K&N Airfilter for 6th Gen. VFR

I searched the threads for experiences with adding just a K&N filter kit. Responses seem good for other Generations, can anyone share their experiences for K&N (or other filters) for the Sixth Gen.? Is a PCIII necessary after switching to another air filter?
Thanks!

 

Don't do it ! Flows no more air than the OE Honda one, and DOES let significantly more crap into the engine. Current thinking is stick to the original setup.
PC111 is not required.

 

The fact is that all filters filter a certain amount of crap out, and some do it better than others. Frankly, unless you are riding a dirtbike in a desert, then you are better sticking with the original, cost excepted (naturally).


Sounds better does not actually mean (IS) better - sound has more to do with perceived "feel" than many would expect.

 

Don't believe a word of it, i've had a K&N in mine since day 1 and not suffered any nonsense at all. This is on top of a K&N i had on my last bike for 5yrs without any issues. Breathes more easily, you can hear the bike gulping down air when you open her up. Added advantage is you don't need to change it for 50k miles, just clean it out when she's serviced.

 

More air flow = more dirt. Unless you have more surface area (bigger filter), the only way to let more air in is to make the "holes" in the filter larger, thus allowing larger particals through. The filter oil in the K&N helps some, but will let more dirt enter the engine than the stock filter. If you never ride in dusty conditions you could get by with a K&N for a while, but if you plan to keep your bike forever, stay with the stock filter.

 

the BMC filter is bigger than the K&N Filter and the stock one
in fact the stock is bigger than the K&N. Go with the BMC. I used K&N on my other bikes and when i SAW a BMC next to a K&N I switched.

 

The WHole K&N or Bmc theory , on a roadbike , is absolute Balls .

On a Quad - Yes , a foam filter definitely filters out more dust than ANY other type of filter system - be it with a pre-filter (?) or otherwise . I have repeatedly scanned debates of which one filters better , and after reading about severe engine failures , this led me to the Firm foregone conclusion that even a Well -oiled filter of that nature simply gets overloaded with too much dirt, reducing it's effectivness rapidly , and nothing will make me believe otherwise . a simple piece of foam , oiled , will provide better performance in dusty conditions , and , obviously , take longer to clog up .



Hows that for extreme , eh ? A bit over the top , but if that were a COne filter -the engine would be screwed . I really oiled that bugger , and finished the event . with half a Liter of water rocking back and forth inside the filter box ...


On a roadbike , I firmly believe that there is Nothing , nothing wrong ,with installing either K & N OR the Italian Bmc filters . If you're as holy as i am about not traversing on Any dirt roads , then Both of those filters will work Fine .and their re-useability would also count toward their purchase .

Anyhow , I am riding both dirt and road bikes , and I would use foam for Dirt - and the nice K&N or Bmc for road. Or stock .but Not the other way around .

 

I have a bmc filter and no other mods (other than the flapper valve and snorkel). I don't exactly ride on backwood's dirt trails or desert roads. Am I doing unnecessary harm to my bike by having this filter installed without pc3, etc?

 

I agree with John O' Leary, I've had K&N filters on just about every motorcycle and dirt bike I've owned. Seen every type of terrain, and they always seems to hold up. I'm not saying you could go 20K miles on dusty roads with a K&N. Every filter is going to need periodic checks and recharging. I check my filter about once a month, just to look at it, make sure it's still oiled and going. I ride year round and do about 800-1000 miles/month. Sometimes as much as 1500 miles if i have a trip that month. I know plenty of people with K&N filters on their bikes. My bike has 29k miles on it, I'm the second owner, and it's had a k&n most it's life. Now, i'm no expert, but i have lots of miles on these filters with good luck. As I said, depends on how well you maintain your bike, and conditions you ride in.

 

You don't have to be a rocket scientist to work out that if you're in dusty conditions, you need to clean the air filter more regularly. Wolf is right, maintain it properly and it will last for years.

I live in an urban enviroment, bike gets serviced regularly, filter cleaned and reoiled at every service, that's the trick. K&N know a few things about air filters, they're the experts after all, as i've stated before, i've had them for years and never had an issue.

 

Thanks all for the great info on different filters for 6th Gen. It sounds like there are advantages to K&N (like increased airflow), however use your discretion in how often you maintain it based on the conditions you are riding in. I also like the idea that you don't need a PC III for the K&N.
Safe riding.

 

Pipercross makes a foam filter for the VFR also that some people claim is the best of all.

 

i have yet to see an engine blow up where the sole cause was merely using a K&N vs stock. yes, it flows more, yes it probably let in more dirt at the same time. biggest perk? not having to spend $20 something bucks on a new paper filter every 12K miles, with a side benefit of supposedly more power.

for reference, just put mine in today. no PCIII. no big boom. go figure. this would make the 8th vehicle i've trusted to a K&N with no ill effects.

Mike

 

Here is an interesting review. I know this an ST1300 and the Oem filter looks bad to start but still a good read. I doubt we would see this type of improvement but still worth look.


http://www.motorcycledaily.com/21september04_kandnfilter.htm

Joe

 

All the people who knock K&N really dont get it. I have one in every vehicle I have ever owned with no problem. The one in the vfr has 20k miles and is still clean. There is absolutly no dirt on the engine side.

Save some money and get a filter that can be serviced. Dont do it for power increase.

I put in a K&N when my stock filter became dirty. $45 dollars for a stock filter every time it gets dirty or $49 for a K&N and you never have to buy another one.

Bigger filter area doesnt neccesarily mean more flow. If you get more flow you get less velocity it's that simple.

 

Like many others I like K&N filters and have run them on several cars, trucks, and bikes for many years.

I just put one on my VFR a few days ago, and I did notice a good bit of increased power at the low end of the band. There is an area of the Natchez Trace Parkway that goes up a pretty steep hill at a relatively low speed limit. I usually hang around the speed limit on that road (it's a federal road and the speeding fines are rough!). I went through that area today, and being too lazy to down shift, was in the 4,000 to 4,200 RPM range. Usually if I go up that hill at that RPM I can feel the engine lugging a bit, but today it just accelerated up it as smooth as silk. I tried it at a few more places that I have noticed that low RPM lug and it's much less noticeable now.

The only change since the last time I was out there is the filter, and the OEM filter only had about 3,000 miles on it. I know, it wasn't due to be changed, but I had the filter and I had the time and I had the motivation so it got changed. Glad I did since there was noticeable improvement on mine.

 

I have personally watched numerous before vs. after dyno tests comparing a new paper air filter versus a K&N air filter and have have witnessed that the K&N made more power.

With that said, I recently installed a K&N on my 25th Anniversary 2007 Interceptor and was perplexed to see that the stock filter had significantly more surface area than the K&N. Sure, inch-per-inch the K&N flows more cfm, but why the heck did K&N make the Interceptor filter with so much less filtering area???

 

i'm sure that the k&n engineer(s) designed the filter for the best performance possible