Volvo 855T popping during deceleration

[sventastic]

K&N gets the extra power by reducing the filtering capability. In other words it reduces the intake airflow resistance by allowing larger and more particles to pass. The particles are like sand in the engine, they increase wear and tear on the engine.

If you can provide data or analysis showing that this is true for the filters used for these cars (both OEM and K&N/etc) then this take would be worth something. Otherwise it's just conjecture. I'm not saying the K&N is good or bad or that your point is wrong, just that it doesn't mean anything without actual proof, which I would be very interested in since I use a cone filter on my 850R

[WhatAmIDoing]

This is exactly why I removed the PO's aftermarket oiled filter. And besides, it's easier to replace a $10 paper filter once a year in under 2 minutes, versus cleaning and re-oiling a K&N filter every 6 months (and then hoping you did it right). The P80s already have a huge air filter compared to other cars, not sure how much more airflow you really need.

[bmdubya1198]

Plus it's really easy to over-oil them. Then that just leads to a gunked up MAF sensor.

[RickHaleParker]

Filtering efficiency is a measure of the filter’s overall ability to capture dirt.




Accumulative Capacity is a measure of dirt holding/loading capacity before reaching the maximum restriction limit.




Accumulative Gain is the total amount of dirt that passed through the filter during the test.



Source

I have seen other side by side comparisons where they had the test conditions for the Marketing (Not ISO 5011) Filtering efficiency claims. In every case K&N fudged the filtering efficiency test by using a particle size larger then what is used in the ISO 5011 filtering efficiency test. In other words K&N fudges the test by changing the test conditions to produce marketing claims that makes their filters look better then they are. K&N then advertises the higher filtering efficiency numbers without disclosing the non-standard test conditions.

[henrysin44]

Filtering efficiency is a measure of the filter’s overall ability to capture dirt.




Accumulative Capacity is a measure of dirt holding/loading capacity before reaching the maximum restriction limit.




Accumulative Gain is the total amount of dirt that passed through the filter during the test.



Source

I have seen other side by side comparisons where they had the test conditions for the Marketing (Not ISO 5011) Filtering efficiency claims. In every case K&N fudged the filtering efficiency test by using a particle size larger then what is used in the ISO 5011 filtering efficiency test. In other words K&N fudges the test by changing the test conditions to produce marketing claims that makes their filters look better then they are. K&N then advertises the higher filtering efficiency numbers without disclosing the non-standard test conditions.

Then it's final, K&N isn't going within 500ft of my 850!

[WhatAmIDoing]

Yikes. It's graphs like that that make me feel bad for leaving that oiled filter on for as long as I did.

[abscate]

Kobayashi & Naru

If you don’t like the result, change the test.

[bmdubya1198]

Kobayashi & Naru

If you don’t like the result, change the test.

I like that. So where's the chart for flow ratings?

[RickHaleParker]

Yikes. It's graphs like that that make me feel bad for leaving that oiled filter on for as long as I did.

Take a white rag and wipe the inside of the air intake plumbing ... I'm sure you can figure out the evidence.

An old white sock is good for this, does the job and keeps your hand clean.