K&N Engine Air Filter

[GrySql]

I was looking at buying a new Motorcraft engine air filter and accidentally came across the K&N 33-5001 Replacement Air Filter. They are a lot more expensive than a paper filter and hard to justify financially but decided to try it, unfortunately the K&N website said they were 'out of stock' - nuts.

As always my main go-to place was Amazon and sure enough they had them available, so I ordered one.

It should arrive tomorrow and I'll do an update.

 

 

[storksb]

Let us know how it performs. I've used them in the past on a Volvo V40 and had good results.

 

Not sure I would get one for my FFE, the engine runs so rarely it would make any sense financially compared to the stock filter.

[ptjones]

I bought one and tested it and their is a difference, but I not sure in our CMAX/FFH we don't use high power often so may not help MPG's. I put it in anyway. :)

 

Paul

[GrySql]

I put it in anyway.

My thoughts exactly, why not.

With a car that requires so little maintenance I had to think of some modification to complicate things... ;)

 

A Sharkfin, chrome door handle surrounds, better lugnuts, trunk rubber mat, upgraded floor mats, updated ICE intake air hose, hood struts, all 10 windows tinted with Air Blue, spare tire setup, better tires and and a Partridge in a Pear Tree.

Plus this K&N filter, maybe it will quiet down the Atkinson blowback groan.

Edited August 3, 2015 by GrySql

[Waldo]

I stopped using K&N's several years ago after the oil messed up my MAF sensor in my Focus. If you're religious about keeping it oiled properly (not too much, not too little) then it shouldn't be a problem, but that will likely mean you're doing more maintenance than just replacing the stock filter every once in a while, not less. I also am skeptical about the benefits, if it's truly more "efficient", then it can really only do that by letting in more dirt. Over on the Flex forum one member was denied warranty coverage when his turbos blew up because he had a K&N, they had evidence of dirt ingestion, which is otherwise very rare on those vehicles.

[GrySql]

I stopped using K&N's several years ago after the oil messed up my MAF sensor in my Focus. If you're religious about keeping it oiled properly (not too much, not too little) then it shouldn't be a problem, but that will likely mean you're doing more maintenance than just replacing the stock filter every once in a while, not less. I also am skeptical about the benefits, if it's truly more "efficient", then it can really only do that by letting in more dirt. Over on the Flex forum one member was denied warranty coverage when his turbos blew up because he had a K&N, they had evidence of dirt ingestion, which is otherwise very rare on those vehicles.

I saw the Flex turbo story and have hear of other 'dirt past the filter' stories, sorry to hear of that Focus story.

I looked at aFE but they don't offer a 'dry filter' like I had on my Flex. Plus, I used an aFE oiled CAI on my Mustang GT for 70k miles.

 

I'll take the chance since none of us are racing this car and I don't do dirt roads. A little maintenance is okay, been doing it all my life.

I probably wash my cars too much too.

[talmy]

The auto makers went from oil bath to paper air filters decades ago partly because of the better filtration. There's also the advantage of longer service interval and simpler servicing. About the only downside was as the filter got dirty it would pass less air, choking the engine (more fuel consumption and potential loss of top end power). Fuel injection solved the fuel consumption issue. I personally wouldn't trust a K&N unless I were racing the car (and I don't!) and wanted the maximum possible power without consideration of engine damage.

[GrySql]

Throwing caution to the wind and jumping on the grenade I installed the K&N air filter and went for a spin.

Right off, the air intake growl of the Atkinson motor was less, otherwise the ICE performed as usual, even my wife commented about the lesser amount of the moose call noise. :)

For everything else it's too early to tell but it fit perfect and had a tight seal when I screwed the lid back in place.

 

In addition, no need to service the filter for 50,000 miles of 'normal driving', which is all I do.

(Edit: Let's see, at $17.99 for a Motorcraft Air filter (Amazon) every 20k miles, I'll need 2.5 of them in the next 50k miles. That's $44.97.

The K&N cost $44.27. I think that is pretty close and I won't have to lift the lid to service the filter 2.5 times in the next 50k miles either.)

 

I also found it interesting that K&N now puts a special card in the box that consumers are told to keep in their car. If any Dealer or auto service company tells you that a warranty service is denied it has a K&N phone number we are supposed to call, K&N will then engage that company immediately. Think what you will about that but I followed instructions and put the card in the glovebox.

 

Edited August 5, 2015 by GrySql

[ptjones]

The reason the K&N air filter lets more air through is it has more surface area than the FORD one. I think I have 60K mi. on mine, but I only use ICE half the time. :)

 

Paul

[Waldo]

The reason the K&N air filter lets more air through is it has more surface area than the FORD one. I think I have 60K mi. on mine, but I only use ICE half the time. :)

 

Paul

 

But that's not really useful. Allowing more air through isn't of any benefit unless the air filter is the restriction at WOT. Ford would be doing some pretty poor engineering if this were the case. The engine needs a certain amount of air to produce a certain amount of torque, if the filter "lets more air through", then the computer will just close the throttle and the end result is exactly the same amount of air entering the engine.

 

At WOT the amount of air entering the engine is going to be dictated by the most restrictive part of the intake system, and if it's designed properly, that restriction will be the throttle body.

[Automate]

 

At WOT the amount of air entering the engine is going to be dictated by the most restrictive part of the intake system, and if it's designed properly, that restriction will be the throttle body.

Not true. All the restrictions between ambient air and the engine cylinders are additive. That's why performance tuners "port and polish" the entire intake system. Porting is enlarging the cross sectional area and polishing is making the walls smother to reduce air flow resistance. Restrictions upstream of the throttle body matter also such, as the air filter.

Edited August 10, 2015 by Automate

[lolder]

What is NASCAR "restrictor plate" racing?

[Automate]

What is NASCAR "restrictor plate" racing?

Are you trying to infer that just because NASCAR engines have a restrictor plate their engine developers don't try and optimize the design of the rest of the intake system?

[hybridbear]

I think he was just asking a question. I'm also curious what restrictor plate racing means...

[Automate]

I'm also curious what restrictor plate racing means...

From Wikipedia

"A restrictor plate or air restrictor is a device installed at the intake of an engine to limit its power. This kind of system is occasionally used in road vehicles (e.g., motorcycles) for insurance purposes, but mainly in automobile racing, to limit top speed and thus increase safety, to provide equal level of competition, and to lower costs; insurance purposes have also factored in for motorsports."

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Restrictor_plate

Edited August 9, 2015 by Automate

[murphy]

Basically a restrictor plate reduces the horsepower of the engine. At Daytona and Talladega Nascar does not want the cars to be able to exceed 200 mph.

[GrySql]

The K&N is working fine.

http://fordfusionhybridforum.com/topic/10369-sp-531-vs-sp-530-spark-plugs/?p=99317

[lolder]

I was disputing the "not true" post about restrictions. It was true but also lower friction is desirable and losses are cumulative but if you have a significant restriction like a poor filter or a "NASCAR" restrictor plate, that far outweighs the advantage of polished ports and is the overriding controlling factor.

Edited August 10, 2015 by lolder

[GrySql]

Just got back from a 1,200 mile trip and found that the noise from the Atkinson blowback is reduced. The car ran great, so far no complaints.

Edited August 17, 2015 by GrySql

[storksb]

Any improvement in fuel efficiency?

[GrySql]

Any improvement in fuel efficiency?

I wish I knew...

I put new, different spark plugs and the K&N air filter in at the same time, plus different tires than the last trip to this destination.

This super hot desert/high elevation mountain trip two years ago was with 2 people, we had 3 people this time so a lot more weight in the car. Last trip I got about 37.5 mpg, this trip we got 40.9 mpg with A/C on 95%.

 

The car drove great and was quieter, this is an early build 2013 Job 1 FFH with 18" wheels/tires. You have a 2015 FFE with all the new improvements so I don't know if this air filter would be worth the effort.

[corncobs]

I wish I knew...

I put new, different spark plugs and the K&N air filter in at the same time, plus different tires than the last trip to this destination.

This super hot desert/high elevation mountain trip two years ago was with 2 people, we had 3 people this time so a lot more weight in the car. Last trip I got about 37.5 mpg, this trip we got 40.9 mpg with A/C on 95%.

 

The car drove great and was quieter, this is an early build 2013 Job 1 FFH with 18" wheels/tires. You have a 2015 FFE with all the new improvements so I don't know if this air filter would be worth the effort.

Sounds like some decent MPG improvement to me! Sure you can't say which individual change/upgrade is responsible for the the biggest improvement but the sum definitely seems to work well.

[dalesky]

I have a K&N cold air intake on my Mustang GT for years. It is allowing better performance, but not better mileage. When I tune the engine for maximum performance and high octane It definitely roars when I stand on it. I am very pleased with my K&N setup. On my fusion I think I will stick with the stock filter.