K&N vs. Green Filter
10-01-2018, 06:42 AM
#1
2nd Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 166
K&N vs. Green Filter
So I have been running K&N air filter for years without even thinking about it. A couple days ago a friend recommended a new filter called Green Filter air filters. So I want everyone opinions on it. Below are the links to K&N Filters and Green Filters. Let me know your thoughts and opinions.
https://www.knfilters.com/default.aspx
https://greenfilter.com
https://www.knfilters.com/default.aspx
https://greenfilter.com
10-01-2018, 08:33 AM
#2
4th Gear Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: LA
Posts: 1,320
Not a big fan of any filter that uses oil to retreat it simply because now the viability of the filter rests in the hands of the user. You have to clean it properly and worst of all, you have to re-oil it properly. Too much oil and it can affect your mass air sensor. Just stick with dry filters, OEM is just fine. I just don't get chasing 5 HP for the street.
10-01-2018, 02:22 PM
#3
Gentleman's Relish
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: AZ
Posts: 13,090
I'm curious what type of flow they were using for their testing and how those flows would differ as the surface started to collect dirt. Their attention to detail on the urethane plastic bleeding over to the filtering media is good but if the overall flow characteristics haven't changed, it's just a gussied up pig.
Watching the video again the rep kills me. He's given so many opportunities to say "We are better because we flow better" but he just never said it, always danced around it. Makes me wonder why not? What are you hiding or are you just selling on being different?
Yes it is IMPLIED but they can they just as easily say "We never said it had better flow" we just showed our filter against theirs on this little machine and our little ping pong ball floats higher with our filter installed. "So better flow?". "Our ball floats higher..." So, the flow isn't better?...Ping pong ball....higher.....
I work in sales so if we had a unique feature or specification over our competitors, I spell it out. I would not let it be inferred because inferred meaning is always easy to to dispel. A fact is not. It's a fact their filters look cleaner and brighter, but what about what matters...flow? Oh, you can't say you have better flow? Why not?
Ugh, the sales rep is horrible....dance, dance, dance...no meat to his pitch. Bottom line you look like a green K&N filter. Even the logo is similar.
Watching the video again the rep kills me. He's given so many opportunities to say "We are better because we flow better" but he just never said it, always danced around it. Makes me wonder why not? What are you hiding or are you just selling on being different?
Yes it is IMPLIED but they can they just as easily say "We never said it had better flow" we just showed our filter against theirs on this little machine and our little ping pong ball floats higher with our filter installed. "So better flow?". "Our ball floats higher..." So, the flow isn't better?...Ping pong ball....higher.....
I work in sales so if we had a unique feature or specification over our competitors, I spell it out. I would not let it be inferred because inferred meaning is always easy to to dispel. A fact is not. It's a fact their filters look cleaner and brighter, but what about what matters...flow? Oh, you can't say you have better flow? Why not?
Ugh, the sales rep is horrible....dance, dance, dance...no meat to his pitch. Bottom line you look like a green K&N filter. Even the logo is similar.
Last edited by Derf00; 10-01-2018 at 02:33 PM.
10-01-2018, 03:46 PM
#4
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 2,327
DO THE MATH first!
Calculate your Engine's CFM at redline. More than likely, the OEM filter provides
or exceeds it. People buy high CFM filters for an engine that tops out at 1350CFM.
IF you are not turbo or supercharged, the OEM is probably all you really need. You
cannot rely on the MAF readings for CFM, mine have gone as high as 1400 at WOT
Multiply the engine’s highest expected revolutions per minute (RPMs) by the displacement of
the engine, as measured in cubic inches. For example, if the engine is not expected to reach
speeds in excess of 6,000 RPMs, and if the size of the engine is 350 cubic inches, then 6,000 x
350 = 2,100,000.
Divide the result from Step 1 by 3,456. For example, 2,100,000 / 3,456 = 607.638.
Multiply the result from Step 3 by .85, which represents a standard street engine’s volumetric
efficiency. For example, 607.638 x .85 = 516.49. Therefore, the engine should be equipped with
a system capable of providing between 500 and 550 CFM.
The calculation for the 4.0 is 386 CFM / 416
The calculation for the 4.6 is 452 CFM / 487
The calculation for the 5.0 is 482 CFM / 519
Calculations are at 6500 / 7000 RPM.
This is the MATH on how to calculate flow, so charts saying these things, N.A. draw
1300+, can't be right. Or, boring the TB increases the CFM, it can't, the motor itself
is only capable of what the math says, N.A. applications. Forced air, is different.
Just about every K&N filter is above those ratings. Most OE paper filters are above those
ratings, it's just when they clog up, does it start to hinder performance, decreased flow
due to restriction.
This is capable, not what it would be drawing, because the 3V, 4V 4,6 engines flow better,
but the displacement calls for those numbers. Longer stroke would up the displacement,
so don't say what if it has a longer or shorter stroke, or bore size, that changes the CFM
because the displacement changes as well.
You can get AirRaid, AFE Dry Filters too, there are plenty options out there. AS stated, if you can't
re-oil the K&N or other type, properly, you will get some inside the intake, but I have never had
that issue.
I think colors are just to match your car, if you have an exposed filter you can see when
you open the engine bay...
Calculate your Engine's CFM at redline. More than likely, the OEM filter provides
or exceeds it. People buy high CFM filters for an engine that tops out at 1350CFM.
IF you are not turbo or supercharged, the OEM is probably all you really need. You
cannot rely on the MAF readings for CFM, mine have gone as high as 1400 at WOT
Multiply the engine’s highest expected revolutions per minute (RPMs) by the displacement of
the engine, as measured in cubic inches. For example, if the engine is not expected to reach
speeds in excess of 6,000 RPMs, and if the size of the engine is 350 cubic inches, then 6,000 x
350 = 2,100,000.
Divide the result from Step 1 by 3,456. For example, 2,100,000 / 3,456 = 607.638.
Multiply the result from Step 3 by .85, which represents a standard street engine’s volumetric
efficiency. For example, 607.638 x .85 = 516.49. Therefore, the engine should be equipped with
a system capable of providing between 500 and 550 CFM.
The calculation for the 4.0 is 386 CFM / 416
The calculation for the 4.6 is 452 CFM / 487
The calculation for the 5.0 is 482 CFM / 519
Calculations are at 6500 / 7000 RPM.
This is the MATH on how to calculate flow, so charts saying these things, N.A. draw
1300+, can't be right. Or, boring the TB increases the CFM, it can't, the motor itself
is only capable of what the math says, N.A. applications. Forced air, is different.
Just about every K&N filter is above those ratings. Most OE paper filters are above those
ratings, it's just when they clog up, does it start to hinder performance, decreased flow
due to restriction.
This is capable, not what it would be drawing, because the 3V, 4V 4,6 engines flow better,
but the displacement calls for those numbers. Longer stroke would up the displacement,
so don't say what if it has a longer or shorter stroke, or bore size, that changes the CFM
because the displacement changes as well.
You can get AirRaid, AFE Dry Filters too, there are plenty options out there. AS stated, if you can't
re-oil the K&N or other type, properly, you will get some inside the intake, but I have never had
that issue.
I think colors are just to match your car, if you have an exposed filter you can see when
you open the engine bay...
10-01-2018, 03:47 PM
#5
4th Gear Member
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: LA
Posts: 1,320
Derf00 makes a good point as well. My problem with the presentation is the paper must be awfully thin to allow such better air flow and I wonder how well it actually filters in the first place. Air filters are not all about flow, they gotta clean also.
10-04-2018, 12:40 PM
#6
2nd Gear Member
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 489
K&N vs. Green Filter
ZEN357, here is my experience with just the K&N air filter. This took place on a certified rear wheel dyno. The first pull was with the OEM filter,and the second pull was with the K&N filter. The K&N filter showed eight more horse power than the OEM. Oh, these "back to back" pulls were on my 2014 Mustang GT Premium. Bottom line, every intake has its own quirks. If you really are interested in any differences, don't believe any products hype, you must match them on a dyno. Also, I use the OEM air filter on the street, and the K&N at the track.
12-12-2018, 06:56 AM
#9
2nd Gear Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 166
This was posted on another forum comparing air filters. I found it interesting. Also I found out the Green Filter's frame is Stainless Steel so it will not rust or corrode.
Couldn't get image to attach so here's a link to a comparison chart.
https://www.camaro5.com/forums/showp...37&postcount=6
Couldn't get image to attach so here's a link to a comparison chart.
https://www.camaro5.com/forums/showp...37&postcount=6
Last edited by ZEN357; 12-12-2018 at 07:01 AM.
03-24-2019, 08:12 PM
#10
3rd Gear Member
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: AZ
Posts: 849
DO THE MATH first!
Multiply the engine’s highest expected revolutions per minute (RPMs) by the displacement of
the engine, as measured in cubic inches. For example, if the engine is not expected to reach
speeds in excess of 6,000 RPMs, and if the size of the engine is 350 cubic inches, then 6,000 x
350 = 2,100,000.
Above gives cu. in. per minute, but too many by a factor of 2: the engine only pumps air in for every other piston stroke. Therefore only 175 cubic inches effectively move air. The rest is the exhaust cycle.
Divide the result from Step 1 by 3,456. For example, 2,100,000 / 3,456 = 607.638.
Why the above?
Multiply the result from Step 3 by .85, which represents a standard street engine’s volumetric
efficiency. For example, 607.638 x .85 = 516.49. Therefore, the engine should be equipped with
a system capable of providing between 500 and 550 CFM.
The calculation for the 4.0 is 386 CFM / 416
The calculation for the 4.6 is 452 CFM / 487
The calculation for the 5.0 is 482 CFM / 519
.
Multiply the engine’s highest expected revolutions per minute (RPMs) by the displacement of
the engine, as measured in cubic inches. For example, if the engine is not expected to reach
speeds in excess of 6,000 RPMs, and if the size of the engine is 350 cubic inches, then 6,000 x
350 = 2,100,000.
Above gives cu. in. per minute, but too many by a factor of 2: the engine only pumps air in for every other piston stroke. Therefore only 175 cubic inches effectively move air. The rest is the exhaust cycle.
Divide the result from Step 1 by 3,456. For example, 2,100,000 / 3,456 = 607.638.
Why the above?
Multiply the result from Step 3 by .85, which represents a standard street engine’s volumetric
efficiency. For example, 607.638 x .85 = 516.49. Therefore, the engine should be equipped with
a system capable of providing between 500 and 550 CFM.
The calculation for the 4.0 is 386 CFM / 416
The calculation for the 4.6 is 452 CFM / 487
The calculation for the 5.0 is 482 CFM / 519
.