Air filter - OEM?

Looking at the service history on my ER6F I can't see any mention of an air filter replacement happening, it was due at 7500 miles and now I'm just over 11k.

I figured it's not a massively expensive part to replace for the hell of it, but how would I know it's due? Is it worth cleaning first?

And a genuine OEM part from the dealer is about £35, or I can get a hiflofiltro filter for about £20 - if I buy a replacement is it worth getting the hiflo?

Ta

Just buy a hiflo and fit it. Injection system should cope and then make a note of the date on the new filter. I change mine once a year.

As above , Hi Flo is an established make of good quality.

Cheers both, ordered one now for the fun of taking off the fuel tank for the first time (already watched a couple of youtube vids and doesn't look ridiculously hard)

Cheers both, ordered one now for the fun of taking off the fuel tank for the first time (already watched a couple of youtube vids and doesn't look ridiculously hard)

Ah, how often have I said that in blissful optimism that the manufacturer would have given some consideration to anyone not blessed with as many arms as an octopus.

Cheers both, ordered one now for the fun of taking off the fuel tank for the first time (already watched a couple of youtube vids and doesn't look ridiculously hard)

 

Ah, how often have I said that in blissful optimism that the manufacturer would have given some consideration to anyone not blessed with as many arms as an octopus.

That said , I could change an ER5 Air Filter in a minute . Thanks Kawasaki

If you are looking for a bit of an upgrade in filter you could go for Pipercross or K&N which are re-usable.

That was one of the things, I had no idea what benefit (if any) a posh filter would provide. K&N didn't seem to do one for my model/year anyway but I see Pipercross do.

https://www.wemoto.com/bikes/kawasaki/er-6_f_caf/10/picture/air_filter_simota_-_performance_and_washable

They do a Simota, my mechanic swears they're better than K&N.

Benefits include alleged performance increase, and the main benefit is its reusable so you just clean it every 12 months.

If you are looking for a bit of an upgrade in filter you could go for Pipercross or K&N which are re-usable.

Read post four.He's already ordered one .

If you are looking for a bit of an upgrade in filter you could go for Pipercross or K&N which are re-usable.

 

Read post four.He's already ordered one .

He can hold onto this information for future reference.

If you are looking for a bit of an upgrade in filter you could go for Pipercross or K&N which are re-usable.

 

Read post four.He's already ordered one .

Shipped about ten minutes ago

Would be genuinely interested in proof of actual benefits from a higher end filter, not just someone thinks it is better (potential placebo effect). The only one I would be able to vouch for right now is after a few years if you still have the bike it should have paid for itself, being reusable

If you are looking for a bit of an upgrade in filter you could go for Pipercross or K&N which are re-usable.

 

Read post four.He's already ordered one .

 

Shipped about ten minutes ago

Would be genuinely interested in proof of actual benefits from a higher end filter, not just someone thinks it is better (potential placebo effect). The only one I would be able to vouch for right now is after a few years if you still have the bike it should have paid for itself, being reusable

Or you whack it on a dyno and see if it does increase the power, which I'm sure a load of people will do

I'm pretty sure I don't have one of those in my shed, but I'll have a look

Ahem......question. If "performance" air filters let more air through, do they also pass more dust/dirt? Just sayin'.

Ahem......question. If "performance" air filters let more air through, do they also pass more dust/dirt? Just sayin'.

No

Ahem......question. If "performance" air filters let more air through, do they also pass more dust/dirt? Just sayin'.

 

No

Why not? There are only 2 ways that a filter can increase the airflow through an engine: reduce the filtering ability or increase the size of the filter. As "drop-in" filters are the same size as OEM, then that only leaves reduced filtering ability. And if these things are so much better than OEM, why don't the bike manufacturers use them in the first place?

Ahem......question. If "performance" air filters let more air through, do they also pass more dust/dirt? Just sayin'.

 

No

 

Why not? There are only 2 ways that a filter can increase the airflow through an engine: reduce the filtering ability or increase the size of the filter. As "drop-in" filters are the same size as OEM, then that only leaves reduced filtering ability. And if these things are so much better than OEM, why don't the bike manufacturers use them in the first place?

These have taken many years or research and they are proven to be better filters while flowing more air

Why don't bike manufacturers use them? Probably cost

No

 

Why not? There are only 2 ways that a filter can increase the airflow through an engine: reduce the filtering ability or increase the size of the filter. As "drop-in" filters are the same size as OEM, then that only leaves reduced filtering ability. And if these things are so much better than OEM, why don't the bike manufacturers use them in the first place?

 

These have taken many years or research and they are proven to be better filters while flowing more air

Why don't bike manufacturers use them? Probably cost

On the contrary, there has been NO research that has proven them to be "better"......while there has been lots that has proven that these things inevitably increase engine wear. Bike manufacturers don't use them because they don't work.

And if you don't believe me just Google ISO 5011.

https://www.knfilters.com/mobile/efficiency_testing.htm

The ISO 5011 protocol allows for flexibility in test design and choice in the variables selected for the test. This means that you can change the grade of test dust, the airflow rate, the beginning and end points of the test, and other factors while still being in conformity with the protocol. For example, the filter can be tested in a special “test housing” or in the factory air box. As you can see, the ISO 5011 test protocol it is not an absolute test or standard; it is meant to help engineers design air filters by holding conditions constant while one variable is changed to measure the change impact

So a flawed test then?

Why not? There are only 2 ways that a filter can increase the airflow through an engine: reduce the filtering ability or increase the size of the filter. As "drop-in" filters are the same size as OEM, then that only leaves reduced filtering ability. And if these things are so much better than OEM, why don't the bike manufacturers use them in the first place?

 

These have taken many years or research and they are proven to be better filters while flowing more air

Why don't bike manufacturers use them? Probably cost

On the contrary, there has been NO research that has proven them to be "better"......while there has been lots that has proven that these things inevitably increase engine wear. Bike manufacturers don't use them because they don't work.

There has been lots of research done on K&N filters ......by K&N

No need to waste your money on fancy filters and cleaning kits with "Special" oil . Just get the stickers instead , cheap as chips , literally.

https://www.knfilters.com/mobile/efficiency_testing.htm

 

The ISO 5011 protocol allows for flexibility in test design and choice in the variables selected for the test. This means that you can change the grade of test dust, the airflow rate, the beginning and end points of the test, and other factors while still being in conformity with the protocol. For example, the filter can be tested in a special “test housing” or in the factory air box. As you can see, the ISO 5011 test protocol it is not an absolute test or standard; it is meant to help engineers design air filters by holding conditions constant while one variable is changed to measure the change impact

 

So a flawed test then?

Why?

K&N are really good at asking questions......and not answering them. The issue is that if a range of filters are tested using the SAME test criteria, the "performance" filters inevitably come off worst. The test is not "flawed" at all. ISO is an internationally recognised organisation.