New out the box it may well do no harm, nice and fresh. Might even feel like an improvement.

10,000 miles later it might well do no harm,

cleaned and oiled properly. Breathing away nicely.

 

20,000 miles cleaned and oiled again, maybe all is well.

By that time you have still spent more with the K&N than buying 3 fresh easy breathing replacement filters.

 

No big deal if someone tries and likes,

please report back in 30,000 miles how your investment performed.

 

george

I make it more like buying 6 oem filters :-)

I have used K&N many times over the last 25 years and they do psychologically boost your HP.

I have done a RR session with a highly tuned mini and they made no difference. In fact, there wasn't a measurable difference between a quality paper filter, K&N or no filter at all.

Just replace the OEM every year, they do reduce in flow significantly when dirty.

Sent from my HTC One X using Tapatalk 4 Beta

Well i have to say i disagree with quite a few comments above, i took some airflow readings on my car with the torque app and the k&n filter definitely had more flow than the standard paper filter. Not a truly scientific test but it showed a difference. Also my car was remapped and its normally recommended that a panel filter is fitted.The other point about oil messing up the MAF, its never happened to me on 4 different cars now, maybe when it has been cleaned and re-oiled that the person re-oiling it has gone over the top with the oil and put too much on then it could cause a problem but that's the incompetence of the person rather than the filter.

And that's where we get problems. There will always be people saying yes and no to using these filters for x amount of reasons. We recommend paper filters however we also recommend if you use an aftermarket oiled one to (so as to clarify my points more clearly) clean off excess oil from it. It can be left with some oil on but we recommend that its minimal.

Working on these daily we have seen a number of them fitted and within a few days the air flow sensor reports a fault and on investigation they have the very same oil stuck to the sensor.

I 100% support your comment about re-oiling them, people soak these things and it can (not always) cause problems.

I've lost count how many sensors we've found to show as faulty simply because they had sticky oil residue on them.

Well i have to say i disagree with quite a few comments above, i took some airflow readings on my car with the torque app and the k&n filter definitely had more flow than the standard paper filter. Not a truly scientific test but it showed a difference. Also my car was remapped and its normally recommended that a panel filter is fitted. The other point about oil messing up the MAF, its never happened to me on 4 different cars now, maybe when it has been cleaned and re-oiled that the person re-oiling it has gone over the top with the oil and put too much on then it could cause a problem but that's the incompetence of the person rather than the filter.

 

Did this flow translate to more power?  I'm guessing no.

Diesels already run excess air and torque is further limited in the ECU.  So taking your air filter restriction from 0.5% to 0.25% makes zero difference to performance or economy.

 

Until you've tarred and feathered your MAF of course.

Hey hey..yay..I like this forum lark...I will report back in 30k..anyway..I am very happy with the Octy 2 which I have had now for a month or so..and am looking forward to corresponding with you all through the forum..

.

Hey hey..yay..I like this forum lark...I will report back in 30k..anyway..I am very happy with the Octy 2 which I have had now for a month or so..and am looking forward to corresponding with you all through the forum..

.

 

Same as mater......bought mine a month ago and love the car....comfort plus looks equals a nice car....

Hi all...I used a K & N on my last turbodiesel.. it made a big difference to performance on a Citroen ZX 1.9TD..and then fitted one to my 05 plate Octavia 1.9 TDI..certainly hasn't done any harm..!!

 

I changed my filter to K&N whilst on a Rolling Road. It made a MASSIVE 1.2 BHP difference! I'm still happy that I did though.

 

Dirty stock - 142.1 BHP

K&N Panel - 143.3 BHP

 

BTW it's a Furby vRS (PD130)

I changed my filter to K&N whilst on a Rolling Road. It made a MASSIVE 1.2 BHP difference! I'm still happy that I did though.

 

Dirty stock - 142.1 BHP

K&N Panel - 143.3 BHP

 

BTW it's a Furby vRS (PD130)

 

Well inside the margin of error then?

I changed my filter to K&N whilst on a Rolling Road. It made a MASSIVE 1.2 BHP difference! I'm still happy that I did though.

 

Dirty stock - 142.1 BHP

K&N Panel - 143.3 BHP

 

BTW it's a Furby vRS (PD130)

 

Clean stock.... 160bhp :P

 

Seriously though if you only "gained" 1.2BHP over a dirty filter, that's less than the margin of error.

Clean stock.... 160bhp :p

 

Seriously though if you only "gained" 1.2BHP over a dirty filter, that's less than the margin of error.

 

No it's the older ASZ engine, not the BLT. I've seen a totally standard Fabia SE (BLT) have 155 BHP from Awesome's RR.

 

Anyway, when I was told it may gain a little bit more when the ECU adapted to the new airflow.

 

PS, that dirty stock one had done 18k miles. Pics in this post: http://www.briskoda.net/forums/topic/167702-performance-air-filter/?p=2083734

Anyway, when I was told it may gain a little bit more when the ECU adapted to the new airflow.

 

Sorry Jim, but that's complete BS.  Unscrupulous tuners use that line to make the customer go away and hopefully not come back.

From the looks of it, it would be a great waste of money and not worth the bother.....so why on earth do some people rage about them!

From the looks of it, it would be a great waste of money and not worth the bother.....so why on earth do some people rage about them!

When you've spent £40 on something you don't want to stand up and say I've been conned.

That or the extra noise makes you percieve speed.

No it's the older ASZ engine, not the BLT. I've seen a totally standard Fabia SE (BLT) have 155 BHP from Awesome's RR.

 

Anyway, when I was told it may gain a little bit more when the ECU adapted to the new airflow.

 

PS, that dirty stock one had done 18k miles. Pics in this post: http://www.briskoda.net/forums/topic/167702-performance-air-filter/?p=2083734

The asz being the same as the bot menus the euro 4 bits like the troublesome egr?

Edited 16 July, 201312 yr by cheezemonkhai

TBH I am steering clear of them as if the stock is cheaper and the k&n needs to be replaced then whats the point in the first place....

Well, they do offer some extra airflow, so whatever helps the turbo spool up so you dont end up with a black oozing farm machine on engagement is wel worth it to me. And also, i dont like to buy and trow away. The performance filter makes for less garbage in nature.

When I had my 2.5 diesel Superb Mk1, I did a number of 700 mile round trips and compared a new stock Skoda filter to a Pipercross panel.  My averag MPG was a definite 3 mpg better with the pipercross and the acceleration felt more immediate (I wasn't just listening to the induction noise either).

 

I now have a standard 2.0 tsi petrol vRS and am doing a similar comparison but can't see any difference so far. I did however see a 4 mpg improvement going from normal unleaded Shell petrol to super-unleaded V-Power.