scott chain oilers?

DSN_KLR650
s2mumford
Posts: 208
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2001 8:40 pm

k&n filter

Post by s2mumford » Wed Apr 24, 2002 9:51 pm

--- In DSN_klr650@y..., David Kelly wrote:
> "s2mumford" writes: > > > > Also, a foam filter that is full of dirt will still allow dirt
and
> > air to pass through it, a K&N will not. Hence, your KLR will not
run.
> > That's why dirt racers run foam filters. Their motor will be
rebuilt
> > frequently, and it's more important to them to finish a race than > > protect their motor. > > No, a dirt racer uses foam air filters because there is nothing
which
> filters *better* than a properly maintained foam air filter. A large > paper filter would do just as well, but would cost (over the same
life)
> and weigh more. > > K&N is not used off road because it always passes more dirt. > Experiment? Line the clean side of your airbox with a smear of
grease
> and see what it looks like after being "protected" by a K&N. > > K&N is often used on-road where somebody thinks the sticker looks
cool,
> and there is rarely enough dirt to cause obvious engine damage. > > > If you don't like cleaning your foam filter all the time, you're
not
> > planning to ride in horrendous dustbowl conditions for 500 miles
in 2
> > days, and $45 fits in your budget, get the K&N. > > If you like re-boring your engine, use the K&N. > > Foam air filters do require cleaning more often but when properly
used
> are the best cleaning and least restrictive filters one can buy. > > Paper air filters are the longest lasting, and could be the best at > filtering as well. All one has to to to make a paper filter the
least
> restrictive is to make the filter bigger. Then again you can make
any
> filter technology less restrictive by using more filter. > > K&N's only merit is that its washable and can be reused more times
than
> a foam air filter.
I've used K&N's for years, I'm literally across the freeway from their plant here in Riverside CA. A friend of mine is sponsosred by them, he's doing R&D on a Ford Focus for them. Drag races it. I think you may have been beat up by a K&N or something Dave, the way you're so against them. They're a fine product and they work extremely well. I know a lot of people claim to have special knowledge, but you can't argue with experience. I have got 20 K plus on my KLR with a K&N filter, 80k on my 5.0 Mustang, 80k on my last Dodge, 10k on this one, etc.etc. All totalled, I'd guess I have about 285,000 miles on K&N's, never had to rebore anything. K&Ns do flow better than paper filters of the same size. That said, I prefer foam filter for my race bike (XR650-R), less sensitive to dirt saturation. Why are you so anti K&N? You even go so far as to insult people's intelligence that owns them! Come on man! Thanks Stuart Mumford

esteban80127
Posts: 62
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2001 1:36 am

k&n filter

Post by esteban80127 » Wed Apr 24, 2002 11:51 pm

The K&N will not filter fine dust nearly as well as an oiled foam filter. Keep that in mind if concerned with engine longevity. Steve G
--- In DSN_klr650@y..., "wilbur_lakeland_fl" wrote: > have tried archives but cannot find anything telling how much > performance increase going to k&n filter (starting to get a brainake > looking) have read about it on arrowhead site - but you know that is > going to be all good... > > I need answer from normal bro - Is it worth dropping $45 for one - > getting ready to order some other crap from arrowhead and can't make > a decision on this part - thanks

esteban80127
Posts: 62
Joined: Fri Dec 14, 2001 1:36 am

k&n filter

Post by esteban80127 » Thu Apr 25, 2002 12:06 am

Stu, How you doing? I had to jump in here about the K&N debate. I agree with Dave that the K&N does not do as good a job as oiled foam. Just try the greased airbox test and you'll see. The K&N will let far more fine particles through than the foam will. In the end everybody will use what they want. But if it is filtration and engine protection you are after, go the oiled foam filter route. Stay with the stock KLR foam filter it is AOK. Steve
--- In DSN_klr650@y..., "s2mumford" wrote: > --- In DSN_klr650@y..., David Kelly wrote: > > "s2mumford" writes: > > > > > > Also, a foam filter that is full of dirt will still allow dirt > and > > > air to pass through it, a K&N will not. Hence, your KLR will not > run. > > > That's why dirt racers run foam filters. Their motor will be > rebuilt > > > frequently, and it's more important to them to finish a race than > > > protect their motor. > > > > No, a dirt racer uses foam air filters because there is nothing > which > > filters *better* than a properly maintained foam air filter. A large > > paper filter would do just as well, but would cost (over the same > life) > > and weigh more. > > > > K&N is not used off road because it always passes more dirt. > > Experiment? Line the clean side of your airbox with a smear of > grease > > and see what it looks like after being "protected" by a K&N. > > > > K&N is often used on-road where somebody thinks the sticker looks > cool, > > and there is rarely enough dirt to cause obvious engine damage. > > > > > If you don't like cleaning your foam filter all the time, you're > not > > > planning to ride in horrendous dustbowl conditions for 500 miles > in 2 > > > days, and $45 fits in your budget, get the K&N. > > > > If you like re-boring your engine, use the K&N. > > > > Foam air filters do require cleaning more often but when properly > used > > are the best cleaning and least restrictive filters one can buy. > > > > Paper air filters are the longest lasting, and could be the best at > > filtering as well. All one has to to to make a paper filter the > least > > restrictive is to make the filter bigger. Then again you can make > any > > filter technology less restrictive by using more filter. > > > > K&N's only merit is that its washable and can be reused more times > than > > a foam air filter. > > I've used K&N's for years, I'm literally across the freeway from > their plant here in Riverside CA. A friend of mine is sponsosred by > them, he's doing R&D on a Ford Focus for them. Drag races it. > > I think you may have been beat up by a K&N or something Dave, the way > you're so against them. They're a fine product and they work > extremely well. > > I know a lot of people claim to have special knowledge, but you can't > argue with experience. I have got 20 K plus on my KLR with a K&N > filter, 80k on my 5.0 Mustang, 80k on my last Dodge, 10k on this one, > etc.etc. All totalled, I'd guess I have about 285,000 miles on K&N's, > never had to rebore anything. > > K&Ns do flow better than paper filters of the same size. That said, I > prefer foam filter for my race bike (XR650-R), less sensitive to dirt > saturation. > > Why are you so anti K&N? > You even go so far as to insult people's intelligence that owns them! > Come on man! > > > Thanks > Stuart Mumford

bkowalca
Posts: 158
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2002 12:21 pm

k&n filter

Post by bkowalca » Thu Apr 25, 2002 4:15 pm

Well I have had enough of opinions if the K&N is better than paper is better than foam. Has anyone put a clean K&N and a clean stock foam filter on a flow bench and actually measured the pressure drop across the filter to see which one works better? Maybe something like the display K&N has setup at various shops, but with real equipment and real filters. This would end the debate. Yes, I fell victim to the marketing forces and in hindsight realized that I really didn't know if spending money on the K&N was really worth it from a performance point of view. Bryan K A14
--- In DSN_klr650@y..., "wilbur_lakeland_fl" wrote: > have tried archives but cannot find anything telling how much > performance increase going to k&n filter (starting to get a brainake > looking) have read about it on arrowhead site - but you know that is > going to be all good... > > I need answer from normal bro - Is it worth dropping $45 for one - > getting ready to order some other crap from arrowhead and can't make > a decision on this part - thanks

Chris Norloff
Posts: 294
Joined: Thu Jan 13, 2005 10:10 am

k&n filter

Post by Chris Norloff » Wed Jul 11, 2007 7:26 am

Why is that why you wouldn't use a K&N? It looks like there's a filter-skin and it needs to be changed. I've used K&N on a street bike, years ago, and it was okay I guess. I wouldn't use one anymore ... too much concern about what it lets through with that "free flowing" thanks, Chris ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: Dave Svoboda Date: Tue, 10 Jul 2007 10:50:33 -0700
>At 06:31 AM 7/10/2007, Zachariah Mully wrote: > >> > http://tinyurl.com/2xqab9>http://tinyurl.com/2xqab9 >> > >> > NO MAP!!! Not yet anyhow... After the 22nd... >> > >> > -Andy >> >>Picture #3 shows exactly why I won't ever use a K&N. > >I use UNI in my KLR, but I've had K&Ns in several bikes, and >I wonder about what looks like a paper covering or something >over the gauze filter. Is there some sort of coarse pre-filter on >the KLR K&N, or was that an addition? > >- Dave Svoboda, Sandy Eggo > > > >List sponsored by Dual Sport News at: www.dualsportnews.com >List FAQ courtesy of Chris Krok at: www.bigcee.com/klr650faq.html >Member Map at: http://www.frappr.com/dsnklr650 >Yahoo! Groups Links > > > >

Tom Dudones
Posts: 24
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2007 4:32 am

scott chain oilers?

Post by Tom Dudones » Wed Jul 11, 2007 11:31 am

Been thinking about getting a Scott chain oiler for my '03 KLR. Is it worth the money? Will it really lenghten the useable life of a drive chain? I read that an "auto" chain oiler is great for road use, but no for dirt? True or not? Anyone using a Scott chain oiler on their KLR? Whatya think of it?? Bigbird _________________________________________________________________ http://newlivehotmail.com

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 39 guests