You can go to Ford Wedsite and down load the PDF file. I have also taken the liberity to cut and past the paragraph for you reading.
Quote:
It is your responsibility to make sure that all of the scheduled maintenance is performed and that the materials used meet Ford engineering specifications. Failure to perform scheduled maintenance as specified in the Scheduled Maintenance Guide will invalidate warranty coverage on
Note especially the statement under one of the graphs, "In 60 minutes the AC Filter accumulated 574gms of dirt and passed only 0.4gms. After only 24 minutes the K&N had accumulated 221gms of dirt but passed 7.0gms. Compared to the AC, the K&N “plugged up” nearly 3 times faster, passed 18 times more dirt and captured 37% less dirt. See the data tables for a complete summary of these comparisons."
Although this was using a Delco filter as a baseline, I'm sure the Motorcraft filters would provide similar results for a Ford V10.
If you have a newer Ford MH on warranty, stay with either a Motorcraft filter or another paper filter from a reputable source. Forget about the oil wetted filters.
#1) Who says the K&N filter does not meet specs? Can you show us where you got that information? My F-150 Owner's Manual does not list OEM air filter "specs" other than the Motorcraft part number. It does not mention that I must use a Motorcraft filter either. Even if a consumer were to try and use an aftermarket filter that meets Motorcraft specs, how would he/she know this? Who do you consider a "reputable source", and how do you know that the filter for your specific vehicle application meets your "specs"? Lots of legal holes here.
#2) The test data, which you list, does not mention anything about manufacturer specifications.
#3) I suggest you go back and read the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act. Specifically section 700.10. The manufacturer cannot deny warranty service or coverage unless they can demonstrate that the defect or damage to a vehicle was caused by the installation or use of an aftermarket part.
#4) Can you provide the "specs" for a Ford V10 air filter so that a suitable replacement can be bought? If only a Motorcraft air filter will do, then this is a clear violation of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act unless Ford offered free air filter replacement during the warranty period.
I never said K&N was the best filter made. I do not use a K&N filter on my truck. I'm just rebutting the misinformation displayed on this thread.
#1) Let's see now---you think that a filter that passes 18 times more dirt than an OEM paper filter will pass Ford's specs. I think most people know who reputable filter companies are (you can start at your NAPA store).
#3) The dealer (and manufacturer) can deny anything they want to. Then it's up to you to hire a lawyer (big bucks usually) to pursue a few thousand $ claim. Not good (or smart) for you.
#4) If Ford is in violation, why don't you sue them.
Finally, I spent a good part of my professional engineering degree working with large off-highway vehicles (that spend a lot of time in dusty conditions) including engine selection and accessory fitting for them. There's a reason they all use paper filters and not oil-wetted filters----please look (and carefully read) the test link again to see why.
Mark
2000 Itasca Suncruiser 35U on a Ford chassis
2003 Ford Explorer toad with US Gear brakes,
ReadyBrute tow bar, and Demco base plate.
What surprises some folks is that K&N filters were never designed for on road use. They were designed originally for race track use where high flow is important and engine wear is not a factor. When they started migrating onto the street they figured "what the heck" and a big business was born. A clean stock filter is designed to flow more than enough air and is not restrictive. Sure a K&N will flow more but you don't typically see race car RPM's anyway so where's the gain except more dirt. K&N's do add a tad of power in an interesting way. Because a paper filter has a tighter weave, there is some friction produced when the air molecules squeeze through which heats it slightly. This slight heat lowers power ever so slightly, so you might say that a K&N runs cooler air and you would be right.
Retired Anesthetist. Pilot with mechanic/inspection ratings.1996 Jayco C 22 foot with 460/Banks Powerpak/Bilsteins.Wife and daughter. Two cats which control my life. 1975 Ford F-250, 84 Coupe Deville, Thorp T18, tons of tools and tons of junk.
Well...OK...if I must. The K&N site lists part number 77-2570KTK for an 07 motorhome but doesn't call out any part number for an 08 Ford motorhome with a v-10. Might be worth a call to K&N to make sure if they have what you need.
They don't filter very well. A number of users have reported oil analyses confirming that.
Your paper filter is probably not restricting air flow. There are lots of tests that show both.
The only way a filter can improve power is by having less restriction at wide-open throttle. At anything but WOT, the carb or FI butterflies are the only restriction. The air filter makes no difference unless it is REALLY clogged, so, I doubt claims of any filter increasing performance or mileage except at full throttle unless the previous filter was REALLY clogged.
If you think a filter with less restriction can give you more power, remove your (clean) element and do a stopwatch or hill climb test. Do not be seduced into thinking more intake noise is more power.
Mileage? Well, maybe a lower-restriction filter might possibly improve full-throttle mileage, but who measures that?
Maximum flow is overrated, anyway. Some expensive dyno time has told me that power drops off at somewhere around 20 inches WC. The more stock the engine, the more restriction it will tolerate. You can measure restriction yourself with a clear vinyl tubing manometer.
Do yourself, your engine and your pocketbook a favor. Buy a filter minder and change the filter only when it shows 20 inches H20 of restriction. A Filter Minder will pay for itself in avoiding premature filter element replacements, too.
Hot Rod Magazine did an air filter element test using both a dyno and a flow bench in their June 2002 issue. They found no advantage to using a K&N or similar.
From the article:
"As you can see, there was very little difference between the filters tested, though the paper element did lose a few ticks as compared to the performance units. In fact, the power numbers are so close as to be identical compared to testing repeatability. However, the one thing we were not able to fairly quantify is airflow performance after a given amount of contamination, and we suspect that’s where a slight difference might show. You’ll have to sort through the advertising claims and make your own call based on price, warranty, and—sad but true—appearance. Also keep in mind that while the paper element is the cheapest, it also gets dirty faster (as evidenced by the seat-of-the pants power you can feel when swapping a used paper filter for an aftermarket one), is not reusable, and probably does not filter contaminants as well."
Several years ago, Sport Compact Car magazine tested ~12 air induction kits, including the K&N FIPK, and a K&N drop-in filter on a new Honda Civic. All the complete kits increased hp/torque a little, but the drop-in replacement element's affect was "transparent" . . . i.e., no increase/decrease in hp/torque.
There have been many other tests, but most of the links I have collected no longer work. Similar results, though.
My time racing bikes and buggies in the desert showed me just how much dirt K&N let through. A white Kleenex would pick up dirt in the inlet of a K&N filtered engine. Not so with Filtron, Donaldson, Baldwin, and the others. A 2-stroke bike engine had a shorter life with a K&N, as all the dirt it let in got to the rod and main bearings. And ball, roller and needle bearings are quite intolerant of grit.
I use an AC with a Baldwin poly wrap.
The ideal situation for filter monitoring would be a permanent gauge on the dash with a tell-tale max needle. I have not seen one with the needle. SW makes a basic one. There are dash-mounted indicators that tell the max vacuum, just like the ones on the air cleaner. I use a Filter Minder remote mounted indicator connected to my air cleaner housing, and check it before every trip. I made a remote installation to avoid the high temps in the engine compartment. Air cleaners last a long time on hard road vehicles.
As to the temporary manometer, a length of clear vinyl tubing connected to the air cleaner housing and run to the cockpit is all you need. Any size is OK. Tape it going straight upward on the sidewall, then going down, then going up again, with the open top end two feet above the lower curve. Fill the tube from the top end with colored water until the level is one foot above the bottom of the loop. When the levels are equal, there is no intake restriction. When the levels are unequal, the number of inches they are apart is the amount of restriction you have, measured in inches of water. I have never seen a reasonably clean paper filter with much restriction.
I did all this stuff way back in the sixties and seventies when racing dune buggies and desert bikes. Found Donaldson to be the best for dusty desert. I never saw a K&N on a real racer buggy. Filtron foam was best for motorcycles.
Disclaimer: I am not a diesel guy, so some of the stuff about throttle position might not apply to diesels.
* This post was
last
edited 08/13/08 09:36pm by bill h *
View edit history
Bill and Susan
84 Barth 30 tag powered by ht502/Thorley, Gear Vendors OD
Siamese Calvin and Airedale Hobbes
4WD Toyota toad
Offline
