Steven
Member
There are many arguments concerning the different air filter types, mostly about people comparing K&N filters to paper filters. In most cases, paper filters filter better and K&N filters allow more air through. I have more questions that really don't seem to be answered by anyone responding to this issue...
Every air filter passes a certain amount of debris and it would be fair to say that the better they filter the less air flow they provide, and vice versa. The particulates that "do" go into the engine end up getting swirled around, burnt, and then pushed out of the engine. I assume that a small fraction of those particles actually touch engine parts which are what might cause damage. (Assume smaller particles since all filters do a pretty good job at removing larger ones)
Under normal use, let's not assume desert environments or such, how damaging is this to the engine, or to put it another way, how well does the filter have to work to keep your engine safe? Is it possible that with a filter such as a K&N which doesn't filter as well as a good paper filter provides enough protection to last the life of the vehicle? Are we being overly analytical about this whole thing considering that most particles pass through the engine (I assume for this argument) without actually touching anything?
It also seems that every engine produces a certain amount of carbon which can be seen coating the inside of our exhaust pipes, so in essence, the motor is creating its own particulates from the fuel. What is the ratio of engine produced carbon to the amount of particulate matter taken in through the filter and are those particulates more or less damaging?
Of course the better we filter the better protection we have, but where do we draw the line as to how much filtration we really need in relation to the lifespan of the vehicle.
Thoughts?