Victory Motorcycle Forum banner

1 - 12 of 12 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I was wanting to know if anyone has actually tested or dynod two different air filters, one being the new and improved high flow filter from Loydz versus the ole trusty and true K&N filter. I have a 2011 XC with a modified K&N and I being told the the Loydz will flow more, but then I asked if they have facts to back that up, as of this time no we don't. Just trying to see if it's actually worth the money from what I have now. I am sure there are others that want to know the same.

Thanks
Diggerwac
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
5,975 Posts
I was wanting to know if anyone has actually tested or dynod two different air filters, one being the new and improved high flow filter from Loydz versus the ole trusty and true K&N filter. I have a 2011 XC with a modified K&N and I being told the the Loydz will flow more, but then I asked if they have facts to back that up, as of this time no we don't. Just trying to see if it's actually worth the money from what I have now. I am sure there are others that want to know the same.

Thanks
Diggerwac
In case you do not find a hard data test between the two, one simple test would be to compare the filter surface area between these filters, and assume both materials have the same air permeability. According to Lloydz, his filter has 30% more surface area, and with the assumptions already stated, that means increased air flow.

Is it worth it? I think for those who move from a stock air filter to the Lloydz it is worth it. The filter will pay for itself over the life of the bike, by not having to replace the stock filter. However, in your case, the added benefit of the Lloydz filter might be way less than the cost of adding it, since you already have a high performance filter in place.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
It is funny you mentioned that about surface area, I was just sitting here thinking about adding that into the question, but all well, I snooze I lose. I totally agree with everthing you said.

Thanks
Diggerwac
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,084 Posts
CR,

That "and assume both materials have the same air permeability" seems like a mighty big assumption to me. Not trying to be a smarta$$, but why would you make that assumption (other than to make calculations easier, i.e., based solely on area). I seem to recall reading specs over the years in filter ads, in which manufacturers state filter-hole sizes and suchlike.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
5,975 Posts
CR,

That "and assume both materials have the same air permeability" seems like a mighty big assumption to me. Not trying to be a smarta$$, but why would you make that assumption (other than to make calculations easier, i.e., based solely on area). I seem to recall reading specs over the years in filter ads, in which manufacturers state filter-hole sizes and suchlike.
Well, I did start my post stating that if no hard data is available, then it is safe to assume they are the same. Obviously they are not same unless they both used the exact same material. The assumption is being made for the simple reason of arriving to a quick conclusion without having to run tests in a test lab. Somehow, I have a feeling their air permeability is very close, so that variable should be negligible. If you have any data on K&N and Lloydz filters air permeability, please don't be shy, share it with us. cheers
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,084 Posts
Well, I did start my post stating that if no hard data is available, then it is safe to assume they are the same. Obviously they are not same unless they both used the exact same material. The assumption is being made for the simple reason of arriving to a quick conclusion without having to run tests in a test lab. Somehow, I have a feeling their air permeability is very close, so that variable should be negligible. If you have any data on K&N and Lloydz filters air permeability, please don't be shy, share it with us. cheers
CR, nope, I don't have any data to share. I did some reading up on this a few minutes ago at K&N's site, but couldn't find any mention of, say, average hole size, that sort of thing.

K&N lists some flow percentages in these two charts:

http://www.knfilters.com/images/factstab1.gif
http://www.knfilters.com/images/factstab2.gif

I also read these K&N pages, which discuss flow rates in general, and describe some more tests:

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

That last page includes the following assertion:

Anyone can flow more air. The trick is to flow more air safely. In our opinion we hit the sweet spot – an optimal blend of high air flow, filtration efficiency, durability and dust capacity.

The Lloydz page for "XC/XR Hi-Flow Air Filter" is:

http://www.lloydz.com/store/item_view.asp?estore_itemid=1000130

That's where it states:

Lloydz' XC/XR air filter will deliver 30% larger filter area and almost 40% more airflow over Stage 1 Filter.

Now, I'm not intending to knock the Lloydz filter. I've ridden to Lloyd's shop, chatted with him, and in the Spring I'm probably going to have him re-map my XCT. I was just saying that - to me, and I'm no engineer, dyno operator, etc., and never was one - the assumption and comparison seemed a little too, um, assuming, too pat. I have no idea which is better, more economical, easier to deal with, better for engine longevity, and so forth. Or the average filtration-hole size.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
5,975 Posts
Lloydz' XC/XR air filter will deliver 30% larger filter area and almost 40% more airflow over Stage 1 Filter.
You could draw a conclusion that, if those numbers are correct, the Lloydz air filter has higher air permeability than the Stage 1 filter, because the filter area is only 30% larger, but the air flow is 40% greater, so the extra 10% ish has to come from higher filter permeability. Now, 10% is very small, and that that 10% is when compared to Stage1 air filter. Surely the K&N filter also has higher air permeability than the Stage1 filter. You can see where I'm going with this: K&N, Lloydz have to be very close in filter air permeability.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
186 Posts
I have Lloydz filter and the reason I think it works is that my AutoTune made corrections after I installed it. (it corrected for more air)
Side note: More air flow isn't always proof of being better for your bike. If your bike's needs are 500 cfm (an arbitrary number for the sake of this example) , then replacing a filter that flows 1000 cfm with one that flows more cfm won't yield a gain. I don't believe this example applies to Lloydz filter.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
13,177 Posts
I was on K&N web site and see no listing for your bike.
If you bought on of the net or ebay its a copy of a K&n
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
774 Posts
This permeabilty term also means more dirt permeates. More air more dirt. Probably why so many throttle body cleaning posts. Want the hole size? Just hold a new K&N up to the sun light and look through it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
634 Posts
On my particular bike, the difference with the Lloydz filter vs Victory filter was about 5hp and 3 lbs ft torque. It was noticeable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
76 Posts
For the forum members using the modified K&N air filter, how are you securing the filter? Is there a bracket that you've found?
 
1 - 12 of 12 Posts
Top