exactly I haven't gotten any solid answers from people but everyone who hasn't had problems have properly reset their cars.

I will be installing the K&N along with the Plenum and Dynoing the car before and after and will report my results

 

i gave you a good answer...like i said the problem seesm to be more common with pre 2001 996.... dont know why

BUT...if you are going to use the KN... look at sealing the KN filter area a little better so that you dont draw in engine bay air

 

The 99' non e-gas MAF and 01' MAF are different(I'd assume the 00' + 01' are the same?). Supposedly(read what you want into this) the newer e-gas MAF are designed to be less prone to fouling.

 

Come on guys:
If you've had both, you know the EVOMS CAI is far superior. Just because your K&N CAI didn't cause problems doesn't mean it's a well designed system. Think of the guys who are reading these threads! The K&N CAI has both design and implementation limitations. The EVOMS CAI doesn't. The $300 difference should not be a factor in this decision.
Ric :-)

 

look for a used EVOMS CAI..i did, and it cost me the same as the KN..AND I GOT A NEW FILTER!!

 

I have the Evoms and had one cel about 20 miles into it. Had it reset and none since.

On a side note, I'm having an AP exhaust and the RSS Plenum installed tomorrow, should the car be reset with these mods as well?

 

Here is my take on the K&N unit. I installed one about 12k miles ago, and used it for about 3k miles before I started throwing codes and lighting up the dash (abs, check engine, etc...."). I have a 99 tip (non-egas). I was bummed because I really liked the performance and sound; I felt the unit actually did deliver on its promises. I tried cleaning the MAF without success, and ultimately had to replace it (which cleared up all the codes).

After a bunch of research I learned the following, which may or may not be true, so take it for what its worth. According to some, the problem is not with over-oiling (although that can certainly cause problems if you over oil), or failing to reset (I installed my unit with the battery cable disconnected, and tried resetting several times). Rather, as mentioned above, it is the pre-01 MAF. If you look at the pre- and post 01 sensors, you'll see that the later units force the air through a much more serpentine-like, circuitous route. I'm told this has the effect of "straightening" the air flow (making it more "laminar," i.e., flowing in a sheet rather than flowing in a turbulent manner). The earlier sensors locate the sensor element right near the opening of th sensor, which the design of the cold air intakes then places right next to the cone filter--filters which, although clealry flow more air, also make the air more turbulent as it passes the wire element. Many think this is the reason for cold air intake woes on the earlier 3.4's. I think the problem is less pronounced with the evo design (sensor is located farther from the cone filter) than with the K & N (MAF right off the filter), but my personal belief is that it is only a matter of time with either unit. Family members have had the evo unit on 02 996's with great long term results.

After I had my problems with my MAF sensor, I called up K & N and they were pretty good to work with, although completely unwilling to acknowledge a systematic problem for earlier sensor cars. I told them I liked the unit, and would like to keep it, but that I didn't want to risk another $300 MAF sensor. I said I would gladly keep the unit if they would guarantee me my new MAF sensor would last at least one year, which they wouldn't do (not at all surprising, as lots of different conditions can blow a sensor). In the end I returned the product for a refund, and have simply been using a K&N drop-in filter ever since with great (albeit not as dramatic) results (I've had the drop-in filter for 11k miles, which in my mind at least validates that the real issue is not the fact that these intakes employ an oiled filter). Sorry this post is so long, hope you find it helpful.

 

I installed a K&N filter exactly as described, disconnected the negative cable, did the swap and reconnected the battery three hours later. Took only 15 miles before the CEL came on, took it to the dealer....guess what MAFS went out, and needs to be replaced, good thing it's under warranty.

After some consternation about the whole filter/cold air intake...is it really worth it? Seriously, is anyone really getting any noticeable ponies out of these things or is it merely a mental advantage.

If additional horsepower were as simple as a filter/airbox swap then why didn't Porsche make it an OEM part?

 

Curious if the filter was the dry or wet/oiled version?
Mine is dry and have had zero problems...

 

Don't know, it came wrapped in plastic, took it out and put it in, it was not oily to the touch at all, didn't smell oily either.

 

Well I got mine, Took it out of the plastic (oiled filter) and let it sit out in newspaper for actually about a week (just didn't have time) Also put some newspaper inside the cone just in case. Installed it without any real problems left the batt disconnected for about 3 hours. Reconnected, turned the car on. It had a little bit of a rough idle for about 5-10 seconds before it flattened out and ran well. Well I have probably put about 1-2 miles on since and put it through everything (getting on it hard, long 3 hour drives, 130+mph, hitting the redline through gears, everything and hasn't done anything bad yet) I do have a 99 but the engine was replaced so maybe I have the newed MAF?

The car has no power gains (at least what i can tell) but the sound itself is the real change. If you go full throttle as soon as u hit 4-5krpms it just ROARS

 

I know there have been earlier K&N posts and some on renntech as well. I cant speak for anyone else, but I have had the K&N kit on my 2002 c2 for about 6,000 miles with no issues. I had one on a 97 Vette for about 40,000 again with no issues. The kit as installed in my c2 fits very well & the baffles do insulate from the engine compartment. Since a dyno doesnt account for forward motion, you will not see an increase in HP. However, the sound at speed means it is getting more air & as such, with more flow & cooler air, you are making more HP. The water ingestion issue has not occured either. I have gone without the drysock in heavy rain & have slipped it on in torrential rain. NO issues at all. I cant think of a better mod for around 250 bucks. If there is one out there, I would love to find out what it is.

 

+1.

I opted for a AEM DRYFILTER (similiar in size to the K&N). No MAF issues whatsoever.

Did have to install the stock unit back in for SMOG Check. I am wating for a CARB EO# for CA.

jorge

 

My K&N has been flawless. I'm sure there might be better systems out there, but this one is good for me.

Cheers
Mark