K&N VS. Napa 6637 - PowerStrokeNation : Ford Powerstroke Diesel Forum
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 8 (permalink) Old 06-21-2010, 03:24 AM Thread Starter
99' F350
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Westfield
Posts: 50
K&N VS. Napa 6637

I have a K&N Cone filter that is like new but i have not yet put it on, a lot of people on here seem to give K&N a bad name, will i be ok to go ahead and put it in or should i go with the NAPA 6637?? Thanks for any input
Big Red 350 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 8 (permalink) Old 06-21-2010, 03:40 AM
Metal - It kicks your ass
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: S.E. Kansas
Posts: 3,090
Re: K&N VS. Napa 6637

Edit: Didn't you already ask this question in a very similar thread you started earlier.?

Modded L99


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
dirtboy25 is offline  
post #3 of 8 (permalink) Old 06-21-2010, 03:13 PM
"Smoke A Lil Smoke"
 
chappy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Marshall Mi
Posts: 2,054
Re: K&N VS. Napa 6637

Put it on only if you don't like your truck!

2004 f250 egr delete,studded,fass 95,suncoast convertor,itp RR,Banks intercooler,58v tuned ficm,Powermax turbo,Matts tunes,6in Icon and 35 toyos 20x12 fuels
Early 99 exlb 4wd-SOLD All Shaeffer oil
Will Iott -8/24/84-7/4/10 "We miss you buddy"
chappy is offline  
 
post #4 of 8 (permalink) Old 06-21-2010, 04:55 PM
owner/president
 
dixieland-diesels's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: HouseSprings/Ellsinore MO.
Posts: 2,768
Send a message via MSN to dixieland-diesels
Re: K&N VS. Napa 6637

How about the AFE #24-40035(NAPA look alike).Its better than both of those.

03 lariat cc,4x4 7.3,DP-F5,36''MT,8"lift w/trac.bars,4"Silverline ss.exh,AFE II,Optimas,ATS housing,WW,Turbomaster,6.0 IC & tranny cooler,BTS,ISSPRO gauges,HPX,ITP RR,BRV+,Powerslots,WARN prem-hubs,coolant filter,ccv mod,08 mirrors,ARP's,mod.fuel & inj's.,Crower rods,AIH delete,AMSOIL fluids. ~waitn on the 38R~
dixieland-diesels is offline  
post #5 of 8 (permalink) Old 06-21-2010, 05:02 PM
PSN Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 745
Re: K&N VS. Napa 6637

Well this is what i understand as the problem with the K&N. It is not the K&N filter its self it is the K&N dropin which does not seal to the factory box very well. I ran a Summit racing cone filter which was 9" long by about 6" with a clamp on style 4" inlet. I did not see any dirt or dust in the intake tube. The Summit racing Filter is a K&N for about $20.00 less. It even came in the K&N box.

2000 F350 CC SB Lariate
Afew exstras
All brought together by Tony Wildman
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


Dale


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.





To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
SZYD is offline  
post #6 of 8 (permalink) Old 06-21-2010, 05:03 PM
<--Spy Vs. Spy
 
theSLEEPER's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Diamondhead, Mississippi
Posts: 14,570
Re: K&N VS. Napa 6637

Quote:
Originally Posted by SZYD View Post
Well this is what i understand as the problem with the K&N. It is not the K&N filter its self it is the K&N dropin which does not seal to the factory box very well. I ran a Summit racing cone filter which was 9" long by about 6" with a clamp on style 4" inlet. I did not see any dirt or dust in the intake tube. The Summit racing Filter is a K&N for about $20.00 less. It even came in the K&N box.


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

228-365-0698
Sheep only have two speeds, 'grazing' and 'stampede'.
Regulated Returns are on SALE!!
theSLEEPER is offline  
post #7 of 8 (permalink) Old 06-21-2010, 07:01 PM
PSN Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Wellington NV.
Posts: 4,810
Re: K&N VS. Napa 6637

No its any K&N.

Lots of good info...

Sorry for the late response. OBSWIZ asked me to comment on a few threads, this being one of them, a while ago and I’m just getting around to it. However, on a new computer (yea!… sort of… depends if you like Vista).

Anyway, I don’t monitor all the different forums anymore, but am always willing to comment if anyone would like to link me to the conversation you are having. Since I am a bit late, I’ll respond to the posts as they appear and hopefully it won’t be too confusing.

quote:
“have a used AIS…couldn’t find a filter for it…got a FIPKI K&N system cheap…should I put a tymar on or put the AIS back on??? I was thinking of mounting a tymar to the K&N tube…what do you guys think”

The K&N element should probably be avoided in turbo-charged applications. The initial filtration efficiency is not high enough to protect the compressor impeller.

The phrase “mounting a tymar” sounds kind of like Tymar is a filter. The filter we use is a Donaldson B085011 and Tymar is a company name. Tymar Performance makes all sorts of items, one of them being the open element intake kits.

That said, the element we use would not fit on the end of a K&N FIPK system. I guess you could technically modify things to get it in, but you wouldn’t have minimal radial clearance around the filter, which should be considered very important to providing low restriction air to the turbo. Without supplying minimal radial clearance, you won’t get the positive benefits the open element system should create.

The AIS will provide excellent filtration efficiency, but will not improve overall restriction or allow much additional air flow in the configuration that Ford uses. The Tymar Intake will provide excellent filtration efficiency as well as decrease restriction to the turbo and add significant air flow.

quote:
“Tymar is going to give you better flow but AIS is going to give you unmatched filtration…the AIS plus it will last a LONG time, like 60K miles…”

Although the AIS will give better filtration efficiency, you are only talking about 1/10 of a percent over the filter Tymar Performance Intakes use at initial filtration efficiencies. Not enough of a difference to really differentiate between the two.

For the longevity, you have to start talking about restriction ranges in both stock and aftermarket applications and how dirt will affect them. AIS has a larger capacity, but not across the restriction ranges once installed on the truck. Because of the configuration you are not lowering restriction significant over stock levels, but you are receiving better filtration compared to the stock intake.

The Tymar Intake will allow lower restriction levels and lasts approximately 15K miles in a restriction range LOWER than stock. If you want to go with longevity of filter, you can continue using the same filter and will simply not experience the positive benefits of lower than stock restriction levels.

We supplied the intake systems for Granite Construction and used them as a severe duty use test. They were rebuilding Power Stroke engines at approximately 60K miles because of the fine silt in the mining beds. After changing to our system they were using the same filters with 28K mile change out intervals and only experiencing 32”h2o of restriction (yellow on your stock restriction gauges) and they eliminated the necessity of engine rebuilds and were selling the used trucks with over 180K miles on them.

quote:
“I'm using a tymar because it's cheap to setup and offers good filtration.”

Although I agree with you, your listed intake is The K&N element should probably be avoided in turbo-charged applications. The initial filtration efficiency is not high enough to protect the compressor impeller.

quote:
“…be sure your Tymar-type filter includes the PowerCore filter media and not some lesser media material.”

Although the PowerCore media is far superior to most other media, there is not a PowerCore media filter available for use as an open element. They are inserts for intake boxes and are not configure for use as filter alone applications.

The filter media is not the main attraction, but the filter configuration. It is NOT true that you cannot get the same filtration efficiencies or flow rates from other Donaldson products. It will just simply have to be larger. The PowerCore configuration allows for compact applications that have flow rates and filtration efficiencies of filters much larger. So it is the compactness of the element and not that the media processes some magical qualities.

quote:
“IMO, the FIPK tube with the heat shield and the Donaldson (aka #6637) filter combination is hard to beat for the money.”


I would probably respectfully disagree. The problem is the thickness of the stacked gauze media will not allow for a high pleat count and severely restricts the available surface area. A typical RD-1460 that is used in a FIPK system only has about 44 pleats. The Donaldson we use is not only a larger filter overall, but the thinner media allows for 202 pleats, leaving us over 5 times the surface area to pull from. This is why we can outflow and out filter a re-usable element as long as minimum radial clearance is maintained.

The problem with heat shields and routing air through intake boxes is that whenever you direct air flow, you increase restriction. Low restriction is the goal, so using a filter that has the ability to flow large masses of air and then enclosing it in a box yields very poor results. Heat shields do literally nothing. Air flow under the hood is dynamic and not static. It is moving all the time. Hot air will move right around a heat shield at the same temperature and be ingested and the only thing you have caused is turbulence.

Aside from impeding minimal radial clearance and isolation of engine vibration, a serious cause for concern is placing the filter, especially a 6637 element, under a rain drip channel for the hood. Beyond the ambient moisture that will cause restriction as it is absorbed into the non-hydrophobic media, you will be directing water towards the filter anytime the rain drip channel flows more rain than it can hold or spills over the retainer during left turns.

I’ll try to check back in and address further comments in the days to come and can hopefully shed some light on why we do what we do using the configuration we did.

Peace to all, enjoy those rigs!
__________________
Hydroscopic means it absorbs water. Hydrophobic is water resistant. Easy to remember because "phobic" comes from phobia, meaning to be scared of or to repel.

Anyway, both of those filters are hydrophobic. The 085046 filter is for high humidity applications. This has little to do with the hydrophobic capabilities and deals with micro biotic growth since constant high humidity, think of boats that are always in the water moored to a dock, will have greater abilities for mold and such to develop on them.

It should be noted that the 085046 filter is a LOT more expensive and there is no air flow or hydrophobic benefit over the 085011.

We only carry the BEST parts and never compromise just to get a sale.

Dealer for: Full Force, Tymar, BTS, Icon, Pure Performance, TW tunes, just to name a few.

email:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Website:
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Introduction only. Please email if I can help.
OBSWIZ is offline  
post #8 of 8 (permalink) Old 06-21-2010, 07:19 PM Thread Starter
99' F350
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Westfield
Posts: 50
Re: K&N VS. Napa 6637

OBSWIZ I see you are a sponsor, do you sell a simple intake?
Big Red 350 is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the PowerStrokeNation : Ford Powerstroke Diesel Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome