4th Generation Maxima (1995-1999) Visit the 4th Generation forum to ask specific questions or find out more about the 4th Generation Maxima.

If using OEM Air intake, is it worth it to drop in a K&N Filter?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jan 22, 2007 | 06:40 AM
  #41  
Bobo's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 6,187
The K&N filter will not result in a loss of low-end torque. To suggest so is ridiculous.

Go get a dyno before and after to support your claim.






Originally Posted by goldmax
Stay with the stock filter. I used a K&N for many miles and didn't realize how much low end torque I had lost using the thing until I replaced it with a Fram paper element. The K&N flows well, but I could really feel it down low, and that is the exact reason I liked the car originally...go low end for it's time and being a V6. Also...as others have said...the K&N flows better because it isn't filtering as well. Hold one up to a light or the sun and you will see many microscopic holes clear thru the filter. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that can't be good for filtration.
Old Jan 22, 2007 | 07:12 AM
  #42  
99grnmaxgxe's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (11)
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 5,705
From: Tucson, AZ
Originally Posted by 99BlackMaxMS
I just bought a 99 SE 5spd with 108K miles. I havent yet looked at the air filter but i would assume that it is a stock paper filter. I plan to replace the filter regardless if it is new or old. I do not plan on replacing the stock intake however, and i was just wondering if it is really worth the extra money to buy a K&N over a paper filter. Will there be more hp gain? Will the sound change at all?
If you are talking about a panel filter, than no.
Old Jan 22, 2007 | 07:49 PM
  #43  
goldmax's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 468
Originally Posted by Bobo
The K&N filter will not result in a loss of low-end torque. To suggest so is ridiculous.

Go get a dyno before and after to support your claim.
I've had the car for 10 years now, and I wasn't imagining the difference when I switched back. Why would I dyno the car to prove something as stupid as that? He's asking if it's worth it to sink $50 into a K&N, and I and many other told him what we've found. If you want to run a K&N in your car, go ahead. If you have a FREE dyno, I'd be happy to come and see if there's a difference. Maybe you should try dynoing yours and post the results.
Old Jan 22, 2007 | 07:59 PM
  #44  
NmexMAX's Avatar
dot dot dot ...
iTrader: (22)
 
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 34,576
From: Santa Fe, NM
I've dynoed with and without a filter and so have a few others. I saw no difference, so I doubt there will be any difference w/ a paper element, and K&N.

Old Jan 22, 2007 | 08:06 PM
  #45  
99BlackMaxMS's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (85)
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,508
From: Wrentham,MA/Smithfield,RI
Originally Posted by 99grnmaxgxe
If you are talking about a panel filter, than no.
What do you mean by panel filter?
Old Jan 22, 2007 | 08:13 PM
  #46  
Fr33way™'s Avatar
Wild for Width
iTrader: (23)
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,471
From: Atlanta
Wow. To add my personal experience: I have had stock setup with paper, stock with K&N, Stock + mid-pipe + K&N, Flipped box with K&N and mid pipe, Flipped box with paper element, Cylindrical K&N w/mid.

When driven like a sane person I have not noticed ANY fluctuation in gas milage and I reached the highest with a flipped box and with my current K&N cylinder filter. There are MANY other factors at play with MPG and range.

Besides getting into true cold-air intake setups, it just depends on what you want to hear, and what you want in the engine bay.
Old Jan 22, 2007 | 08:13 PM
  #47  
Fr33way™'s Avatar
Wild for Width
iTrader: (23)
 
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,471
From: Atlanta
Originally Posted by 99BlackMaxMS
What do you mean by panel filter?
Stock style rectangle filter, but fabric and wire instead of paper.
Old Jan 30, 2007 | 08:05 AM
  #48  
wildbillx's Avatar
Newbie - Just Registered
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 8
I personally like my K&N filter, I use it on my bike, and my other car 1994 MarkVIII and got a 6hp gain on the MArk VIII.
Old Feb 28, 2007 | 10:53 AM
  #49  
blazed SE-L's Avatar
Junior Member
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 18
i added a k-n filter about two months ago the only diff would be the gas miles if you drive hard it seems to leave quick but when driving normal i get alittle more miles about 375 on the street before the filter i was getting 325-350. but then everyone may feel diff about the filter and how it is. i like it
Old Feb 28, 2007 | 01:47 PM
  #50  
maxima_tuned's Avatar
Member
iTrader: (3)
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 133
Are there any filter besides OEM that wont use more gas mileage?
Old Feb 28, 2007 | 03:43 PM
  #51  
99BlackMaxMS's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (85)
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,508
From: Wrentham,MA/Smithfield,RI
Just stick w/ OEM paper if you have the stock intake. Its your best bet and only $7.99 at autozone. Change every year or 10-15K miles.
Old Mar 1, 2007 | 06:48 AM
  #52  
NmexMAX's Avatar
dot dot dot ...
iTrader: (22)
 
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 34,576
From: Santa Fe, NM
I will do a comparison with the stock airbox and see if there is indeed an increase in airflow. MAF %.
Old Mar 1, 2007 | 02:08 PM
  #53  
99BlackMaxMS's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (85)
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,508
From: Wrentham,MA/Smithfield,RI
Originally Posted by NmexMAX
I will do a comparison with the stock airbox and see if there is indeed an increase in airflow. MAF %.
Its already been done...the link was already posted in here. It shows minimal changed between stock paper, fram, and the K&N. It helped me decide to stick w/ an OEM filter.

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/airfilter/airtest1.htm
Old Mar 1, 2007 | 04:20 PM
  #54  
NmexMAX's Avatar
dot dot dot ...
iTrader: (22)
 
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 34,576
From: Santa Fe, NM
I think MAF % usage would be a better indicator of actual engine air flow.
Old Mar 1, 2007 | 04:55 PM
  #55  
99BlackMaxMS's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (85)
 
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 4,508
From: Wrentham,MA/Smithfield,RI
Originally Posted by NmexMAX
I think MAF % usage would be a better indicator of actual engine air flow.
Agreed
Old Mar 1, 2007 | 05:22 PM
  #56  
metal_god98SE's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (1)
 
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 353
From: Massachusetts
Originally Posted by 2da mizzax
more air = more fuel supplied by the vehicle to match the air which does NOT = more effeciency. And i find it hard to think that nissan designed our cars choking them of needed air. the K&N filter may give you more power since it allows more air but it will also cause you to use more fuel. I personally regret my K&N filter.
I personally agree ....my K&N is sitting on a shelf in my shed. Mizzax is right....the MAF will detect more air, which will increase the fuel to balance out the mixture. The performance gains are not noticable, but the less fuel mileage is.... and at $2.50 a gallon, my wallet is more important than a couple extra HP. Besides, can only go as fast as the car in front of you.

There is only an OEM filter in my airbox....no fram crap or anything like that.
Old Mar 2, 2007 | 05:14 AM
  #57  
d00df00d's Avatar
Old enuf to pick his own gears
iTrader: (4)
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 5,018
K&N filters do filter less than other ones you can buy. If there is any performance gain, it is so tiny that it is not remotely worth the reduction in filtration.

The convenience factor is an illusion. Sure, you never have to buy another air filter again, but cleaning and re-oiling a K&N is much more of a PITA than just changing a conventional filter. As has been said, the cost savings only work out to a few bucks per change at most. Not worth it.
Old Mar 2, 2007 | 05:32 AM
  #58  
MDeezy's Avatar
Senior Member
iTrader: (27)
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 33,701
From: Atlanta
Originally Posted by d00df00d
K&N filters do filter less than other ones you can buy. If there is any performance gain, it is so tiny that it is not remotely worth the reduction in filtration.

The convenience factor is an illusion. Sure, you never have to buy another air filter again, but cleaning and re-oiling a K&N is much more of a PITA than just changing a conventional filter. As has been said, the cost savings only work out to a few bucks per change at most. Not worth it.

plus the cost of purchasing the cleaner and oil kit is at least two filters right there.

A Good thing about K&N is they can custom make you a filter.
Old Mar 2, 2007 | 05:34 AM
  #59  
sky jumper
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I have seen many poor UOAs with people running K&N filters. they let excess dirt in and cause elevated bearing and cylinder wear. they don't add any power, and are a pain to clean. they must have some genius marketing people to pull off that snow job.
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
vingodine
5th Generation Classifieds (2000-2003)
45
May 21, 2016 12:46 PM
A32goldylocks
4th Generation Maxima (1995-1999)
2
Sep 2, 2015 06:39 AM
95Maxi
4th Generation Classifieds (1995-1999)
7
Aug 29, 2015 09:38 PM
MaximaDrvr
7th Generation Maxima (2009-2015)
16
Aug 19, 2015 08:20 PM




All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:14 AM.