Home Forums Articles How To's FAQ Register
Go Back   Xoutpost.com > BMW SAV Forums > X5 (E53) Forum
Fluid Motor Union
User Name
Password
Member List Premier Membership Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Xoutpost server transfer and maintenance is occurring....
Xoutpost is currently undergoing a planned server migration.... stay tuned for new developments.... sincerely, the management


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 06-02-2013, 12:20 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: New York City
Posts: 199
jcorreanyc is on a distinguished road
Should I go with aFe Pro 5R or Pro Dry S for my X5 4.6is?

Hi all,

I have 122k miles on the clock and a very clean car. I'm running a bone stock set up but finally ordered myself a Magnaflow x-pipe that I'm going to have put on next week. I'm thinking to change the paper filter in the stock airbox with an aFe filter. I don't really believe that changing the filter will give me any added horses, but I do know that it'll give me a slightly enhanced sound.

aFe makes two versions for the X, one oiled and one not. The Pro 5R is like aFe's version of the K&N filter, cotton with oil on it. The Pro Dry S uses synthetic foam with no oil on it for better filtration and slightly less flow than the oiled version.

I really care about keeping my engine clean and don't want to damage the MAF and throw a code. That said, I only drive about 5,000 miles a year and that's it. So I'll probably never really have to clean and re-oil the filter. The added filtration of the Pro Dry S sounds nice, but I feel like at 5,000 miles a year, how much dirt could my engine really suck in through the cotton element?

Again, my priority is sound. If the Pro Dry S will give me the same added growl that the oiled filter does, I'll probably go with that. But if I can get a little more from the Pro 5R and not have to worry about dirt getting through it, then I'll probably go that route.

Thoughts?
Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links

  #2  
Old 06-02-2013, 12:53 AM
pnoyako85's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: basking ridge
Posts: 2,217
pnoyako85 is on a distinguished road
Do Dinan instead man... $500. Afe are $300 i think
__________________
Call Me For Tires: 732-421-6931
Past
2000 E46 325i
2006 E53 4.4i Sport
2006 X5 4.8is
2011 E90 328xi
2011 E71 50i Fully Loaded :thumb up:
Current
2000 E39 528i
2013 F10 M5
2013 F10 535xi
2017 X3
2017 Sedona
2017 Optima
2016 Fiesta
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-02-2013, 01:30 AM
TerminatorX5's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Stafford, VA & Harrisburg, PA - USA
Posts: 5,736
TerminatorX5 is on a distinguished road
go with the one that lets the engine breathe better - the M62 has big lungs and needs a lot of air... on my N62 as i was working on the misfire and loss of power issue, when i put a K&N in place of the factory filter, the engine definitely worked better, even though at the time it still had other issues...

so, go with the one that breathes better...

BTW, 5000 miles a year - is nothing... I put on last year about 23,000 miles...

you will be ok with the oiled filter...
__________________
E53 X5 4.6iS
147K mi - Sold May 2013
Tireprints left in:
USA, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Panama, Russia

E53 X5 4.8iS built 2005-10-17
66200 mi - June 2012
96000 mi - June 2013
112000 mi - June 2014
OEM fire extinguisher
OE first aid kit
OE tow hitch
OE TV module
OE aspheric mirror
K&N air filter
black/white badges
rear camera
4-channel video recorder

Here is the list of things I have done to the X
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06-02-2013, 08:53 AM
Ricky Bobby's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Wake Forest, NC
Posts: 9,344
Ricky Bobby will become famous soon enough
They will both sound the same and both will filter extremely comparably, that being said if it were my car, I'd go with the Pro Dry S as I find dry filters are easier to maintain than oiled.

EDIT: I read that your priority is sound, if the airboxes are the same setup, the type of filter will not change the sound lol. Just go with whichever you can get cheaper.
__________________
2018 Ram 2500 6.7L Cummins 68RFE
19k miles -Bright White/Black - Big Horn Sport - Crew Cab Short Bed
2013 X5 35D (CEO's) - Born on 5/17/2013 -
82k miles - Alpine White/Cinnamon Brown/Premium Pkg, Sport Activity/Premium Pkg and Sound/20" Style 214/Running Boards

Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 06-03-2013, 03:12 AM
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: New York City
Posts: 199
jcorreanyc is on a distinguished road
@ Ricky Bobby,

I'm not sure that's the case. The word I've been getting is that changing the filter element on the stock airbox will actually enhance the sound a little. Its a slight improvement, but similar to what you get with a CAI.

Also keep in mind that I'm putting on an x-pipe, so that will contribute to most of the extra sound.

Anyway, I'm still kind of undecided, but I'm leaning towards the oiled filter since it offers the best flow. Just don't want my engine getting dirty.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 06-03-2013, 08:53 AM
Ricky Bobby's Avatar
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Wake Forest, NC
Posts: 9,344
Ricky Bobby will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcorreanyc View Post
@ Ricky Bobby,

I'm not sure that's the case. The word I've been getting is that changing the filter element on the stock airbox will actually enhance the sound a little. Its a slight improvement, but similar to what you get with a CAI.

Also keep in mind that I'm putting on an x-pipe, so that will contribute to most of the extra sound.

Anyway, I'm still kind of undecided, but I'm leaning towards the oiled filter since it offers the best flow. Just don't want my engine getting dirty.

Trust me, the sound may change a TINY bit but for the most part changing the type of filter element if you have a stock airbox, with no other airbox modifications is not going to change the sound. Ever put a K&N replacement filter in stock airbox? No sound change, and that is similar to Pro 5R filter.

However, the CAI that Afe makes with either their Pro Dry S or Pro 5R filters WILL change the sound you get since it is an open element filter, no enclosed box (essentially filter on a stick), and you will get that induction sound from the shape of the filter as well (conical instead of flat panel)

Again, if your priority is SOUND above all, spend the 300 bucks and get an Afe INTAKE, not just replacement filter. You're correct that the xpipe will add nice exhaust noises, but if you want induction noise, you need to do the full intake.
__________________
2018 Ram 2500 6.7L Cummins 68RFE
19k miles -Bright White/Black - Big Horn Sport - Crew Cab Short Bed
2013 X5 35D (CEO's) - Born on 5/17/2013 -
82k miles - Alpine White/Cinnamon Brown/Premium Pkg, Sport Activity/Premium Pkg and Sound/20" Style 214/Running Boards

Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06-03-2013, 03:51 PM
JCL's Avatar
JCL JCL is offline
Premier Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 11,853
JCL will become famous soon enoughJCL will become famous soon enough
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcorreanyc View Post
I really care about keeping my engine clean and don't want to damage the MAF and throw a code. That said, I only drive about 5,000 miles a year and that's it. So I'll probably never really have to clean and re-oil the filter. The added filtration of the Pro Dry S sounds nice, but I feel like at 5,000 miles a year, how much dirt could my engine really suck in through the cotton element?

Again, my priority is sound. If the Pro Dry S will give me the same added growl that the oiled filter does, I'll probably go with that. But if I can get a little more from the Pro 5R and not have to worry about dirt getting through it, then I'll probably go that route.

Thoughts?
If you care about keeping your engine clean (on the inside) then you will stay with the stock filter.

If your priority is sound, then just take the filter out. Maximum airflow, least restriction, most sound. And shortest engine life.

Anything between those two extremes is just a case of balancing your own priorities.

Instead of relying on filter manufacturer's web pages, though, why not look at actual filter tests run by independent sources?

One of my older go-to air filter links is attached below. This was a professional standardized test of 9 automotive filters, ranging from the stock AC Delco to K&N, AFE, etc. The filters were sized for a diesel pickup, but they don't know that, they are just filtering air. And diesels in light duty pickup trucks need a lot of air. While the OE filter listed was an AC Delco, the comparisons still shed some light on filtering issues with similar technology filters.

Efficiency: AC (OE) 99.93%, AFE 99.23%. That is how well they took dirt out. Both look good at first glance, but think about the .07% loss in efficiency vs the .77% loss in efficiency. That is 11 times. Hmmm.

Restriction: AFE 4.99" H20, AC 6.23" H20. OK, the AFE had less restriction when new. Looks good on web page advertisements too. But think about it. 1.24" H20 is equal to .045 psi. Atmospheric pressure is 14.7 psi. So that means the additional restriction is .3% Sounds good on paper, if a little underwhelming. But when the filter is not new, it has much more restriction. The test was run until they reached 10" H20 restriction, so eight times that delta between the two filters. At filter half life, you would have four times the restriction as the difference between the two filters. That change interval matters more than which filter you pick. Especially when the two filter technologies have different capacity limits, ie operating time till blocked.

Dirt Capacity: AC 574 g, AFE 233 g. So the AFE fills up 2.5 times faster. It doesn't hold as much when blocked. That isn't so critical in the real world, since it lets more dirt through. Capacity isn't the issue.

Dirt passed: AC .4 g, AFE 1.8 g. So the AFE passed 4.5 times as much dirt. Ouch.

Summary: The oiled AFE filter, which is claimed to flow more, does so (over a narrow range of clean filter, at a specific airflow). But that doesn't matter a whit, since the total airflow restriction is inconsequential. You can take the filter out and run a dyno test, and not get more power. Lots have tried it. So flowing more air is just advertising hype. But here is the tradeoff: you will let in more dirt, you will reach filter capacity sooner (clogged), and if you modify the standard OE cold air intake with a cone filter, you will be inducting warm air from the engine compartment, which directly reduces power and engine efficiency.

All this for some underhood jewelry, and induction moan.

Good luck, whatever you choose.

Link here if you want to read more:

Air Filter Study Completed!!!!! - TheDieselPage.com Forums
__________________
2007 X3 3.0si, 6 MT, Premium, White

Retired:
2008 535i, 6 MT, M Sport, Premium, Space Grey
2003 X5 3.0 Steptronic, Premium, Titanium Silver

2002 325xi 5 MT, Steel Grey
2004 Z4 3.0 Premium, Sport, SMG, Maldives Blue
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 06-03-2013, 09:54 PM
bcredliner's Avatar
Premier Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Little Elm,Texas. (40 minutes North of Dallas)
Posts: 8,105
bcredliner is on a distinguished road
If you want change you can hear I would spend the $$$ on exhaust note. X pipe will help but lower restriction exhaust will increase performance and deliver lots of music to your ears. That said,I have had a Dinan cold air closed system complimented with a K&N oiled cone filter since I drove my X off the showroom floor. Anything that gets through the filter is not going to hurt anything anywhere it goes. I clean and re-oil the filter about every six months and about every 2 years I buy a new one. After more than 100,000 miles, all is well and I would go the same route again. Probably not much Texas like dust in New York. If it is possible to increase the sound of incoming air it is not going to come from an OE type filter. Give an oiled cone filter a try, I would go with K&N, you can always go back if you don't hear what you want and are still worried about harming something.
__________________
X5 4.6 2002 Black Sap, Black interior. 2013 X5M Melbourne Red, Bamboo interior
Dallas
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 06-03-2013, 10:08 PM
JCL's Avatar
JCL JCL is offline
Premier Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 11,853
JCL will become famous soon enoughJCL will become famous soon enough
Love it. K&N, the lowest filtering efficiency in the independent test linked above. Second worst in amount of dirt passed through, only slightly better than another oiled filter (Uni),

You clean and oil it every six months, and replace it every two years? My most recent paper OE filter went four years, no clogging or increased restriction. Changed it after four years out of a sense of guilt.

It isn't about the size of what goes through it causing damage, it is about the quantity of what goes through it.

On the other hand, if I was going mud bogging, a cleanable oiled filter would be my first choice. They don't collapse as quickly when soaked.

And I agree with the exhaust suggestion. If the objective is sound, play with exhaust, not intake.
__________________
2007 X3 3.0si, 6 MT, Premium, White

Retired:
2008 535i, 6 MT, M Sport, Premium, Space Grey
2003 X5 3.0 Steptronic, Premium, Titanium Silver

2002 325xi 5 MT, Steel Grey
2004 Z4 3.0 Premium, Sport, SMG, Maldives Blue

Last edited by JCL; 06-03-2013 at 10:14 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 06-03-2013, 10:30 PM
bcredliner's Avatar
Premier Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Little Elm,Texas. (40 minutes North of Dallas)
Posts: 8,105
bcredliner is on a distinguished road
Chill--I didn't say the K&N filter was any level of efficiency. I didn't say it was cheaper either. What I did write about is what I have done for over ten years without any problems in a high dust environment. I am all for the science of studies. They at least make for testy forum discussion. How many times will I see a study concluding caffeine is good for me and the next study not. Studies are like asking a CPA what the number is and he says what do you want it to be? Perhaps that study means other filters are more efficient than they need to be-just overkill. I prefer practical, applicable experience on this one--no offense intended.
__________________
X5 4.6 2002 Black Sap, Black interior. 2013 X5M Melbourne Red, Bamboo interior
Dallas
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
4.6is, afe, air filter, bmw x5, pro 5r

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:56 AM.
vBulletin, Copyright 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0
© 2017 Xoutpost.com. All rights reserved. Xoutpost.com is a private enthusiast site not associated with BMW AG.
The BMW name, marks, M stripe logo, and Roundel logo as well as X3, X5 and X6 designations used in the pages of this Web Site are the property of BMW AG.
This web site is not sponsored or affiliated in any way with BMW AG or any of its subsidiaries.