Whether your "I'd say" guess is right or wrong, you're correct that FAA aproval isn't given away. That's the answer to a different question, though, and FAA approvals are still not relevant to cars.

Don't take this personally, by the way; I'm not tryna slam you in particular. The oil selection of top circle-track racers and the spark plug recommendations for Briggs and Stratton lawnmower engines and NASCAR's fuel approvals and IMO alternator type-approvals are equally irrelevant to anything I do, drive, or work on, for the same reason. Nevertheless, "AS USED BY TOP NASCAR RACERS!!!!" and "MEETS NASCAR SPECIFICATIONS!!!!" and "IMO-APPROVED!!!!" are commonly used as promotional babble in marketing stuff to people itchin' to spend money.

Most of us don't have the time, equipment, and training to be able to do a really scientific, meaningful test of something like an air filter. And it's not practical for most of us to dig up a library full of primary-source data and plow through it to get to the core of the matter. So sooner or later we have to pick out whatever good quality, relevant, independent data we can easily get our hands on and use it together with other relevant clues to make a decision about what's what.

Another relevant clue in this case: driven by market forces and strict fuel economy and CO2 emissions regulations throughout the developed world, the world's automakers spend enormous R&D money to gain tiny reductions in fuel consumption. You read about it all the time: cars coming with 5, then 6, then 7, then 8, then 9-speed automatic transmissions, cars coming with increasingly sophisticated variable valve timing and other high technology, cars coming with engine stop/start systems that shut off the engine (while keeping the A/C going strong) while you wait at a red light, then instantly kick the engine back on as soon as you lift your foot off the brake…and all of these complicated, costly equipment upgrades for single-digit percentage improvements in fuel economy.

At the aftermarket "performance part" level, a K&N air filter costs about $50. At vehicle-production quantities, sold to automakers, that same K&N filter would cost about $5. If an automaker could gain even the smallest measurable improvement in engine efficiency by using a K&N filter, they'd do it in a heartbeat. And yet, vehicles don't come with K&N air filters as original equipment.

(And if you don't like the market-forces analysis, here's a plain ol' engineering angle on it: the air filter is not the bottleneck in the flow through the intake tract; that honour belongs to…the throttle plate.)

_________________
一期一会
Too many people who were born on third base actually believe they've hit a triple.

Dan,if it floats ya boat then happy sailing...

I second that no brainer by a manufacture that looks for the shortest routing of such an insignificant item as vacuum line to save pennies on the bottom line. That said, these same perceived blind to after market performance do-dads have to warrantee their very complicated product once purchased can be used in unconceivable manners for 50,000 to 100,000 miles up to ten years. There is no other complicated manufactured product on the planet with such warrantee exposure that comes to mind.

I'm on the side of automotive/mechanical engineers that design this stuff to last, and back up their design work.

It is amusing how K&N and others back up their product with million mile warrantee on an oily screen, a safe bet on a low cost widget, but not backing up its ability to protect inner workings of said vehicle installed on.

Look here for K&N limited warrantee, the way I read, it basically states; if you use it while driving on clean dust free roads it will filter that air nicely, but not in any other environments more hostile. Oddly most of the users of these devices are probably of the second part.

Just my 2 cents.

So now I think I'll drop some coin and pick up a few of these Tornado maintenance free performance enhancers for the fleet I saw on You Tube so it must be true and leave the OEM filters in place. ;~)




See below for fine print disclosures:




For those in need of a truth detector, the above final paragraph is indeed sarcasm, satire, or a wink wink, sort of statement, and in no way would I spend a dime on any such snake oil junk.

_________________
67' Dart GT Convertible; the old Chrysler Corp.
82' LeBaron Convertible; the new Chrysler Corp
07' 300 C AWD; Now by Fiat, the old new Chrysler LLC