E90Post
 


ECS BMW
 
BMW 3-Series (E90 E92) Forum > E90 / E92 / E93 3-series Powertrain and Drivetrain Discussions > N54 Turbo Engine / Drivetrain / Exhaust Modifications - 335i > BMC air filter



Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      12-21-2007, 10:20 AM   #67
T Bone
Brigadier General
 
T Bone's Avatar
 
Drives: 2008 335xi Coupe
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The land where we kill baby seals

Posts: 4,021
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Driver72 View Post
And why wouldn't they?

Just out of curiousity, for those who think the BMC is worth paying the $30-40 more than the K&N, what exactly do you guys think makes the BMC better?
Does it not use the same cotton gauze weave that the K&N invented in 1969?
Does it not use an oil to catch and filter particulars again, copying the K&N?

There is a clear difference in type of filter between the ITG and K&N but please explain to me how you guys feel the BMC is superior to the K&N and worth spending 60% more for it?

K&N started making these filters for offroad motorcycles, and even that BMC copied.
BMC started 4 years later, also for motorcycles.

K&N has been making these performance filters for cars shortly after they design these cotton gauze filters back in 1969. (I remember using them back in the mid-late 80's when I started driving)
BMC just started making there copy for cars in 1991.

Again, if the BMC is not just a copy of the K&N, somebody please explain to me how you think the BMC is better and can do a better job, considering they just used the knowledge and technology the K&N designed?

BMC filters actually fit. I can use a specific example where they killed the K&N. In the BMW M5 / M6 application. The K&N filter didn't fit and the surface area was smaller than stock. K&N didn't measure properly. The BMC fit like a glove. Everybody who has a BMC noted improved throttle response including me. Everybody with the K&N reported loss power and running hotter.

See for yourself.... Remember this is just one example....I am sure there are others.

Also the K&N Typhoon CAI for the M5 / M6 threw codes and reduced power..... Sorry K&N, this ain't a Ford Truck....you will have to do some engineering to improve on the work of BMW's engineers.

K&N (compare against the BMC's surface area)






BMC vs. Stock
__________________
"Aerodynamics are for people who cannot build engines"......Enzo Ferrari
T Bone is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      12-21-2007, 10:21 AM   #68
Driver72
Brigadier General
 
Drives: 335i - to new owners now.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: California

Posts: 4,485
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by HyperM3 View Post

6 to one, half a dozen to another. I had the ITG filter before I got the BMC filter.
Yup, when it's comparing the K&N to the BMC. You just pay quite a bit more for the BMC, which makes no sense really.

But the ITG, as you know, is a completely different, so it's not a 6 and 1/2 comparo.
And I know why you left the ITG (or have my suspicions) based on what I've heard from others who left the ITG fliter behind.
Driver72 is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      12-21-2007, 10:33 AM   #69
Orb
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Drives: 335
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canada

Posts: 1,734
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Driver72 View Post
And why wouldn't they?

Just out of curiousity, for those who think the BMC is worth paying the $30-40 more than the K&N, what exactly do you guys think makes the BMC better?
Does it not use the same cotton gauze weave that the K&N invented in 1969?
Does it not use an oil to catch and filter particulars again, copying the K&N?

There is a clear difference in type of filter between the ITG and K&N but please explain to me how you guys feel the BMC is superior to the K&N and worth spending 60% more for it?

K&N started making these filters for offroad motorcycles, and even that BMC copied.
BMC started 4 years later, also for motorcycles.

K&N has been making these performance filters for cars shortly after they design these cotton gauze filters back in 1969. (I remember using them back in the mid-late 80's when I started driving)
BMC just started making there copy for cars in 1991.

Again, if the BMC is not just a copy of the K&N, somebody please explain to me how you think the BMC is better and can do a better job, considering they just used the knowledge and technology the K&N designed?
Good observation. I was thinking this myself and guess who does have the expired patent. What it does tell us that BNC filters may be slightly less restrictive at the cost of far less filtration. I couldnít even find any data on this which leads me to believe that donít want you to know. Not worth 2 whp for long term engine damage this will cause.

I like to go with Helena filter when they come out but K&N this week for me as your test showed it was worth the $50 investment.

I am not sure why there is a mob mentality to jump the BNC band wagon.

Orb
Orb is offline   No_Country
0
Reply With Quote
      12-21-2007, 10:34 AM   #70
Driver72
Brigadier General
 
Drives: 335i - to new owners now.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: California

Posts: 4,485
iTrader: (0)

[quote=T Bone;1854188]BMC filters actually fit. I can use a specific example where they killed the K&N. In the BMW M5 / M6 application. The K&N filter didn't fit and the surface area was smaller than stock. K&N didn't measure properly. The BMC fit like a glove. Everybody who has a BMC noted improved throttle response including me. Everybody with the K&N reported loss power and running hotter.

See for yourself.... Remember this is just one example....I am sure there are others.

Also the K&N Typhoon CAI for the M5 / M6 threw codes and reduced power..... Sorry K&N, this ain't a Ford Truck....you will have to do some engineering to improve on the work of BMW's engineers.

K&N (compare against the BMC's surface area)


That may be the case with the M5/M6 fitment.
I've had probably 15-18 different cars I've used the K&N filter on, never a fitment issue.
And you could probably find tens of millions of people who've used K&N filters without any fitment issues either.

But look at the actual filter itself. BMC even copied the pinkish-red color of the K&N filter.
I agree though based on your picture there, the BMC clearly has more filter air space than the K&N for the M5/M6. But my guess is K&N, as is usually the case, was the first to release an aftermarket filter for the M5/M6 and probably didn't (as you say) measure accurately or rushed it out to market. I would think they've changed that and reengineered it by now.

But again, the point wasn't a measurement fitment issue.
It's the point that when I've said the BMC is a K&N copy, people have said, "ahh he doesn't know what he's talking about" or "surprising that a car enthusiast doesn't know any better".
The fact of the matter is, the BMC filter is engineered and made as a direct take-off of the original K&N design. With the exception of the anomoly from you M5/M6 fitment issue, in 99.9% of cars the BMC won't flow and better/differently, make any more power or so forth than the K&N...because it's filter is the SAME thing. You just pay more for it.

OK, that's enough for me.
I don't know why really I care.
If people want to pay 60% more for the same thing, by all means, go for it.
It's just the untruths about the BMC (making more power on the dyno, that it's really different than the K&N, etc etc) that I was trying to clear up.

Later
Driver72 is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      12-21-2007, 10:52 AM   #71
T Bone
Brigadier General
 
T Bone's Avatar
 
Drives: 2008 335xi Coupe
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The land where we kill baby seals

Posts: 4,021
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Driver72 View Post
That may be the case with the M5/M6 fitment.
I've had probably 15-18 different cars I've used the K&N filter on, never a fitment issue.
And you could probably find tens of millions of people who've used K&N filters without any fitment issues either.

But look at the actual filter itself. BMC even copied the pinkish-red color of the K&N filter.
I agree though based on your picture there, the BMC clearly has more filter air space than the K&N for the M5/M6. But my guess is K&N, as is usually the case, was the first to release an aftermarket filter for the M5/M6 and probably didn't (as you say) measure accurately or rushed it out to market. I would think they've changed that and reengineered it by now.

But again, the point wasn't a measurement fitment issue.
It's the point that when I've said the BMC is a K&N copy, people have said, "ahh he doesn't know what he's talking about" or "surprising that a car enthusiast doesn't know any better".
The fact of the matter is, the BMC filter is engineered and made as a direct take-off of the original K&N design. With the exception of the anomoly from you M5/M6 fitment issue, in 99.9% of cars the BMC won't flow and better/differently, make any more power or so forth than the K&N...because it's filter is the SAME thing. You just pay more for it.

OK, that's enough for me.
I don't know why really I care.
If people want to pay 60% more for the same thing, by all means, go for it.
It's just the untruths about the BMC (making more power on the dyno, that it's really different than the K&N, etc etc) that I was trying to clear up.

Later

Don't go away so quickly, this is a good discussion topic. The claim for fame for BMCs is the way the mould the plastic. Very few seams and great integration with the element.

I am not sure if it is constructive to discuss whose idea it was to use oiled cotton first. It is about who has a better filter for your application.

I have had K&Ns in all of my past cars going back to the 1990's but things have evolved and competition is better. You can go search the M5board and K&N completely screwed up on the drop in filters and the CAI kit.

At the end of the day the difference is around the price of a tank of gas and I have not heard one bad thing ever about the BMCs.....
__________________
"Aerodynamics are for people who cannot build engines"......Enzo Ferrari
T Bone is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      12-21-2007, 04:43 PM   #72
Jonmartin
Banned
 
Jonmartin's Avatar
 
Drives: E90 M3
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Los Angles (818)

Posts: 2,103
iTrader: (1)

Send a message via AIM to Jonmartin
Quote:
Originally Posted by T Bone View Post
Don't go away so quickly, this is a good discussion topic. The claim for fame for BMCs is the way the mould the plastic. Very few seams and great integration with the element.

I am not sure if it is constructive to discuss whose idea it was to use oiled cotton first. It is about who has a better filter for your application.

I have had K&Ns in all of my past cars going back to the 1990's but things have evolved and competition is better. You can go search the M5board and K&N completely screwed up on the drop in filters and the CAI kit.

At the end of the day the difference is around the price of a tank of gas and I have not heard one bad thing ever about the BMCs.....
Exactly,+1 Thank you for pointing out the comparo pics in post 67.In my own experience the BMC is better period and is worth whatever the differance in price is. I can afford it I want it it's built far better.You get what you pay for it's that simple if you can't understand that concept then buy a pep boys filter because it "looks" the same. Kind of like how the the 335 "Looks" just like the M3
Jonmartin is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      12-21-2007, 05:13 PM   #73
Driver72
Brigadier General
 
Drives: 335i - to new owners now.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: California

Posts: 4,485
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jonmartin View Post
Exactly,+1 Thank you for pointing out the comparo pics in post 67.In my own experience the BMC is better period and is worth whatever the differance in price is. I can afford it I want it it's built far better.You get what you pay for it's that simple if you can't understand that concept then buy a pep boys filter because it "looks" the same. Kind of like how the the 335 "Looks" just like the M3
Your comparison/analogy is way off there Jon, not even similiar.
The 335i and M3 ARE completely different from the engine, suspension, brakes, etc, etc, etc. MANY MANY differences.

On the otherhand the BMC is a cotton gauzed weave filter that is oiled, a technology and design they got and copied from K&N, 4 years after K&N developed and was selling the technology, out came BMC.
In that sense, they ARE the same.
BMC obviously had to make some changes otherwise they'd be sued and those changes are the rubber seals around the cotton filter. I can't believe BMC even copied the color of the filter.
BMC didn't start making these filters for cars until 1991 either, after K&N's patent for these car filters was expired and 20+ years after K&N have been making them for cars already.
I don't know why people can't see the truth in that, and have delusions of grandeur from spending more for the same filtering technology.

I only responded to this thread again because T-Bone didn't want me to go so soon. But the reality is, if people want to believe that the BMC is better because they paid more for it, so be it. If they don't want to believe that BMC started making the same design/technology filters as K&N for cars many years after K&N had been because K&N's patent expired, so be it.

But K&N spend many, many years engineering and designing these filters to get the most air flow through without sacrificing filtration quality.
Since BMC is using the EXACT same technology and design, if there's flows a bit more air, it's at the expense of filtration quality.
Therefore, as stated, pretty sure BMC's flows just the same as K&N's and with the same filtration qualities.

No reason to debate it further.
Over and out on this one.


Jon, you available for a dyno in Dec. 27th?
You can meet up with me and a few others.
We'll test the two filters and I'll bet you lunch there is no real difference in power and flow.
PM me and let me know.
Driver72 is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      12-21-2007, 05:19 PM   #74
Jonmartin
Banned
 
Jonmartin's Avatar
 
Drives: E90 M3
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Los Angles (818)

Posts: 2,103
iTrader: (1)

Send a message via AIM to Jonmartin
Quote:
Originally Posted by Driver72 View Post
Your comparison/analogy is way off there Jon, not even similiar.
The 335i and M3 ARE completely different from the engine, suspension, brakes, etc, etc, etc. MANY MANY differences.

On the otherhand the BMC is a cotton gauzed weave filter that is oiled, a technology and design they got and copied from K&N, 4 years after K&N developed and was selling the technology, out came BMC.
In that sense, they ARE the same.
BMC obviously had to make some changes otherwise they'd be sued and those changes are the rubber seals around the cotton filter. I can't believe BMC even copied the color of the filter.
BMC didn't start making these filters for cars until 1991 either, after K&N's patent for these car filters was expired and 20+ years after K&N have been making them for cars already.
I don't know why people can't see the truth in that, and have delusions of grandeur from spending more for the same filtering technology.

I only responded to this thread again because T-Bone didn't want me to go so soon. But the reality is, if people want to believe that the BMC is better because they paid more for it, so be it. If they don't want to believe that BMC started making the same design/technology filters as K&N for cars many years after K&N had been because K&N's patent expired, so be it.

But K&N spend many, many years engineering and designing these filters to get the most air flow through without sacrificing filtration quality.
Since BMC is using the EXACT same technology and design, if there's flows a bit more air, it's at the expense of filtration quality.
Therefore, as stated, pretty sure BMC's flows just the same as K&N's and with the same filtration qualities.

No reason to debate it further.
Over and out on this one.


Jon, you available for a dyno in Dec. 27th?
You can meet up with me and a few others.
We'll test the two filters and I'll bet you lunch there is no real difference in power and flow.
PM me and let me know.
I cannot dyno that day My service Appointment was moved to that date.But any other day will do.
Jonmartin is offline   United_States
0
Reply With Quote
      12-21-2007, 05:22 PM   #75
Driver72
Brigadier General
 
Drives: 335i - to new owners now.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: California

Posts: 4,485
iTrader: (0)

Bummer, I'll see if I can find another BMC filter to test than.

Cheers
Driver72 is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      12-22-2007, 12:24 AM   #76
O-cha
Brigadier General
 
O-cha's Avatar
 
Drives: Mcoupe
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: In front of you

Posts: 4,729
iTrader: (2)

Send a message via AIM to O-cha
Hey your stock filter looks different then mine, mine does not have the filter on that smaller section.
__________________
O-cha is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      12-22-2007, 05:03 AM   #77
e.n335
Moderator
 
e.n335's Avatar
 
Drives: e93 ///M3 DCT, 07/2009
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Switzerland, ZH

Posts: 4,480
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by O-cha View Post
Hey your stock filter looks different then mine, mine does not have the filter on that smaller section.
No 335i filter on the pictures.
__________________
Not more than 500 chp for my daily driver. Well, ... .
e.n335 is offline   Austria
0
Reply With Quote
      12-22-2007, 04:40 PM   #78
pikkashoe
Major
 
Drives: 2007 BMW 335 Coupe
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Miami, FL

Posts: 1,239
iTrader: (1)

Driver, what are your thoughts about the difference between the BMC Filter and the ITG Filter? Is it safe to say that there also would be no considerable benefit to changing.
__________________
2007 E92 AW/Coral Red/Alumin, 6 speed manual, ZSP, PROCEDE V3.1, Factory Short-Throw Knob, Bms Filter. 12/7/07 - 12.84 @ 109.36
pikkashoe is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      12-22-2007, 07:41 PM   #79
sflgator
Major General
 
sflgator's Avatar
 
Drives: '09 MB C63 AMG & '08 MB GL450
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: U.S.

Posts: 5,389
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by pikkashoe View Post
Driver, what are your thoughts about the difference between the BMC Filter and the ITG Filter? Is it safe to say that there also would be no considerable benefit to changing.
Other ppl who have had both have said that they like the BMC Filter better. I will let you know as well in Jan. when I get mine.
__________________

|2009 RENNtech MB C63 AMG | Black/Black Leather/Black Maple | Premium II | MultiMedia | iPod |
| TeleAid | Charcoal Filter Delete | BMC High-Flow Air Filters | High-Flow Secondary Cats | Clear Side Markers |
sflgator is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      12-22-2007, 08:36 PM   #80
Driver72
Brigadier General
 
Drives: 335i - to new owners now.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: California

Posts: 4,485
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by pikkashoe View Post
Driver, what are your thoughts about the difference between the BMC Filter and the ITG Filter? Is it safe to say that there also would be no considerable benefit to changing.
The ITG is completely different than the K&N or BMC.

I haven't used the ITG, but from what I hear, again, it probably offers similiar gains to the K&N and BMC filters.

However, I know a couple people who have had the ITG and when they saw the K&N, switched and have sold their ITG.

For $50-60 you just can't beat the performance, price, and filtration ability of the K&N.
Driver72 is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      12-22-2007, 09:49 PM   #81
Orb
Lieutenant Colonel
 
Drives: 335
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Canada

Posts: 1,734
iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Driver72 View Post
The ITG is completely different than the K&N or BMC.

I haven't used the ITG, but from what I hear, again, it probably offers similiar gains to the K&N and BMC filters.

However, I know a couple people who have had the ITG and when they saw the K&N, switched and have sold their ITG.

For $50-60 you just can't beat the performance, price, and filtration ability of the K&N.
The STREAMLINE filter is coming out soon so it should be the best of both worlds. It has comparable flow vs restriction to K&N and BMC with around 99% filtration efficiency.

The BMC will be proven that it filtration efficacy are lower than 96% so short term gain for long term engine damage. The K&N are known to be above this but would like to find out as I have one now.

Orb
Orb is offline   No_Country
0
Reply With Quote
      12-22-2007, 09:56 PM   #82
O-cha
Brigadier General
 
O-cha's Avatar
 
Drives: Mcoupe
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: In front of you

Posts: 4,729
iTrader: (2)

Send a message via AIM to O-cha
Quote:
Originally Posted by e.n335 View Post
No 335i filter on the pictures.
That could be why they look different.
__________________
O-cha is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      12-23-2007, 08:44 AM   #83
smartitalian
Sicilian Captain.
 
smartitalian's Avatar
 
Drives: 335 xi coupe
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Paradise Island

Posts: 8
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrewKo View Post
Holy shit...I didn't expect much difference with a drop in filter, but I was wrong. Car is spooling quicker and the engine feels smoother and slightly quicker. I don't know why, but this appears to be a very good improvement for $85. I have a dyno day this week so I'll update this with dyno information.
confirmed...

excellent.

__________________
Live your life to the fullest because no one else will do it for you.
smartitalian is offline   Italy
0
Reply With Quote
      12-23-2007, 10:53 AM   #84
midlife
ocasionally in crisis
 
midlife's Avatar
 
Drives: '08 335i cabrio
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: ..........

Posts: 2,359
iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Orb View Post
The STREAMLINE filter is coming out soon so it should be the best of both worlds. It has comparable flow vs restriction to K&N and BMC with around 99% filtration efficiency.

The BMC will be proven that it filtration efficacy are lower than 96% so short term gain for long term engine damage. The K&N are known to be above this but would like to find out as I have one now.

Orb
source please
__________________
If your car isn't scary - it's just not fast enough !
RPI IC / UR catless DPs / JB3 2.0 beta / UR CAI / Quaife LSD / Snow Methanol Injection / VK oil cooler upgrade / Forge DVs /
M3 rear sway / Riss catch can / Paddle shifting 6AT / M Sport steering wheel / Logic 7 / Dunlop Direzza Z1 255/235 /
midlife is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      01-31-2008, 04:51 AM   #85
Turbo-335CI
New Member
 
Drives: 2007 E92 335i
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: East Coast

Posts: 28
iTrader: (0)

Does anybody know what is the height of the BMC filter for our 335i? I can not get any data from BMC website. Is it heighter than K&N filter or not. The K&N 335i filter size is:
Height: 1.125 in (29 mm)
Outside Length: 14 in (356 mm)
Outside Width: 11.125 in (283 mm).
Can someone post a picture of both filter side by side? Thanks for any input.
Turbo-335CI is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      02-01-2008, 12:37 AM   #86
Car Enthusiast
Private
 
Drives: 2008 335i
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: TX

Posts: 83
iTrader: (2)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Driver72 View Post
Where are these dynos that you claim have shown more power gains than the K&N? I have yet to see one legit dyno of the BMC air filter compared to stock or the K&N.
You paid 60% more for basically a copy filter.

Why does F1 use BMC you ask?
Paid marketing, and/or free donations would be my guess.

BTW, there are dozens and dozens of race teams that use K&N, from Nascar to Dragsters, to Superbike, to you name it.
That's great that BMC advertises f1 uses their filters. Ever stop to think of why they ONLY advertise F1 as being the race organization that uses their air filters??
Hint: paid endorsements, free advertisement, and because every other major race organization is using the K&N as the vast majority.

There are so many more race teams that use K&N and have used K&N for decades it's not even funny.
K&N has even has sponsor race teams for their filters, and yet the competition still used the K&N's, so you know they weren't getting paid for it.
That's great that BMC has one race organization though.

I just think it's funny how some of you think the BMC is superior and how you think it's so much different when in fact it's basically a direct copy of the K&N and they use the technology K&N invented and designed, that's all.
If you've been into modifying cars for any significant amount of time you'd know that just because 2 products look the same, are designed similarly, and are based off the same concept, doesn't mean they produce the same power. Just look at intakes and exhausts....several manufacturers build them and many of them have similar designs, but they often show significantly different results on the dyno, even when tested one right after the other on the same dyno and on the same car. It's simply ignorant to go "well all cold air intakes have larger diameter piping and pull cooler air, so they're all the same thing."

Also, the fact that K&N designed filters first and that they're widely used means nothing. Ford designed cars way before Lexus...Is Ford vastly superior to Lexus now?
Car Enthusiast is offline  
0
Reply With Quote
      02-01-2008, 11:09 AM   #87
stressdoc
Moderator
 
stressdoc's Avatar
 
Drives: 335 E90 ZSP+
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: MO

Posts: 9,786
iTrader: (0)

Wonder if BMW might offer improved filters to go with their performance intake?
__________________
My not-so-recent ED: http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=31829
Quaife, BMW Perf & M3 suspension, V5, M-sport, ...
Please join BMWCCA http://bmwcca.org/index.php?pageid=c...&ref_by=300279
stressdoc is offline   Dominica
0
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:49 PM.




e90post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST