Toyota RAV4 Forums banner

1 - 20 of 53 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
225 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Was offered a K&N air filter for the RAV for around USD70. Suppossedly washable around after every 50,000miles. They claim it should help the RAV get faster revs. Got interested with that, plus any potential fuel savings. Has anyone tried this? Or have heard of anyone who has? Any feedbacks? Is it worth it, vs just buying stock filters every service time?

Here is the site:

http://www.knfilters.com/filtercharger.htm

For Gen2 Ravs:

http://www.knfilters.com/search/product.aspx?Prod=33-2216


Appreciate any inputs. Thanks. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
265 Posts
K&N makes great fillters and are well known. $70 seems expensive. (at least in USA).
Performance & and fuel economy-wise, one "may" notice a very slight increase.
The K&N would do a better job of filtering and over the life of the vehicle, probably may be cheaper in the long-run than the OEM. Of coarse the cleaning kit must be figured in also.
 
R

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
I haven't seen any majority say it was worth it in the RAV4.

There just aren't enough hamsters under the hood.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
225 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Thanks, Snyrav4, RAV4HER. Will canvass around first, and may try it out sometime in the future.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
225 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
mensajero said:
K&N Filters are worth every penny, for sound, performance, and durability. The rest don't even come close. A very big :thumbs_up: .
Thanks for the feedback, mensajero. I'm quite encouraged to consider this during the next air filter change. Have you also seen any fuel savings / additional mpg?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
881 Posts
Autobeat said:
mensajero said:
K&N Filters are worth every penny, for sound, performance, and durability. The rest don't even come close. A very big :thumbs_up: .
Thanks for the feedback, mensajero. I'm quite encouraged to consider this during the next air filter change. Have you also seen any fuel savings / additional mpg?
Around here the factory paper filer is 1/3 the cost of a K&N, so the K&N pays for itself in about 2 years or less depending on how dust your driving environment is. Since I put an intake hose pointing the the ground to pull in more cold air I have to clean mine more frequently, I would be spending a fortune in paper filters if I was using them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,239 Posts
Autobeat said:
mensajero said:
K&N Filters are worth every penny, for sound, performance, and durability. The rest don't even come close. A very big :thumbs_up: .
Thanks for the feedback, mensajero. I'm quite encouraged to consider this during the next air filter change. Have you also seen any fuel savings / additional mpg?
Yes, in a big way. Of course this goes hand in hand with the way you drive. But since I installed the Apollo K&N filter. Fuel Economy has jumped a ton. My wife thought that the gas gauge was not working. Of course, I made a huge change in the intake system. But a full tank last me 15 days using my ride everyday in the mountains of PR. Dame, I need that Scan gauge so I can give you specific numbers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
779 Posts
If you are changing from a dirty old paper filter you will notice a big difference in everything. If you are changing from a new paper filter to a K&N flat filter you may notice a *little* more power above 4000rpm. I did.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,239 Posts
:lol: No ian g, I've have them all. Foam, paper, K&N Imitation, K&N [two types] and I've found K&N to have the more bang for the buck. Check out information below.

1. Stock OEM for about a year (no pictures)

2. K&N OEM filter [which goes into the black box] More power...after 4,000 rpm. :cry: ( it's in the garage somewhere)

3. Weapon R Foam, I had a little more power. I notice that dirt when accumulated severity cripples air intake more then others. I cleaned it and reinstalled it. I felt like the engine was being chocked to death. :?



4. I installed a cheap K&N LIKE filter. More air, but less torque. :?



5. I installed a genuine K&N funnel filter. More power, more torque, better sound but I know that the engine could do more. especially when i installed the Header and the Magnaflow Muffler. This K&N filter is for sale


6. Then I installed the Apollo K&N filter. This is the mother of all the filters. Power [o yea], Sounds [a little loud for the street, but who cares :lol:], Torque, Oh YEA! Best power and mileage [believe it or not] Of course, this depends on the way you drive. Never the less, it does give more mileage regardless.


Well, ian g there you have it, I say again, I've had them all. I can tell you that no less then three month with them on and I can tell you without a doubt. K&N filters are the State of the Art. Install one, you will know, see, and feel what I mean.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
225 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Thanks for all the inputs, tankdOg, ian g, mensajero.
ian g said:
If you are changing from a new paper filter to a K&N flat filter you may notice a *little* more power above 4000rpm. I did.
mensajero said:
2. K&N OEM filter [which goes into the black box] More power...after 4,000 rpm. :cry: ( it's in the garage somewhere)
I was just planning to use the K&N filter replacement shaped same as/interchangeable with the OEM filter, vs the full air intake mod. Does that mean, from your experiences, it only helps after 4000rpm? So if the Rav is generally driven lightly, below 4000rpm, it may not have any, or very little added power, fuel economy improvement?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,239 Posts
Autobeat said:
Thanks for all the inputs, tankdOg, ian g, mensajero.
ian g said:
If you are changing from a new paper filter to a K&N flat filter you may notice a *little* more power above 4000rpm. I did.
mensajero said:
2. K&N OEM filter [which goes into the black box] More power...after 4,000 rpm. :cry: ( it's in the garage somewhere)
I was just planning to use the K&N filter replacement shaped same as/interchangeable with the OEM filter, vs the full air intake mod. Does that mean, from your experiences, it only helps after 4000rpm? So if the RAV is generally driven lightly, below 4000rpm, it may not have any, or very little added power, fuel economy improvement?
Yep :shock: So spend money once. Not like me that I had to experiment and find out the expen$ive way.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
225 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
mensajero said:
Yep :shock: So spend money once. Not like me that I had to experiment and find out the expen$ive way.
Thanks, mensajero. At least I know now, when I do get one (the oem shaped K&N), it will be more for reusability, and a little added power/fuel economy during occasional overtaking or needed faster acceleration (above 4000rpm).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
779 Posts
In a 2001 Rav, with the more refined engine I would expect even better results with the flat K&N filter (I bet you perform much better at higher Revs than us 4.1s, so you may get gains after 5000rpm as well).

But, Mensajero say I want to install an Apollo K&N...three questions:

1) where does the air sensor go that used to be plugged into the black filter box?

2) how the heck do you remove the black OEM filter box?

3) what do you do with the other air pipe leading from the engine to the OEM air filter (one pipe goes to the throttle body, the other to the engine)?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
986 Posts
I tried the K&N filter for a good 50K+ miles and found it offered no gains in performance and fuel economy, and went back to plain old Purolator air filters. I also found that the K&N passed more dirt into the intake than the paper filter, which ended up being the deciding factor causing me to switch back to paper filters. The Purolator filters cost me $12 every 12-15K miles.

Don't get me wrong, I like K&N filters, but in the case of my Rav, I couldn't justify using them.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,239 Posts
Jeff, I don't doubt that you might have bought a K&N imitation. Even though it might have had the K&N logo. Their have been cases. I've even seen Toyota Oil Filters in the same box as the Toyota OEM filters and they are imitations. But anyway, if that happened to you. I'd go back to the company and ask for a refund.

ian g, as soon as I read your questions I went out and took some shoots of my installation...aaaggain. :) Anyway, as you can see in the first group of shoots. I always used the same funnel tubing. I got that on EBAY for a buck, shinny black chrome. But when I bought the K&N Apollo Filter. I was thinking how to install a large filter in such a small space, without the tube. Easy, I just cut the one I had. I was fortunate enough that the OEM air sensor was just under the fuse box and in front of the brake fluid container. This was just pure luck and it fitted neatly. The other rubber hose that must be connected to the funnel tube, as you can see is connected just in front of the blue rubber connector. The other pipes I just put some filters as you can see in the other pictures above this post. The second picture you can see that I have resolved the air intake tube calaps that happened last week. Now it breaths and runs well. Hope this can help.





 

·
Registered
Joined
·
986 Posts
Nope, mine was a genuine K&N filter.

I think the problem with 4.2 Ravs is that the stock intake setup is not very good, and that even if you run without a filter it would still not improve anything.
 
R

·
Guest
Joined
·
0 Posts
I tried a K&N for about 12000 miles and just went back to a regular filter. I have not noticed any real change. I think the main point is not that the stock intake is badly designed but is so well designed that there is not much improvement to be found, not without forced induction. It already has a large air box, and a cold air intake. The intake tube on my RAV is twice the size of that one on my old GM V8 Suburban; so getting air in is not a problem. Most modern engines are about as optimized as they can be for any reasonable cost these days, so small changes to the intake and exhaust system are not going to provide more than a few extra horsepower. You will get a bigger change from just driving it aggressively for a few weeks till the onboard computer compensates. I know it has on mine. I have driven other ‘Identical’ RAVs whose drivers where more conservative and noticed a huge difference in the acceleration rates. I would stick with the stock filter for the cost.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
225 Posts
Discussion Starter #20
Rienolf said:
I tried a K&N for about 12000 miles and just went back to a regular filter. I have not noticed any real change. I think the main point is not that the stock intake is badly designed but is so well designed that there is not much improvement to be found, not without forced induction. It already has a large air box, and a cold air intake.
Thanks, Rienolf. It does seem that the air intake is big enough, so even though the oem filter has more air restriction than a K&N, it seems, from your inputs and earlier inputs, to still allow enough air as generally needed by the engine. A K&N replacement filter's benefits possibly then seem to be for higher revs, plus its reusability feature.
 
1 - 20 of 53 Posts
Top