hawgman

Wow, you only have to change the fuel every 15000 miles? Damn, I have to change the fuel in mine every couple of hundred miles


While I cannot answer that exact question, let me offer this.
I just sold a MMR CAI on fleabay. The guy that bought it is pissed because he has a V6, I specifically stated SEVERAL TIMES in the auction description and title that it was for a V8 / GT. Anyway back to the point, he is upset because the MAF will not fit his intake tube. It is larger than what is on his V6. So given that, I would assume that the airbox for a V8 is not the same as for a V6.

281GT

I have had a K&N filter in my beater for years. I installed it when the car had 50,000 miles. It now has over 137,000 miles on it. I service the K&N once per year. I change the oil every 3000 miles and I have experienced no problems whatsoever. The engine used half a quart of oil between oil changes when it was new. It still does that. Hasn't changed in 137,000 miles. I drive the car everywhere including dusty gravel roads and through very harsh Canadian winters. Regardless of whatever scientific data that may be availalble, based on my real life experience nobody could say the K&N filter has not done it's job on my car.
When my 05 Mustang GT arrives, provided I don't go insane waiting for it, I do plan to install a CAI with a K&N type filter. I like the idea that they are serviceable. Less waste, they do flow better and the filtering apparantly is sufficientely good so as not to reduce the life of an engine. Just my two cents worth.

showam1

I agree with 281GT to a point, but the debate in the truck forums is do to premature failing of turbos, not the average car.
That said, the study proves that the K&N lets in more dirt to the engine period, regardless of the miles you may have put on you're car that is equipped with a K&N filter.
Who is to say that it couldn't have lasted longer with an OEM filter?
The question is, what is an acceptable amount of dirt, and at what price? Remember even a small particle can kill a mass air flow meter.
Not saying it will, just that the possibility is there.
We are all looking for ways to increase the HP out of our mustangs, and many of these ways will adversely effect the longevity of the engine life, question is whats it worth to ya?

Redfire

That would be a rather big piece of dirt! It all boils down to microns, oil wise. Im no oil engineer, but I think its something like if the particle is under 5 microns, it can run around in the oil flow in your engine and not harm a thing. Anything over 5 microns will be caught by the oil filter, so your covered. Theres different sizes of Dirt, and the real small ones are held in suspension in a good motor oil, and get dumped out at change time.

Lizardking

These things bear studying. I went to 5000 mile oil changes like Ford recommends. Engines are better built, oil is better, filters are better, its just a waste to dump oil at 3000 miles nowdays. Ive been doing 5000 mile oil changes for years now, my cars run just as good at 100,000 miles as they did when new.

I stick with stock intakes, maybe aftermarket ones give a slight hp increase, but when they started selling at $200+ for an adapter, filter, and a bent piece of metal I Said forget it. I also like the ease of the stock intakes, no maintenance except for a 6000 mile filter change, and I like the stock look.

RedFireGT

I've been a K&N user for over 15 years. Had one on every car during that time including 2 turbos and 2 with superchargers. Have one in the stock box on my 2005 GT. Never had a problem with any of them. I have found that twice a year cleaning with the K&N brand of cleaner and oil works best.

RetiredGeneral

I've posted this before, but I had a dirty paper fram air filter on my car (65 Nova, don't hate) and did 3 passes in the 1/4. Then I put in the K&N filter and did 3 more passes. I averaged a tenth slower with the K&N. The filters were the same size and the car was running in the 12's so it should have made a difference. I tried retuning the carb, but the K&N couldn't get the numbers the Fram did... go figure.

bahbahblacksheep

Its very common knowledge that the K&N filters don't protect against dirt as well as a paper filter.

Its also pretty common knowledge among my circles that the K&N really doesn't do much performance wise either unless the stock filter is a restriction. I have even seen many tests that showed a clean paper filter flowed better than a K&N. It was only after the paper filter got really dirty, did the K&N have any advantage at all

So before someone starts preaching to me about more free-flowing this or that, please read this article

edit:
http://www.audiworld.com/tech/eng18.shtml