K & N air filters
Subscribe
Most people run the BMC filters on the 997TT. I do, it's easy to install and no problems thus far, and I've been using them for the past 10 years on all my Porsches. I don't re-oil them for fear of messing up the MAF which is not that uncommon, so I just buy a new one every year. I consider them a consumable just like changing the oil. With the BMC, I noticed no change in fuel consumption (more on that below)
In regards to K&N, they are cheaper to buy. I use them on my AMG 63, and also, no problems so far. I don't re-oil and just replace them every year after they get dirty. What I did notice compared to the OEM paper filter, was that the fuel consumption got significantly worse.
In regards to K&N, they are cheaper to buy. I use them on my AMG 63, and also, no problems so far. I don't re-oil and just replace them every year after they get dirty. What I did notice compared to the OEM paper filter, was that the fuel consumption got significantly worse.
www.eagleday.com has the best prices on BMC, from my experience.
Here is my write up/pics on how to change the 997TT airfilter.
https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...-997-1-tt.html
And finally, I am but a stones throw from you in Beautiful British Columbia (YVR)
Here is my write up/pics on how to change the 997TT airfilter.
https://www.6speedonline.com/forums/...-997-1-tt.html
And finally, I am but a stones throw from you in Beautiful British Columbia (YVR)
Until your swapping out the turbos I would not even bother with the 'high flow' filter as your car is not going to need the added flow - if any it actually provides. Modern paper filters flow quite well and keep small particles out plus they wont foul your MAF which even out of the box filters can do.
From E90 forums, pretty good test of filters that may or may not be applicable but good reading non the less.
Round 2 of testing is finally complete. Round 1 of testing can be found here. This test included a few more filters and was performed slightly differently from Round 1. Another variable to consider is the ambient temperature, which was a toasty 94* during today's testing. The temperature during Round 1 was much cooler (60's if memory serves correct).
Filters tested: Stock, ITG, K&N, BMC, Helene, BMS
Test Vehicle: 2008 335xi E92 6AT with JB2 and no secondary cats
Test Procedure: Each pull was done in 3rd gear. Repeated 4th gear pulls on this load-bearing dyno causes overheating even with the factory oil cooler installed and plenty of airflow in the dyno cell. RPM sampling range was from 2k to 6.8k. Boost was sampled from the BOV vacuum line, and AFR was sampled at the right-side tailpipe using an Innovate LM-1 wideband. The vehicle was warmed up to the point of the oil temp gauge being 3 hash marks short of 250* for the first run to begin for each filter. After each run, the car was allowed a few minutes of cooldown until the oil temp again read 3 hash marks short of 250*. Four runs were done on each filter. The best run for each filter is shown below compared to the stock filter (stock is the solid line). Underscoring the impact of heat, you'll see that the best run for nearly every filter (save the BMC) was the first run. The other runs, grouped by filter, are also found below. Ambient temperature remained between 91* and 94* during the entire test with humidity at 32%.
Conclusion: Under these conditions, none of the aftermarket filters outperform the stock filter.
Round 2 of testing is finally complete. Round 1 of testing can be found here. This test included a few more filters and was performed slightly differently from Round 1. Another variable to consider is the ambient temperature, which was a toasty 94* during today's testing. The temperature during Round 1 was much cooler (60's if memory serves correct).
Filters tested: Stock, ITG, K&N, BMC, Helene, BMS
Test Vehicle: 2008 335xi E92 6AT with JB2 and no secondary cats
Test Procedure: Each pull was done in 3rd gear. Repeated 4th gear pulls on this load-bearing dyno causes overheating even with the factory oil cooler installed and plenty of airflow in the dyno cell. RPM sampling range was from 2k to 6.8k. Boost was sampled from the BOV vacuum line, and AFR was sampled at the right-side tailpipe using an Innovate LM-1 wideband. The vehicle was warmed up to the point of the oil temp gauge being 3 hash marks short of 250* for the first run to begin for each filter. After each run, the car was allowed a few minutes of cooldown until the oil temp again read 3 hash marks short of 250*. Four runs were done on each filter. The best run for each filter is shown below compared to the stock filter (stock is the solid line). Underscoring the impact of heat, you'll see that the best run for nearly every filter (save the BMC) was the first run. The other runs, grouped by filter, are also found below. Ambient temperature remained between 91* and 94* during the entire test with humidity at 32%.
Conclusion: Under these conditions, none of the aftermarket filters outperform the stock filter.
Good information. Thanks. I know there's quite a bit of debate on "Performance" filters, and while the E90 test shows no performance benefit between new filters, I think that a dirty BMC filter will perform better than a dirty OEM paper one.
Quote:
Round 2 of testing is finally complete. Round 1 of testing can be found here. This test included a few more filters and was performed slightly differently from Round 1. Another variable to consider is the ambient temperature, which was a toasty 94* during today's testing. The temperature during Round 1 was much cooler (60's if memory serves correct).
Filters tested: Stock, ITG, K&N, BMC, Helene, BMS
Test Vehicle: 2008 335xi E92 6AT with JB2 and no secondary cats
Test Procedure: Each pull was done in 3rd gear. Repeated 4th gear pulls on this load-bearing dyno causes overheating even with the factory oil cooler installed and plenty of airflow in the dyno cell. RPM sampling range was from 2k to 6.8k. Boost was sampled from the BOV vacuum line, and AFR was sampled at the right-side tailpipe using an Innovate LM-1 wideband. The vehicle was warmed up to the point of the oil temp gauge being 3 hash marks short of 250* for the first run to begin for each filter. After each run, the car was allowed a few minutes of cooldown until the oil temp again read 3 hash marks short of 250*. Four runs were done on each filter. The best run for each filter is shown below compared to the stock filter (stock is the solid line). Underscoring the impact of heat, you'll see that the best run for nearly every filter (save the BMC) was the first run. The other runs, grouped by filter, are also found below. Ambient temperature remained between 91* and 94* during the entire test with humidity at 32%.
Conclusion: Under these conditions, none of the aftermarket filters outperform the stock filter.
Originally Posted by gmoney
From E90 forums, pretty good test of filters that may or may not be applicable but good reading non the less.Round 2 of testing is finally complete. Round 1 of testing can be found here. This test included a few more filters and was performed slightly differently from Round 1. Another variable to consider is the ambient temperature, which was a toasty 94* during today's testing. The temperature during Round 1 was much cooler (60's if memory serves correct).
Filters tested: Stock, ITG, K&N, BMC, Helene, BMS
Test Vehicle: 2008 335xi E92 6AT with JB2 and no secondary cats
Test Procedure: Each pull was done in 3rd gear. Repeated 4th gear pulls on this load-bearing dyno causes overheating even with the factory oil cooler installed and plenty of airflow in the dyno cell. RPM sampling range was from 2k to 6.8k. Boost was sampled from the BOV vacuum line, and AFR was sampled at the right-side tailpipe using an Innovate LM-1 wideband. The vehicle was warmed up to the point of the oil temp gauge being 3 hash marks short of 250* for the first run to begin for each filter. After each run, the car was allowed a few minutes of cooldown until the oil temp again read 3 hash marks short of 250*. Four runs were done on each filter. The best run for each filter is shown below compared to the stock filter (stock is the solid line). Underscoring the impact of heat, you'll see that the best run for nearly every filter (save the BMC) was the first run. The other runs, grouped by filter, are also found below. Ambient temperature remained between 91* and 94* during the entire test with humidity at 32%.
Conclusion: Under these conditions, none of the aftermarket filters outperform the stock filter.
Thoughts on this set up,
Agency Power 997.1 Cold Air Intake - http://www.vividracing.com/catalog/a...9-p-59684.html
Agency Power 997.1 Cold Air Intake - http://www.vividracing.com/catalog/a...9-p-59684.html
If your car is stock, for some very mild "power" mods, I'd do first in order:
1. ECU flash plus BMC filter (about the same $$ as the AP Intake). You are paying most of the money on that carbon fibre housing.
2. Exhaust (Europipe which is what I have)
3. Intercoolers (for an increased safety margin and lower IATs)
1 thing you will notice with Cold Air Intakes, there is considerably much more induction "noise". Some like it, some don't. I am of the latter.
1. ECU flash plus BMC filter (about the same $$ as the AP Intake). You are paying most of the money on that carbon fibre housing.
2. Exhaust (Europipe which is what I have)
3. Intercoolers (for an increased safety margin and lower IATs)
1 thing you will notice with Cold Air Intakes, there is considerably much more induction "noise". Some like it, some don't. I am of the latter.
Quote:
Agency Power 997.1 Cold Air Intake - http://www.vividracing.com/catalog/a...9-p-59684.html
Originally Posted by MJA
Thoughts on this set up, Agency Power 997.1 Cold Air Intake - http://www.vividracing.com/catalog/a...9-p-59684.html