Air cleaner opinion

[3wings]

As far as this "test" goes I'd be leary. First it was performed on a filters for a diesel V8 truck engine, second, even they admit in the article "As Arlen learned in attempting his own tests, there are many variables that can adversely affect filter test results. Third, "Temperature & humidity of the test dust and air used in the test are strictly monitored and controlled" which doesn't happen in the real world. Fourth, "A small temperature change or a small change in humidity can cause the mass of a paper filter to change by several grams." In the end you can have test results tailored to whatever outcome you want if you control the input. When these filters are compared on F6B's or Goldwings, in real life situations, then maybe I'll even consider it but this particular study holds no water.

I'm sure that if we came up with the cash, we could have these tests performed on GW air filters. The guys getting these tests done were diesel guys and that may have been a good thing because diesel filters tend to be bigger and heavier which might have made their accuracy a bit easier to achieve. The author was very forward about how the tests were performed and the big variables that temp and humidity could introduce. It would be pretty impossible to do a real world test with any validity so they have to control the variables as much as they could to make their test have value.

Does anyone have any ideas to make their testing better and more applicable.

In my opinion, the big cost in air filters for us is the labor to change them. Filters are the cheapest insurance we can get for our toys. This article brings up a great point that if a supplier's filter is really better, why not pay for the independent test and use it in their advertising rather than just saying "mine is better"?
I have K&N's in three of the seven bikes in my garage. This article is making me re-think that.

Now we can spend way too much time arguing this along with oil and tires. 😁😁😁

[taxfree4]

I'm sure that if we came up with the cash, we could have these tests performed on GW air filters. The guys getting these tests done were diesel guys and that may have been a good thing because diesel filters tend to be bigger and heavier which might have made their accuracy a bit easier to achieve. The author was very forward about how the tests were performed and the big variables that temp and humidity could introduce. It would be pretty impossible to do a real world test with any validity so they have to control the variables as much as they could to make their test have value.

Does anyone have any ideas to make their testing better and more applicable.

In my opinion, the big cost in air filters for us is the labor to change them. Filters are the cheapest insurance we can get for our toys. This article brings up a great point that if a supplier's filter is really better, why not pay for the independent test and use it in their advertising rather than just saying "mine is better"?
I have K&N's in three of the seven bikes in my garage. This article is making me re-think that.

Now we can spend way too much time arguing this along with oil and tires. ������

Then unless it is in the real world, where we live and ride, I wouldn't give this a thought. Imagine telling a guy with a GM Duramax V8 Diesel that because of a controlled test on a Goldwing he spent too much money for nothing on his filter instead of an OEM. Thalidomide worked great in the lab till kids were being born without arms and legs in the real world.

[KeyWasted]

Here’s an interesting test from a neutral party;https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJ3L-E-ufYo

Looks like you need to decide between filtering and slight performance gains. :https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GS69owXpGdY&t=433s