STYES Posted April 18, 2004 Report Share Posted April 18, 2004 I have been debating the value of a K & N filter for my 97 STS. Does anybody have some sound reasoning that would convince me of a significant HP gain? 10 or less HP gain is not worth it. I will never notice such a small increase, and given all the "variables" such as humidity, 10 HP is not going to do anything for me. Also, does anybody know the exact part number I would need. I think I need #33-2086. Can somebody confirm or deny that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fast95SLS Posted April 18, 2004 Report Share Posted April 18, 2004 The horsepower increased helped me gain .2 of a second in the 1/8 mile, but the big gain is in the savings. It cost me $45 for the K&N air filter. It is still as good as new and I have 220,000 miles on the air filter. I do not have the filter number, but if you measure your current air filter, the K&N catalog has a table that will convert your measurements to a part number. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trmnatr Posted April 18, 2004 Report Share Posted April 18, 2004 According to what I have read in the archives on this. The stock paper filter flows better than the K&N. You are not going to see any HP increase with the K&N on a Northstar from what I gathered. There was a test comparison done on it in the archives, check it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg P. Posted April 18, 2004 Report Share Posted April 18, 2004 In my opinion, the K&N filter is a huge waste of money. There seems to be no conclusive proof that it will help your performance in any way at all. It's an air filter. For 65 bucks? But as they say there is a sucker born every minute and there seem to always be a product for them to buy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lacseville Posted April 18, 2004 Report Share Posted April 18, 2004 no, the paper filter won't flow better, but the paper flows more air than a stock motor can handle, so why would you wanna get a filter that flows more when your can't handle it all anyhow. if you were to do an exhaust in conjuction, the k&n MIGHT be a good choice. To justify the $60 or whatever it is, you'd have to buy a whole buncha paper filters. your car would die before you bought enough paper filters to make it litterally worth it. I personally have the K$N because i think it just a better filter and filters more crap out. comes to personal preference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranger Posted April 19, 2004 Report Share Posted April 19, 2004 Savings? I pay $3-$4 apiece for air filters. At $3 each $45 will buy you 15 filters. Changed at 30K per the manual will get you 450K before you run out of filters. At $4 each you will go 337K. Now if you paid $60-$65 as suggested, well you do the math. I think Bruce did a comparison (not seat of the pants) and found little to no improvement. The report, as suggested is in the old board archives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
STYES Posted April 19, 2004 Author Report Share Posted April 19, 2004 Thanks for the replys folks! I do think that getting more cold air, to the filter box is the best way to go. My solution is not conducive to daily driving. The extra box is ugly, I had to pull the headlight, and the tube gathering fresh air, is not that big, and it is constricted. I took my 85 SS Monte, bought another air cleaner, and grafted a second air tube to the other side. It is not that easy here. But more air, means more fuel. But I want cold air, and that cone filter does not provide it, and usually sets a code. Any ideas? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.