sludge

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ed & Jane Grant
  • Start date Start date
Matt said:
It isn't relevant to engine flushing.




No, and I would never say that anyone should use them unless they want
the very well documented benefits. I use synthetics purely for the cold
starting advantage. They are overkill in pretty much every other way as
I don't run extended drain intervals and I don't race, etc. However,
for me the cold start benefit alone is worth the incremental cost. The
"data" at the Bilstein site was feeble even if true, with claimed
performance that isn't even above the measurement noise floor. This
isn't true with synthetic lubricants. There is tons of data from many
sources as to the benefit, so much so that some car makers (Chevrolet
with the Vette and Porsche) actually specify it.

Comparing engine flushing with synthetic oil is as specious as your
comparision to electronic ignition.




I wouldn't let a Pep Boys employee within 10 feet of my car. I stopped
at an Autozone once to get the free scan tool read on my Plymouth van as
the MIL was lit. They gave me a code that made no sense at all as it
was a part that had been just recently replaced. I went to a Chrysler
dealer and they gave me the correct problem code. Places like that
can't even use a scan tool correctly. You think I'd let them access the
internals of my engine? Not going to happen.

Well, it is obvious that you are one of the folks that P.T. Barnum
talked about. Reason won't work with you so I'm done with this thread.
Click to expand...

It appears that his religious fervor extends to the Bilstein machine.
Remember, in his world science and facts don't matter, all that counts
is faith and belief. ;-)
 
Matt said:
Because the advantages aren't needed in most cases. Chevrolet and
Porsche do specify synthetics. My K1500 requires a specific Castrol
synthetic gear lube in the manual transmission.

K&N filters are a great way to ruin your engine as they pass a lot more
dirt than do conventional paper filters. Sure, you get a little more
performance, but you give up engine life. If you are a racer, this is a
worthwhile trade. It is a fool's choice for a street vehicle.
Click to expand...

Let's see, so far we've discovered that he believes in the Bilstein
machine and K&N filters. Wanna bet whether he has one of those
"Turbonators" in his intake and Slick 50 or Duralube in his crankcase?
Perhaps he believes in E3 spark plugs, too?

Yeah, there's one born every minute.
 
Let's see, so far we've discovered that he believes in the Bilstein
machine and K&N filters. Wanna bet whether he has one of those
"Turbonators" in his intake and Slick 50 or Duralube in his crankcase?
Perhaps he believes in E3 spark plugs, too?
Click to expand...

I've seen some comment here about K&N, and in fact I've watched these
comments since they began here, but I've never seen anything that documents
K&N problems. I don't use K&N, but they are one of the better reputed
aftermarket items outside of this forum. I'm curious how K&N has achieved
such a notable reputation as to now be deemed to ruin engines.

I'm aware of one (reported) case where K&N caused a problem with a MAF
sensor, but to my understanding (admittedly not well researched), this is
either not the norm or it has been resolved by the manner in which the
filters are oiled. There are a ton of these filters out there and if MAF
sensor problems were such a real threat, one would expect to see a lot of
press about it - but one does not.

I've never seen any documentation of engines being ruined by K&N filters
either. Is this an urban legend that has developed in this group or does
someone actually have some empirical evidence of K&N problems?
 
Brian said:
It appears that his religious fervor extends to the Bilstein machine.
Remember, in his world science and facts don't matter, all that counts
is faith and belief. ;-)
Click to expand...

As both a Christian and an engineer, I think there is a place for both.

Matt
 
Mike said:
I've seen some comment here about K&N, and in fact I've watched these
comments since they began here, but I've never seen anything that documents
K&N problems. I don't use K&N, but they are one of the better reputed
aftermarket items outside of this forum. I'm curious how K&N has achieved
such a notable reputation as to now be deemed to ruin engines.

I'm aware of one (reported) case where K&N caused a problem with a MAF
sensor, but to my understanding (admittedly not well researched), this is
either not the norm or it has been resolved by the manner in which the
filters are oiled. There are a ton of these filters out there and if MAF
sensor problems were such a real threat, one would expect to see a lot of
press about it - but one does not.

I've never seen any documentation of engines being ruined by K&N filters
either. Is this an urban legend that has developed in this group or does
someone actually have some empirical evidence of K&N problems?
Click to expand...

You haven't looked very hard. This was from the very first page of a
Google search using "K&N filter efficiency test" as search words.

http://home.usadatanet.net/~jbplock/ISO5011/SPICER.htm



Notice that the K&N supplied data provides no comparitive data. This is
typical of a product that doesn't compare well to its peers. They show
absolute numerical values and argue that they are good enough. Kind of
like buying a cheap Chinese TV vs. a Sony. Sure, you will still see a
picture, but never put a Sony beside it or you'll kick yourself.

http://www.knfilters.com/images/factstab2.gif


I'm not at all saying that using a K&N is instant death for an engine.
If you never drive on dirt roads or dusty areas, you may never see a
difference. Then again, the difference in airflow is so small that you
won't see a difference in performance that is measurable either. And
the trade is that you now have to at least annually pull the filter,
wash out the old oil and re-oil it. My paper filters last 50-100,000
miles (only replaced the filter twice on my minivan that went 178,000
miles) and I have a dirt driveway nearly 3/8 mile long and drive on dirt
roads fairly often. Modern paper filters with modern vehicles that have
the air intake being the grill, rather than in the engine compartment,
simply last a long time.

If you are racing where you are running at full throttle much of the
time, then the difference in airflow may matter and if you suck in more
dust and shorten your engine life, you don't care. You will likely wear
the engine out from abuse before you see the affect of the less
efficient filter. However, if you are like me and plan to keep a
vehicle at least 200,000 miles and longer if possible, then I think this
is more of a concern. It's your money, but for me I see no reason to
pay premium dollars for a filter that requires maintenance, is messy,
passes more dirt and provides a performance advantage that isn't
measurable in the type of driving I do (I rarely run full throttle or
even close).


Matt
 
'I hope this isn't an attempt to prove me wrong, Dave. While I support
Christian morals, I also support tolerance of others up to the point
where they begin to tread on my individual rights.'

REPLY: H.T. , Yes...I can agree with this too. However, I support
taking a stand against the very things which are sending this country
down the moral sewer also ; I think its encumbant upon all of us who
know right from wrong and who care about this Country to do so. I trust
you feel the same way as its ok to be intolerant toward things which
ruin an entire nation. Regards.
Click to expand...

Dave, I gotta tell you there's almost nothing I dislike more than Christian
proselytizing. One thing I dislike more would be Atheistic proselytizing.

Let's talk Hyundai's friend! :)
 
With no oiling issues, it'd be far better to try to gradually dissolve the sludge.
Click to expand...


All one has to do is tear down an older engine that has been well-maintained
and have a look. It's amazing how clean everything is... including the oil
pan. Only in cases of abuse or overheating will you normally find anything
that flushing would help.
 
If I (or someone else) has not had FIRST HAND EXPERIENCE
with something/someone..
Click to expand...

OK Dave, I have had first-hand experience. I have torn down many, many
engines.

It's amazing how clean an old but well-maintained engine is. Only in cases
of abuse or overheating will you normally find anything that flushing would
help. Based on my experience, I don't think flushing has any value in a
normal maintenance regime.
 
Brian Nystrom wrote:

Let's see, so far we've discovered that he believes in the Bilstein
machine and K&N filters. Wanna bet whether he has one of those
"Turbonators" in his intake and Slick 50 or Duralube in his crankcase?
Perhaps he believes in E3 spark plugs, too?

Yeah, there's one born every minute.
Click to expand...

And perhaps uses a water injection (Adds 80 HP INSTANTLY!) add-on?

Water injection systems are predominantly useful in forced induction
(turbocharged or supercharged), internal combustion engines. Only in
extreme cases such as very high compression ratios, very low octane
fuel or too much ignition advance can it benefit a normally aspirated
engine.

<<<Note that for water injection to provide useful power gains, the
engine management and fuel systems must be able to monitor the knock
and adjust both stoichiometry and ignition to obtain significant
benefits. Aviation engines are designed to accommodate water injection,
most automobile engines are not. Returns on investment are usually
harder to achieve on engines that do not normal extend their
performance envelope into those regions. >>>
 
While I agree there's a chance of engine damage, that's very small. I
don't see the point in doing the flush in the case where there is no
actual oiling problem to begin with, but if you've already got a clogged
or partially clogged passage, you're far more likely to do damage by
driving than by flushing. And remember, this would be for people facing
costly repairs in the first place. If it's inexpensive to clean by hand
whatever's clogged, that's a far better alternativbe.
 
Mike said:
I've seen some comment here about K&N, and in fact I've watched these
comments since they began here, but I've never seen anything that documents
K&N problems. I don't use K&N, but they are one of the better reputed
aftermarket items outside of this forum. I'm curious how K&N has achieved
such a notable reputation as to now be deemed to ruin engines.
Click to expand...

The K&N packaging explains, quite in simple english, that the unit
passes 50% more dirt than the average paper/fiber filter. This has been
well covered in alt.autos.dodge.trucks over the last few years.

The story goes something like this: Paper filters consistantly clean
98% of the average crap out of the average "outdoor" air, K&N's pass
97%. This does equate to a 50% increase in dirt flow.
I'm aware of one (reported) case where K&N caused a problem with a MAF
sensor, but to my understanding (admittedly not well researched), this is
either not the norm or it has been resolved by the manner in which the
filters are oiled. There are a ton of these filters out there and if MAF
sensor problems were such a real threat, one would expect to see a lot of
press about it - but one does not.
Click to expand...

The bigger issue is the fact that K&N filters don't filter well until
they're actually dirty. The more dirt, the better it filters. Freshly
cleaned its no better than an oily cotton sock.
I've never seen any documentation of engines being ruined by K&N filters
either. Is this an urban legend that has developed in this group or does
someone actually have some empirical evidence of K&N problems?
Click to expand...

"Ruined"... Nope, I doubt anyone's actually had their engine "ingest" a
K&N filter or some equivalent action that you could actually call
"ruining". Premature failure due to increased wear due to unusually
high foreign matter in the intake is more like it.

K&N's do make sense in many situations. The biggest advantage of the
K&N is it takes a lot more foreign matter to "clog". If you're
operating tractors/trucks/dirtbikes/jeeps/4-wheelers/etc in conditions
where paper filters start restricting airflow nearly instantly, the K&N
filter is your best answer.

JS
 
JS said:
The more dirt, the better it filters.
Click to expand...

That's true of any type of filter.
K&N's do make sense in many situations. The biggest advantage of the
K&N is it takes a lot more foreign matter to "clog". If you're
operating tractors/trucks/dirtbikes/jeeps/4-wheelers/etc in conditions
where paper filters start restricting airflow nearly instantly, the K&N
filter is your best answer.
Click to expand...

Actually, your best answer is a large, high-flowing pre-filter to catch
the bulk of the crud before it gets to the finer, standard filter.
That's pretty much "filtration 101". It can be difficult to do in the
confines of an engine bay, however.
 
Back
Top