Green Filter vs AFE vs K&N. - Page 2

Mar 6, 2008 | 02:09 PM

#26

SoCalCLK

MBWorld Fanatic!

Joined: Mar 2003

Posts: 2,974

Likes: 5

From: Southern California

2017 W205 C43 AMG

Quote:

Originally Posted by FishtailnZ

FYI with Greens, I gained 9 hp over the stock paper filters in back to back runs on the dyno. Not bad for a hundred bucks.

Nice, FTZ. Since the CLK55 and SLK55 have the same engine, I always wondered how our engines would benefit from a non-paper filter.

As you know, the OEM paper filter is the same in the CLK350, 500 and 55, as well as most of the other cars in the MBUSA line-up that shares those engines.

It would make sense that the 55 engines would see more than a 2-3 hp increase, which is good.

Mar 6, 2008 | 07:17 PM

#27

FishtailnZ

Senior Member

Joined: Feb 2004

Posts: 497

Likes: 0

From: Canada

Looking for a new toy.

Yea I read the same thing about filters giving just 2 - 3 hp, but never saw any actual dynos. So when I dynoed mine for a stock baseline last fall before storing it, I did the first couple of runs with the paper filters. Then for ****s and giggles and the 5 min work to swap 'em in, I tried the Greens for my last run and was pleasantly surprised with that 9 hp gain - cheapest 9 extra hp you're going to get with these cars for sure *L*.

Mar 18, 2008 | 12:44 AM

#28

newguy2008

Super Member

Joined: Feb 2003

Posts: 523

Likes: 1

From: Hollywood North

CLK 55 ///AMG Cabrio, ML63 ///AMG

+1.
Been 1 year without any problems - probably time for cleaning/oiling.
I went with Green based on reading that K&N are poorly manufactured - specifically where rubber on the air filter is cut - more jagged edges than Green, which means poor airflow on K & N's?

Quote:

Originally Posted by AmGbZe

I did my research last year and came to the conclusion that Green Filters are the best. They were about $100 for the pair but... no problems at all and I felt a little difference in power...

Last edited by newguy2008; Mar 18, 2008 at 01:33 PM.