I have no direct experience of oiled filters, but have read about them fouling up MAFs on plenty of forums over recent years. I do wonder though how much of this is just internet hearsay where people have experienced problems after RE-OILING and putting too much on.
Given that pre-oiling their product increases the production cost, there must be a tangible good reason for companies like K&N to do so. From a common sense perspective I can also see why it is needed. Now I appreciate that sometimes companies get it wrong, but if MAF fouling is a proven risk, wouldn't a big company like K&N acknowledge and act on that? One would certainly hope so, but I know it's not always the case.
So trying to take a balanced view on it, I'd be weighing up the risk of increased internal wear due to lessened filtration (from removing the oil) Vs the risk of MAF damage and cost of more regularly having to swap the part. Given it may take 10s of thousands of miles for increased engine wear to take place (and how would one even determine that it was actually increased compared to if you'd had an oiled, or even OE filter over that mileage?) I would probably take the path of having the un-oiled filter.
Bookmarks