air filters including equipment, environmental controls (temperature and humidity), required accuracy of measurement, and methods for conducting a test. For equipment, environmental controls and accuracy of measurement the standard leaves little to ponder. The lab either meets or does not meet the requirements. The last item is methods for conducting a test. Note that this says "methods", not "method", for conducting a test. This point is important because the standard does not specify a single method for conducting a test. Instead, the standard specifies a range of options for conducting a test. The exact method chosen is essentially the choice of the laboratory and the customer. This brings us to comparability. Two filters tested identically can be compared directly. On the other hand, two filters tested with different methods, though both tests may be valid and may conform to ISO 5011 requirements, may NOT be directly compared by their results. It simply is not a valid comparison. The use of ISO 5011 data in advertising, therefore, can be speculative also. For instance, for company "A" to say that according to ISO 5011 tests we have a 99.97% efficiency is meaningless unless the exact method of testing is also specified. In other words, beware that it is possible to "select" a method of testing that will optimize the performance of a filter and still be ISO 5011 compliant."

This leads me to believe that while Mr. Spicer and his crew may have had the best of intentions, they were not competent to carry out these test in any meaningful manner. Its pretty obvious they did not understand the relevant ISO specifications or how to interpret them. The initial write-up goes to great length to mention the test equipment & cost of said equipment, but mentions nothing about the testing facility. Further, IIRC, the K&N in the initial test was a used filter, which means its hard to know if it was damaged, properly cleaned & oiled, etc. I think this is the problem when well meaning amateurs attempt to perform complex testing procedures. As I stated in my earlier post, testing like this is best left to professionals.

But there is a cheap and easy way to find out if your air filter in your truck attached to your engine driven on the roads you drive on is working or not. Just send in an oil sample to a testing lab the next time you change the oil. Then you will know everything you want to (and maybe a few things you would rather not) know about your air filter, how your oil is holding up and relevant engine wear indicators. Spend about $20, you can quit guessing and have the facts you need to make an educated decision on your filtration. I recommend it highly.

While I was looking for some other articles, I ran across this article. While I cannot vouch for its validity, it certainly sounds like other articles I have read by Mr. Vizard. I'll just throw it into the mix.

 

[BigBlueChevy]

I'm looking for real answers not trying to start a fight or any issues. Just looking for info. Promise


The first filter test claims to be done under careful scientific conditions, but they used different sized particles to test the K&N and AFE filters, and the temps & humidity were not the same.

Where did this information come from? Who provided it?


Everything I can find about what was then known at Testand Corporation in Rhode Island, where the test was claimed to be run, says that they manufacture filter testing equipment. They are not in the testing business, at least I can find nothing that would indicate they had a testing facility.

This statement comes from Spicer himself:" I had shared my idea with Testand, an independent testing facility, about a side-by-side comparison study." Also, he states that: "but he was offering to actually PERFORM the lab work for us at no charge" Labs are required to have the highest level of control over things like humidity specifically because its in an enviorment where everything needs to be controlled. Humididty and tempurature being 2 because there are certain tempurature and humidty ranges that offer the greatest reduction in ESD(electrostatic discharge) which is fatal to electronics.


We obviously have two contradicting articles and there is info present in one where it isn't in the other. And in the End, we come back to what the original poster wanted to know. What air filter should I use. Spicer answered it a bit indirectly, but essentially its one of two(you go for the one that as the best filtration, or the best flow, you can't have both.) K&N proudly announces that there filters have greater flow than stock(which they do), but they do leave out the fact that to gain more of that flow, you need to sacrifice the max dirt holding capacity, and filtration percentile.

 

[bobbiemartin]

I'm looking for real answers not trying to start a fight or any issues. Just looking for info. Promise


The first filter test claims to be done under careful scientific conditions, but they used different sized particles to test the K&N and AFE filters, and the temps & humidity were not the same.

Where did this information come from? Who provided it?

Well, that would be you. I actually read the charts in the link you provided. I would think someone "looking for info" might at least read what they post. I assume you haven't?

Everything I can find about what was then known at Testand Corporation in Rhode Island, where the test was claimed to be run, says that they manufacture filter testing equipment. They are not in the testing business, at least I can find nothing that would indicate they had a testing facility.

This statement comes from Spicer himself:" I had shared my idea with Testand, an independent testing facility, about a side-by-side comparison study." Also, he states that: "but he was offering to actually PERFORM the lab work for us at no charge" Labs are required to have the highest level of control over things like humidity specifically because its in an enviorment where everything needs to be controlled. Humididty and tempurature being 2 because there are certain tempurature and humidty ranges that offer the greatest reduction in ESD(electrostatic discharge) which is fatal to electronics.

Yes, but I can find nothing stating they have such a facility. If they did, they did not advertise it as such. This Link suggest they are a manufacturing facility - no mention of a lab.
The current company only mentions manufacturing, no lab facilities listed. Maybe they cobbled up a test area, maybe they have the best testing lab in the world, maybe they ran it in the parking lot. I dunno. If you have any info as to their facilities, I would like to see it. Its clear they didn't know about ISO 5011 when they ran the first test, so I doubt they met their requirements.

We obviously have two contradicting articles and there is info present in one where it isn't in the other. And in the End, we come back to what the original poster wanted to know. What air filter should I use.

As I said, as oil analysis would provide him all the info he needs.

Spicer answered it a bit indirectly, but essentially its one of two(you go for the one that as the best filtration, or the best flow, you can't have both.) K&N proudly announces that there filters have greater flow than stock(which they do), but they do leave out the fact that to gain more of that flow, you need to sacrifice the max dirt holding capacity, and filtration percentile.

Which tells me that Spicer does not understand air filtration. After witnessing a proper test with his own eyes, he still cannot bring himself to admit that maybe the first test was flawed. He saw that a K&N can flow more air yet filter properly. You can have both, if the filter is designed properly.

There are lots of good filters on the market that work in various ways using all kinds of media or methods. Donaldson's are a fine filter, if a little bulky.

I'm not saying K&N's are the best. I like them, they work well for me. They are generally panned on the forums, mostly quoting from a test that is dubious at best. I was just trying to point that out.

 

[BigBlueChevy]

Well, that would be you. I actually read the charts in the link you provided. I would think someone "looking for info" might at least read what they post. I assume you haven't?

I guess I missed that bit of info. Good eye. You win that one lol

Yes, but I can find nothing stating they have such a facility. If they did, they did not advertise it as such. This Link suggest they are a manufacturing facility - no mention of a lab.
The current company only mentions manufacturing, no lab facilities listed. Maybe they cobbled up a test area, maybe they have the best testing lab in the world, maybe they ran it in the parking lot. I dunno. If you have any info as to their facilities, I would like to see it. Its clear they didn't know about ISO 5011 when they ran the first test, so I doubt they met their requirements.

Another good point... Pictures would have been very helpful in this situation but like you said, there wernt any.



As I said, as oil analysis would provide him all the info he needs.



Which tells me that Spicer does not understand air filtration. After witnessing a proper test with his own eyes, he still cannot bring himself to admit that maybe the first test was flawed. He saw that a K&N can flow more air yet filter properly. You can have both, if the filter is designed properly.

There are lots of good filters on the market that work in various ways using all kinds of media or methods. Donaldson's are a fine filter, if a little bulky.

I'm not saying K&N's are the best. I like them, they work well for me. They are generally panned on the forums, mostly quoting from a test that is dubious at best. I was just trying to point that out.

Kinda like the media and hybrids eh? I'm gonna have to say that after all this that K&N's are good for flow and if I ran a top fueled dragster or stock car, that would be my choice, but for the ol' 6.5, paper is the way to go. Guess it really depends on the driver and his likes and dislikes. I personally run an AcDelco(been running it for over a year now). I've never run a K&N so I really can't say which is better via seat of pants and or oil analysis...

 

[t2ch]

I will jump in here with my 2 cents.
I run a K&N in my LBZ. Have for 60 some thousand miles. I have not had any problems.
I have not had MAF sensor problems, I have not noticed the oil being dirtier than when running the donaldson.
I have not run any tests with it. I did however try one thing the last time I cleaned it. I dragged a white, clean, cotton old t-shirt around the intake tube. I noticed no dirt or oily residue. This tells me the filter is doing its job.
I did notice the turbo will light just a tick faster than it does with the stock filter.

Some have said you do not need an aftermarket filter until you reach 500 HP. I don't know.

I do get tired of the bashing K&N gets on these forum's, especially from people who have only read one test.

 

[DZZ71]

Here is the set up i had on my 1996 reg cab long box. Worked good had no issues and turbo was louder.

 

[Brooklyn Tow]

Nice fit, was that an AFE setup?

 

[DZZ71]

Nice fit, was that an AFE setup?

No, Home made with a K&N filter.

 

[dangerousdave]

I'm guessing you made the elbow from drain plumbing, what is the box made from?

 

[bison]

My Suburban is nearly 15 years old and I've had it for 11 of those, almost as long as I've had my wife (18 years) and you know what, I'm still stuffing the box:thumbsup:

same box ? or?:smile5:

 

[ryridesmotox]

Thats a nice looking custom job. My experience with K&n style filters has been mixed. They are really touchy if you over oil them. And you want to keep them as dry as possible as the water will tend to displace the oil, or so my experience with them has been. I have had them on dirtbikes, streetbikes, old trucks, new trucks, and muscle cars. But for my daily driver I usually go stock on it. And since the AC delco filters so well, why change whats not broken.