Air filters and tank fuel line fittings....

[yerguy]

Dan'l here from sometimes sunny Calif.

Due to the recent wild fires, the fact that they came within 1/4 mile of my house and several forays on the ST to examine the damage they've caused, in clear conscience I really think I should be repacing the air filter.

I've not done this yet on the ST, but I've two concerns/question regarding this.

1) I've seen numerous threads about the difficulty of removing the fuol lines/and tank to access the filter. Seems the problem is removing the lines from the barbed fittings without damaging them. The gist as I understand it is the barbs are so pronounced and have such an undercut that the hoses won't release from the plastic fittings without breaking them.

I know about the brass replacement fitting kit, but recall a gent said one or two of them were the wrong size or threaded wrong?? And the $70-$80 for the kit is a bit stiff in my book, especially if they don't fit.

I was thinking that maybe (come on techno wienies...pipe in here!!) of perhaps carefully cutting the hose away from the barbs to release the hose AND/OR just buying a few feet of the apprpriate fuel injection rated hose and replace them after finishing.

This lil' issue has me wondering if I should'nt just replace the whole mess with Aeroquip aircraft fittings and make up the appropriate hoses in -4 and -5 med press hose.

Are the tank fittings a conventional pipe thread or some oddball thread/size??

2) We're all pretty much aware of the advantages of the K&N filter, but I saw a thread suggesting they don't filter the air as well as the OEM filter. True or False???

Lemme know guys, cuz I want to get on this.

[1fastcat]

Hi Yerguy,
I just performed the exact procedure on my 2000 ST. I had to replace a leaking fuel sender unit (Triumph provided the part because I didn't want to transport it to a dealer for the NHTSA recall work. Also I don't trust most mechanics because they are hacks.

I had no problem releasing the quick connect fuel lines. removal of the tank was straight forward. Just take your time, twist the quick connect fitting and slowly pull off. I also replaced the plugs with NGK Iridiums and put in a K&N air filter. I noticed a smoother idle and slightly quicker starting. No power difference, but my bike already has custom headers and a remapped computer.

As far as the K&N's are concerned I'll give you one mans experience. I'm 40 years old and grew up around high performance. In the 50's my Dad had one of the fastest cars (per the Stockton and Tracy newspapers) in the Central Valley. In the early 70's his souped up 33 Plymouth won the open class at Sacramento's Kingdom Raceway against a motorcycle. He later built race cars for Johnny Brazil among others. Ten years ago I built a custom Jaguar street rod from a bare metal shell, and recently put in a 462 HP Lingenfelter 383 with Superram injection. Suffice to say I am probably more qualified to talk about high performance modifications than 99% of the guys on this site - just from an experience standpoint.

I also subscribe to several high-perf mags, as well as Popular Mechanics and a few other consumer publications. Unlike the "unscientific" statements rendered by some in this forum, K&N and other "oiled media" filters have been tested, retested, and re-retested throughout the decades. I have never seen a test that showed a paper filter providing as good of particulate filtration i.e. smaller particles filterd, nor provide comparable airflow. Then when a paper filter gets even the slightest bit dirty, airflow is dramatically reduced. K&N's maintain that high airflow and trap even smaller particulates as it gets dirty. If scientists, engineers and the like could not find a detrimental issue with "oiled media" filters, and since I have never read or heard of any combustion engine racing team using paper filters (including baja and endurance racing) what in the world are all of these wannabee ROCKET SCIENTISTs talking about?

The simple message is this:

ENGINES ARE A VACUUM PUMP. THE MORE EFFICIENT THE COMBUSTION OF FUEL, AND THE MORE AIR VOLUME THAT THE ENGINE CAN PUMP THE GREATER THE POWER (CAN YOU SAY SUPERCHARGERS?). AIRFLOW IS A DIRECT CORRELATION TO POWER AND COMBUSTION EFFICIENCY. THEREFORE GREATER AIRFLOW, THROUGH PLENUM, AIR FILTER, CHAMBER AND RUNNER PROFILING MEANS MORE POWER AND BETTER COMBUSTION EFFICIENCY. Last time I looked the AIR FILTER was a vital component in this process.

Sorry for the rant, but I get tired of seeing messages without basis other than "I held it up to the light", or "I didn't notice any difference", or "my sisters brother said it doesn't work".

[ This message was edited by: 1fastcat on 2004-02-04 23:18 ]

That's absolute nonsense fastcat. I agree that K&N will flow more air and if you want your engine to produce maximum power (e.g. for competition use)then fit one.

If you want your engine to last a bit longer then fit a paper element and change it regularly.

You can't have air flow and filtration; it's one or the other.

I think you have been reading too much advertising hype from K&N.

(I nearly forgot; before you remind me about you being more qualified than 99% of the other guys on this site, perhaps I'm one of the 1%)

[ This message was edited by: terry on 2004-02-06 10:05 ]

[dolson]

Can there be two of us in the 1%tile?

Since the mid 60's I have raced on every drag strip in the Great Lakes area. SCCA at Elkheart Lake and flat tracked and road raced in the Southeast.

Air filtration was never a consideration in any racing venue.
Why? Because in drags the motor was torn down between rounds anyway and the others after every race.

On pavement racing there really is no reason to have a fliter unless the rules specify one or to help straighten out the airflow because of airbox problems.

I get a chuckle out of the John Force commercials with their K/N filter patches on. I never built a motor with a huffer on where I installed an air filter.

Here we for the most part are street and road riders and in this what are you interested in? Longivity or power?
If you want power get a GSXR1000 and go mental.

Remember the OEM's place and the aftermarket builders.
Triumph builds a triple now in a very high state of tune out of the box. Without going internal there isn't a whole lot to do to them. Cans and filters won't change the Touque and H/P enough to justify the cost really.
K/N has been out there enough that I'm sure Triumph has tried their filters in development and rejected them as an OEM part that doesn't meet their standards. And Triumph doesn't want their engines coming back to haunt them.

K/N on the other hand is only interested in hawking their filters and Being able to say that their filters flow more air.
The ONLY way they can Flow more air is to have LESS filtration area. I've said it before, there are no magic filters and it's all a compromise. They try to make up for this by rubbing oil on the medium and saying you can clean and recharge saving money. If the air is moving through the oiled medium so are the particulates you are trying to keep out due to less filtration area.

If one has convinced themselves K/N is the way to go fine and more power to you.(pun intended) But don't try to convince me that they are a superior filter. The facts don't support you only media and advertizing hype.

Before you believe the articules written in the mags remember that the editors WILL NOT let anything in that will reflect bady on a heavy advertisor. Too much money is at stake. I have seen personally that this is so. A heavy advertisor can have the biggest turd and the prostitutes at the mag will polish it but all you'll have is a shiny turd.

Don

I think I'm part of the 1% too Terry, and agree with what you put. You get air flow, you get filtration, it's the compromise between the two that governs performance v engine life. (Me?, 30 years motor trade, including 7 years Ferrari Dealer, started restoring / rebuilding engines, finished as Manager, 6 years BMW/Porsche/Aston Specialist Manager, 2 years UK BMW Alpina Op's Manager, and 40 bikes of my own over the years). Fast cat dislikes anecdotal, non scientific evidence so here's some stuff I found on the web regarding K&N filters:

"John: I was responsible for evaluating re-usable air filters for a major construction/mining company that had hundreds of vehicles ranging from large earthmovers to pick-up trucks and salesmen's cars. This study was embarked upon due to the fact that we were spending upwards of $30,000 a MONTH on paper air filters. Using them one time then throwing them away.. I initiated the study in that I was convinced that a K&N type filter or oiled foam would save us many dollars per year in filter savings, man hour savings, and of course engines as these would filter dirt better than paper. (yes, I had read the K&N ads and was a believer)

Representative test units were chosen to give us a broad spectrum from cars right through large front end loaders. With each unit we had a long history of oil analysis records so that changes would be trackable.

Unfortunately, for me, every single unit having alternative re-usable air cleaners showed an immediate large jump in silicon (dirt) levels with corresponding major increases in wear metals. In one extreme case, a unit with a primary and secondary air cleaner, the secondary (small paper element) clogged before even one day's test run could be completed. This particular unit had a Cummins V-12 engine that had paper/paper one bank and K&N/paper on the other bank; two completely independent induction systems. The conditions were EXACTLY duplicated for each bank yet the K&N allowed so much dirt to pass through that the small filter became clogged before lunch. The same outcome occurred with oiled foams on this unit.

We discontinued the tests on the large pieces almost immediately but continued with service trucks, foremen's vehicles, and my own company car. Analysis results continued showing markedly increased wear rates for all the vehicles, mine included. Test concluded, switched back to paper/glass and all vehicles showed reduction back to near original levels of both wear metals and dirt. I continued with the K&N on my company car out of stubbornness and at 85,000 miles the Chevy 305 V-8 wheezed its last breath. The top end was sanded badly; bottom end was just fine. End of test.

I must stress that EVERYONE involved in this test was hoping that alternative filters would work as everyone was sick about pulling out a perfectly good $85 air cleaner and throwing 4 of them away each week per machine...

So, I strongly suggest that depending upon an individual's long term plan for their vehicles they simply run an oil analysis at least once to see that the K&N or whatever alternative air filter is indeed working IN THAT APPLICATION... It depends on a person's priorities. If you want performance then indeed the K&N is the way to go but at what cost???

And no, I do not work for a paper or glass air filter manufacturing company nor do I have any affiliation with anything directly or indirectly that could benefit George Morrison as a result.. "

A bit long winded but evidence enough for me.

Martin

[1fastcat]

Obviously you are not in the 1%.
Once again - I'll state the obvious - YOU PROVIDE NO SCIENTIFIC FACTS to back up your claims of inferior filtration. The above article does not have ONE statement of actual wear measurements. Supposedly they tested? Using what standards? Excessive wear? I don't see any measurement of wear. MY CHEVY 305 WHEEZED ITS LAST BREATH AT 85,000 MILES? What kind of crackpot science is that? Did we do a full tear down and analysis of wear data? How often and what service was performed on the vehicle? How was it driven? etc. etc. etc.

If you want to talk about wear testing and filtration standards provide data from THE SOCIETY OF AUTOMOBILE ENGINEERS (SAE). Try to find tests results like the SAE J726 or other SCIENTIFIC MEANS OF MEASUREMENT AND CATEGORIZATION.

For those of you who may actually care about factual data try to look at the independent SAE results on the K&N website
K&N FACTS AND INDEPENDENT TEST RESULTS

Oh and for you Oliver Stone's who think the data is manipulated - prove them wrong and sue for false advertising via Class Action. They got the money, bet you can't take it since you won't find the smoking gun.

[sprintrsdawg]

1fastcat, since the fire in yer belly already seems to be burning high, I guess I'll risk throwing on a bit more gasoline (although I'm not really trying to).

You're calling for "scientific fact" from others, but your opening response was an argument based on your personal/professional experience and provided no "scientific fact." That's fine, but it seems a bit unfair to call on others to provide evidence you do not provide.

You call for scientific facts on evidence of wear, but in that same post, you provide no evidence either way. The link you provide presents a percentage of achieved filtration. I'm not saying this isn't valid or useful, but I am saying that I don't believe it constitutes an argument one way or another on its own. Most physical evidence benefits from, even requires, explication.

Finally, I've put a K&N in my RS and my TT. I haven't had a chance to run them yet, and I don't know that they will run any differently, but I went with them because I'm willing to believe that the engines will breathe better and provide a bit more response. A scientific choice? Certainly not, but a sort of informed choice, nonetheless.

The point of argument, in a classic sense, is for all parties to work toward achieving a mutual resolution. Therefore, the best argument is one in which all parties assist others in achieving this goal. Sorry, it's sort of what I do to pay for the Triumphs.

Best to all in this discussion.

Kurt

[dolson]

1fast cat,
I see no reason to take your sample page as evidence that K/N makes a better filter. There are no facts presented here, no way to check sources. This is obviously a promotional page paid for by K/N and highly suspect.

If K/N makes a superior product in air flow AND filtration prove it to us. If you can do that to everybodys satisfaction I'll be the first to admit I can learn something new and thank you for it.

But I won't accept 3rd. party info. or any testing results where K/N OR any other filter maker had any part in, nor facts stated not in evidence. And remember lab testing and real world usage are two different things.

I would lean toward the findings of a company stated like Martin did over a lab test too because lab tests are just that. They look at one minute aspect and have nothing to loose.
Whereas a corporation will do anything to save a buck and if it was economically sound for them to use K/N filters till they junked the engines they would do it.

Martin, If your are still with us is it possible to provide a link to that summary?

Thanks all,
Don

[yerguy]

EGADS!!!!!

"Why can't we all just get along"...... Jack Nicholson, from "Mars Attacks".

Seems like I've done it again!!! Oops!!! Everytime I send in a wee little question or observation, I get everyone fired up. Gads, maybe I'll post more often just to keep you guys on your toes???

OK, the reason why I originally posted this quiry, was until a recent post brought it up, I've not seen much negative info regarding the K&N's and hoped for someone to tell me a lil' bit more. I guess I got more than I bargained for, but sure makes for interesting reading, you know??

I suppose a bit of backgound is needed so you'll undertand my experiences.
Graduate of everyone of the mechanic schools/certification for VW/Porsche?Audi prior to 1974, factory certified for drivetrain and suspension for BMW, Alfa Romea, and Lotus automobiles, former service manager for 2 VW/Porsche dealers and a Honda dealership.

NHRA drag racing: A Super Stock, B-Altered, '39 Willys that would run now days as a Pro-Mod, 409 SS Impala, a Norm Spalding 440 Dart and a 340 Challenger.

SCCA: Oh boy...Formula Vee, Super Vee,(air and waer cooled) BMW 2002 IMSA sedan, RX7 IMSA GTU, GT3 and GT2 RX7's, Bill Tempero's Can Am Lola,, Fomula Mazda, more Formula Fords than I can recall, built the 2 chassis ued by Mike Lewis currently in the SCCA Trans-Am seriesand have been racing Laydown/Enduro/Road Racing karts for 20 years. (They're fast and cheap!!) Positions filled...Crew Chief, Head or Lead Mechanic, Head Fabricator, all pit crew spots, and my specialty is chassis setup. Thank God for scales and bump steer gauges!!!

The projects I've worked with have gone on to regional National class championships, have been to the Valvoline Run Offs more than once and the last GT2 Mazda and the American Sedan projects I worked with, I put the driver on the podium every race and we've got the track records at Willow Springs, Button Willow, Holtville, and Firebird in Phoenixto show for our efforts.

Roundy-round: Late model stock, Grand-Am Modifieds, 360 Sprints

Former Engineering student, originally following a degree program in Welding Engineering at Ohio State University (Go Buckeyes!!!) with and emphasis on stuctural dynamics and eventually aviation structures. Completed NAVY A, B, and C schools for aviation structural mech, completed 1 year school for composite structure repair and fabrication, served 2 years in machine shops NAVY AIMD level, certified aeronautical welder since 1975.

Currently work as an aviation structures Loftsman where I use all my combined fabrication skills and directly liase with the Engineering Dept. to produce pre-production prototype/repair components for all the NAVY aircraft.

So, I think it's fair to say I'm a lil' more than the average wanna-be gearhead.

I've a voracious appettite for serious racy car nuts/bolts info and this leads into the K&N quiry.

Back when Circle Tack was a serious racers magazine (when Smoky Yunick was still writing for them) they used t have some really good A vs. B testing of numerous products. One test in particular was for cars requiring air filters such as on dirt track cars and for those that chose to used a filter.

The flow bench and dyno tests showed that the K&N did in fact flow more air with verified results on the dyno. They produced more HP ahan any of the then current filter systems out there at the time. And before you ask, NO they did not analyze the oil for foriegn debris afterwards. The intent of the testing was: Which filter makes you go fast???? with reasonable protection???

I agree the idea of a reusable filter is tempting, but I really am interested in the long term results. Mr Olson, I agaree that the ST has plenty of Go-Fast for this old fart, but a wee bit more would be nice, but not if I have to sacrifice longevity of the powerplant.

Here's a little tid bit I'm familiar with because of my association with the NAVY air fleet.

In the early days of Desert Storm, almost half of the entire inventory of helicopters used by the NAVY and the ARMY were downed because of the amount of sand being injested through the turbine engines. We saw compressor blades all the way back to the 6th and 7 stage sometimes all but eroded away, with damage throughout the entire engine and the fine silt that worked it's way into the main shaft bearings was almost locking up a number of engines.

Neither service had ever experienced this kind of damage and without helicoptors, the intended mission was severely impacted. The deflectors and screens normally fitted for severe/dirty envionments simply could not stop the amount of sand working it's way into the engines. The NAVY brass from the Pentagon contacted K&N and they managed to fab up and put into produciton a pre-filter and filter system that extended the service of those affected aircraft by 60-80% vs. the previous performance. Yeah, the engines were still getting beat up, but they were lasting quite a bit more before having to park the aircraft. And......they did this in a 10 day turn around. That's pretty impressive.

I don't care how many cubes you pulling, how big a blower you've got, how big a Holley, Weber or throttle body you've got, or how many RPM you manage, you AIN'T gonna' flow as much air as those big Pratt and Whitney or GE turbines. And the K&N filters kept them alive longer than anything used previously. Something to thnk about, eh?????

General questions for you guys.......

Fastcat...Remember I was gonna go up to Rocky Mayers for that killer new seat next week?? They called and left a message this afternoon, said there is a scheduling conflict and I have to reschedule. I made the appointment many weeks ago, Rocky called me personally and we talked at length about my seating needs and assured me they could do this in one day. I've made arrangements to borrow a bike trailer for the drive up and back and have submitted leave for that day plus the day after to return the borrowed trailer.

I'm actually waking up in the mornings thinking about that seat first things and now......I'm bummed!! Big time!! Oh,and....I definitely intend to try the route you suggested north of LA to Ojai at a later date after it warms up a bit more. Riding up from here in North San Diego would pretty much relegate that to a weekend trip, but a good one, I'm sure.




bmk...Hey, thanks a ton for your input. Very illuminating and VERY serious food for thought.

As a former BMW mech, race mech and owner, I'm truly impressed with the quality and engineering of the BMW autos. Just wondered if you might have an old 3.0 CSL Alpina laying about collecting dust?? If so, I'll be more than happy to take care of it. I'll clean up after it if it goes wee on the floor. Really I will, I promise. Can I get one, can I, can I huh???? Pleaseeeeee???? An M3 will do in a pinch......



Mr. Don Olson.....Our spiritual leader!!! An old SCCA guy eh?? Are you one o' the guys I see at the regional/club races with the "Old Age and Treachery will beat Youth and Enthusiasm" tee-shirts at the track?? Me wonders??? Spending much time up there at Portland International Raceway?? I REALLY that facility, one of the many reasons I like Portland, besides the good mini-breweries and coffee houses. And a PBS station that plays the Blues 24/7...cool!!

Bet you got an old Lotus Super 7 getting all dusty in the shop there somewhere. If so I'll be more than happy to take care of it and please see the rest of the comment to bmk above, the same applies!!!

I'm still curious, are you flying recips or turbine, single or multi???? Gimme a wing waggle next time you fly by North Island and I'll wave back!!



In conclusion, I guess I've inadvertanly become the forums rabble-rouser. Sorry 'bout that, but.....Damn this is fun!! I'll try and dream up another doozy just to keep you guys going. Care to try for politics and religion anyone??? Ooh, ooh a good one just came to mind. Let's all talk about Tony George and all the good things he's doing for open wheel racing. Or maybe the American Lemans series vs NASCARS Grand Americn series. Now, lemme' think........uh?????

Have a good one guys, the weekends here....YEA!!!!!!





[ This message was edited by: yerguy on 2004-02-06 23:26 ]

Hi,

Well, 1fastcat wrote I]For those of you who may actually care about factual data try to look at the independent SAE results on the K&N website [/i]. I looked, it may be factual, it may have been done in a science lab, but what exactly does it tell us?

It shows air flow through a filiter over time in a coarse dust environment, for a flat and round K&N filter respectively. It provides no comparitive data with a stock filter or it's ability to filter fine as opposed to coarse dust. It shows a statistic, and as we know "there are lies, damn lies, and statistics".

Fact is, we all know the K&N flows well, and if that's your (hopefully informed) choice then fine. It doesn't make it a better filter than the original equipment, just different.

If the K&N was so superior in both air flow, running costs (no regualr replacement interval) and filtration of both fine and coarse particles, along with long term engine reliability, then wouldn't the world's car and bike manufacturers, collectively spending billions in R&D have wholeheartedly adopted the K&N route by now as original equipment.

I can guarantee that the vehicle manufacturers really do have accurate, comparitive scientific data on relative performances of filters.

PS 1fastcat, am I just English or does California really have two "l's" in it?

Sorry yerguy, I don't have a 3.0CSL in the garage unfortunately, a great car even by todays standards.

Don, sorry I don't have the link to the article on the filters, I came across it some time back and copied it to my computer for info.

Finally, I look in on a few bike forums, I find them stimulating, informative and fun. There is an immense store of individual knowledge out there to be shared, some anecdotal, some scientific, some fact, and generally very little outright rubbish. Everyone should have a valid right to post reasonable discussion without degrading the input of 99% of contributors.

Martin