Jump to content

The RennTech.org community is Member supported!  Please consider an ANNUAL donation to help keep this site operating.
Click here to Donate

Welcome to RennTech.org Community, Guest

There are many great features available to you once you register at RennTech.org
You are free to view posts here, but you must log in to reply to existing posts, or to start your own new topic. Like most online communities, there are costs involved to maintain a site like this - so we encourage our members to donate. All donations go to the costs operating and maintaining this site. We prefer that guests take part in our community and we offer a lot in return to those willing to join our corner of the Porsche world. This site is 99 percent member supported (less than 1 percent comes from advertising) - so please consider an annual donation to keep this site running.

Here are some of the features available - once you register at RennTech.org

  • View Classified Ads
  • DIY Tutorials
  • Porsche TSB Listings (limited)
  • VIN Decoder
  • Special Offers
  • OBD II P-Codes
  • Paint Codes
  • Registry
  • Videos System
  • View Reviews
  • and get rid of this welcome message

It takes just a few minutes to register, and it's FREE

Contributing Members also get these additional benefits:
(you become a Contributing Member by donating money to the operation of this site)

  • No ads - advertisements are removed
  • Access the Contributors Only Forum
  • Contributing Members Only Downloads
  • Send attachments with PMs
  • All image/file storage limits are substantially increased for all Contributing Members
  • Option Codes Lookup
  • VIN Option Lookups (limited)

K&N Aircharger - More Codes and other Problems


Recommended Posts

I installed the K&N Intake kit about a week ago and, thus far, have several observations.

Initially, the primary difference I noticed was the sound of the intake and the overall "note" of the car on hard acceleration. I already have the porsche sport exhaust on my 99 C2, so it primarily "screams" more at full throttle and actually rounds out the exhaust note nicely. Obviously, the car is louder and more aggressive, although not so much from inside the passenger compartment.

As far as a power difference or faster throttle response, I do not notice much if anything. Obviously, without dyno testing this is subjective. Possibly, since I already have the sport exhaust, my motor may already breath better than stock and may negate some of the difference that may be noticed by other installers...or it could just be a more aggressive sound coupled with wishful thinking :)

After about 20 miles of driving, the car died for the first time (since I've owned it) on sudden deceleration when braking down off a freeway offramp. Of course, it started again immediately.

During the following day, this happened 3 more times, always on sudden, longer deceleration.

Finally, yesterday the CEL came on for the first time (also, since I've had the car).

I pulled codes with the Durametric system and came up with:

P0102- (factory code 115) Mass Airflow Sensor: Below lower limit

P1123- (factory code 27)Oxygen sensing Adaptation Range 1 (cylinders 1-3): Lean Limit

P1125- (factory code 35) Oxygen sensing Adaptation Range 1 (cylinders 4-6): Lean Limit

If anyone has any insight into these codes and reasons why they would be generated, please let me know. To me, this looks as if the system obviously does breathe better if it is causing a lean condition...I am just surprised that the adaptive engine control system cannot increase fuel volume enough to keep up with the increased air flow. Obviously, these codes may have been generated only during those sudden deceleration stages of my driving when the car died and I suddenly got off the throttle and cut off fuel flow (but engine vacuum still kept the air sucking in at full volume). At least that is my theory.

As far as the MAF fault, I'm not sure. I installed it properly, the system is sealed properly and I did not reoil or overoil the filter. I installed it as it came.

Any help or insights would be great. Thanks guys!

post-12474-1155774504_thumb.jpg

post-12474-1155774523_thumb.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

    You can remove these ads by becoming a Contributing Member.

Hi Loren,

It certainly seems that I'm not the only one with the problems.

Any ideas on the codes? You are the best person to ask, so please let me know if you have any diagnostic theories as to why those three codes are being sent and possible fixes.

I'd like to keep the K&N just for the throttle sound alone....and I don't want to disassemble it again and do a intake R&R.

Thanks in advance Loren!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After 500+ miles mines been perfect (knock, knock). During install I had MAF in backwards and car kept stalling - turned it around it ran fine.

I left the sock/cover over the filter to keep things cleaner....I don't know if that makes any difference?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As some of you may know, I started the same forum topic about the K&N aircharger. I have experienced continuous CELs due to MAF reading errors since install (never had any errors or CELs prior to install). Since installation of the K&N aircharger, my 996 also stalls frequently on the freeway or while in the upper gears when I suddenly back off the throttle and coast. Today, the car died with a strange clattering noise.

There has been much speculation about oil from the K&N contaminating the MAF and accumulating in the throttle body. I completely disassembled mine today and found NO EVIDENCE OF OIL ACCUMULATION. None in the throttle body (bone dry) and none in the air intake tube from the filter. Just to be sure, I used K&N filter cleaner to wash the majority of the oil out of the filter, let it dry and reinstalled it. After about 10 miles, I came up with the same CEL and stalling on coasting after deceleration.

I also very thoroughly checked all connections and seals, and cleaned my MAF with electrical cleaner (it already looked spotless) prior to reinstallation and testing. I'm quite confident that my installation is about as optimal as it can be as I am a professional auto restorer and have performed mechanical work for over 20 years. So any type of install error is highly unlikely.

I just thought that I would provide an update.

If anyone from K&N peruses these forums, it would be great to hear what type of fixes, if any, they have come up with. Or, conversely, if the problem has been isolated and is potentially a design flaw. It would be wonderful for K&N to get involved in these forums to support the many lifetime K&N users on this and other enthusiast sites (I have used K&N filters in my own cars for over 15 years and install from 20-30 in customer's cars annually). I, like any thinking individual, realize that design errors happen and that, sometimes, unforseen problems can surface once a component is released. I fully understand this and accept that it is a part of ongoing engineering and automotive development. I have had the same type of issues in my own restoration business. However, I do ask that the manufacturer accept responsibility and support the loyal customers that they have. So please K&N reps....provide a little help or insight....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As some of you may know, I started the same forum topic about the K&N aircharger. I have experienced continuous CELs due to MAF reading errors since install (never had any errors or CELs prior to install). Since installation of the K&N aircharger, my 996 also stalls frequently on the freeway or while in the upper gears when I suddenly back off the throttle and coast. Today, the car died with a strange clattering noise.

There has been much speculation about oil from the K&N contaminating the MAF and accumulating in the throttle body. I completely disassembled mine today and found NO EVIDENCE OF OIL ACCUMULATION. None in the throttle body (bone dry) and none in the air intake tube from the filter. Just to be sure, I used K&N filter cleaner to wash the majority of the oil out of the filter, let it dry and reinstalled it. After about 10 miles, I came up with the same CEL and stalling on coasting after deceleration.

I also very thoroughly checked all connections and seals, and cleaned my MAF with electrical cleaner (it already looked spotless) prior to reinstallation and testing. I'm quite confident that my installation is about as optimal as it can be as I am a professional auto restorer and have performed mechanical work for over 20 years. So any type of install error is highly unlikely.

I just thought that I would provide an update.

If anyone from K&N peruses these forums, it would be great to hear what type of fixes, if any, they have come up with. Or, conversely, if the problem has been isolated and is potentially a design flaw. It would be wonderful for K&N to get involved in these forums to support the many lifetime K&N users on this and other enthusiast sites (I have used K&N filters in my own cars for over 15 years and install from 20-30 in customer's cars annually). I, like any thinking individual, realize that design errors happen and that, sometimes, unforseen problems can surface once a component is released. I fully understand this and accept that it is a part of ongoing engineering and automotive development. I have had the same type of issues in my own restoration business. However, I do ask that the manufacturer accept responsibility and support the loyal customers that they have. So please K&N reps....provide a little help or insight....

I would be curious to get a reading of the MAF while coasting to a stop. Based on the 1123 and 1125 codes, it appears that the computer is thinking it is getting more air than it really is and that is why the O2 sesnors are trying to lean the mixture out. If you watch both the airflow readings AND the intake temp readings closely, you may see a blip before the codes are thrown which might indicate a problem with a ground.

Do this codes get thrown after a WOT run, or simply driving casually? Is there a screen BETWEEN the filter and the MAF?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Papi

I sent my MAF to K&N for testing. The engineer of the 63 series has been helpful thus far & says K&N will not leave anyone hanging. As you suggest, too much oil is probably not the problem (see the link). I was about to buy a dry filter & the engineer told me to save my money. If you haven't spoken with them yet, you might want to report the problem - 951-826-4000.

He also said the engineers do read these forums for product info., but don't respond because it would create a feeding frenzy. I'll send him this link.

http://www.knfilters.com/MAF/massair.htm

Edited by mjl
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The engineer of the 63 series has been helpful thus far & says K&N will not leave anyone hanging. I was about to buy a dry filter & the engineer told me to save my money.

Interesing link. They claim they've dipped the MAF in the filter oil and it still operated normally. They also claim oil doesn't come off an over-oiled filter - even at ridiculously high flow rates. So something doesn't add up here with all the documented issue with the K&N product and CEL/MAF. I was told by a Porsche tech that the MAF is prone to failure in general. What to think? :huh:

Edited by GaryAZ
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As some of you may know, I started the same forum topic about the K&N aircharger. I have experienced continuous CELs due to MAF reading errors since install (never had any errors or CELs prior to install). Since installation of the K&N aircharger, my 996 also stalls frequently on the freeway or while in the upper gears when I suddenly back off the throttle and coast. Today, the car died with a strange clattering noise.

There has been much speculation about oil from the K&N contaminating the MAF and accumulating in the throttle body. I completely disassembled mine today and found NO EVIDENCE OF OIL ACCUMULATION. None in the throttle body (bone dry) and none in the air intake tube from the filter. Just to be sure, I used K&N filter cleaner to wash the majority of the oil out of the filter, let it dry and reinstalled it. After about 10 miles, I came up with the same CEL and stalling on coasting after deceleration.

I also very thoroughly checked all connections and seals, and cleaned my MAF with electrical cleaner (it already looked spotless) prior to reinstallation and testing. I'm quite confident that my installation is about as optimal as it can be as I am a professional auto restorer and have performed mechanical work for over 20 years. So any type of install error is highly unlikely.

I just thought that I would provide an update.

If anyone from K&N peruses these forums, it would be great to hear what type of fixes, if any, they have come up with. Or, conversely, if the problem has been isolated and is potentially a design flaw. It would be wonderful for K&N to get involved in these forums to support the many lifetime K&N users on this and other enthusiast sites (I have used K&N filters in my own cars for over 15 years and install from 20-30 in customer's cars annually). I, like any thinking individual, realize that design errors happen and that, sometimes, unforseen problems can surface once a component is released. I fully understand this and accept that it is a part of ongoing engineering and automotive development. I have had the same type of issues in my own restoration business. However, I do ask that the manufacturer accept responsibility and support the loyal customers that they have. So please K&N reps....provide a little help or insight....

I would be curious to get a reading of the MAF while coasting to a stop. Based on the 1123 and 1125 codes, it appears that the computer is thinking it is getting more air than it really is and that is why the O2 sesnors are trying to lean the mixture out. If you watch both the airflow readings AND the intake temp readings closely, you may see a blip before the codes are thrown which might indicate a problem with a ground.

Do this codes get thrown after a WOT run, or simply driving casually? Is there a screen BETWEEN the filter and the MAF?

Thank you for the interest and help. First, isn't it true that if the computer thinks it is getting more air than normal that it would try to richen the mixture of fuel to compensate for the extra air?

The motor dying occures most often after freeway driving (at 65-80mph) when decelerating or coming off the freeway onto an offramp during braking (no throttle application). It has happened once to me on a roadway doing about 45 after coming off the throttle. This behavior would seem to indicate that the car is not getting enough fuel during times when there is no throttle application (the gas pedal is not being depressed at all), because there is a greater than normal amount of air getting into the intake and the computer is not compensating with additional fuel to keep the motor running. That is just my interpretation. I may be completely off.

Also, 1999 911, I do NOT have any kind of screen between the MAF and the filter. I have read elsewhere that adding a screen may decrease air turbulence and straighten out airflow to keep the MAF from throwing a CEL. There was a forum entry on 6speedonline where it was discussed that air flow past the MAF that is too turbulent or irregular is far more likely to throw a CEL than any amount of oil. So, adding a screen may be a good thing to try. I'll try to install one in the next day or two and will give everyone an update on the results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Admin
I have read elsewhere that adding a screen may decrease air turbulence and straighten out airflow to keep the MAF from throwing a CEL. There was a forum entry on 6speedonline where it was discussed that air flow past the MAF that is too turbulent or irregular is far more likely to throw a CEL than any amount of oil.
I haven't had any screens for 6 years - zero CELs.

You need to have your car fault codes read (not all cause a CEL) and you need to track your fuel trims and MAF readings. An independent shop can do this or some OBD II software that run on a laptop can be used. Until then you are shooting in the dark (IMHO).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have read elsewhere that adding a screen may decrease air turbulence and straighten out airflow to keep the MAF from throwing a CEL. There was a forum entry on 6speedonline where it was discussed that air flow past the MAF that is too turbulent or irregular is far more likely to throw a CEL than any amount of oil.
I haven't had any screens for 6 years - zero CELs.

You need to have your car fault codes read (not all cause a CEL) and you need to track your fuel trims and MAF readings. An independent shop can do this or some OBD II software that run on a laptop can be used. Until then you are shooting in the dark (IMHO).

Hi Loren,

I have never experienced ANY CELs prior to the installation of the K&N, nor has my car ever died before as it does now on a 2-3 times daily basis. The codes that I continue to pull after installation are listed at the top of this post. The screen seems not to be an issue on all aftermarket intakes and is probably a factor of air volume and velocity past certain filters and a function of the design of the air tube on various systems. Obviously no screen to reduce air turbulence would ever be necessary on a stock air box. It may be possible that people who report positive results with screens are just reducing the volume and velocity of air getting to the MAF and intake to a more stock level and therefore letting the sensors and computer stay in a more "stock" range.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

K&N kit doubled the distance between the TB and the MAF. the tube now acts like a "tuned pipe" as the cross section area go from small to large to small. Kind of like a resonator in the exhaust to increase power at certain RPM. That mean at certain "frequency" of air flow would increase the flow by having a "resonance". But on the other hand, when the TB is closed, this "resonance" could also send the air back to the MAF and trigger a "no flow" reading thus causing the MAF to lean out the air fuel ratio. Check and see if the stall is happening at the same RPM range with the TB closed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

K&N kit doubled the distance between the TB and the MAF. the tube now acts like a "tuned pipe" as the cross section area go from small to large to small. Kind of like a resonator in the exhaust to increase power at certain RPM. That mean at certain "frequency" of air flow would increase the flow by having a "resonance". But on the other hand, when the TB is closed, this "resonance" could also send the air back to the MAF and trigger a "no flow" reading thus causing the MAF to lean out the air fuel ratio. Check and see if the stall is happening at the same RPM range with the TB closed.

Hi Alex,

Well, the stall DOES always occur when the Throttle body is closed, since it always happens when you come completely off the throttle during deceleration (and your foot is on the brake). RPMs will also be similar (although speeds will vary), since, on a manual car (which mine is), when you decelerate and get off the throttle, RPMS will also suddenly drop (the speed of the drop will only be hindered by motor compression).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well.....I finally have some good (at least hopeful) news.

It seems that I have now solved the CEL issue as well as the engine stalling issues that I have experienced since installing the K&N intake kit.

Since I was always throwing MAF codes after these occurrences, I diverged from K&Ns official statements that oil contamination of the MAF is not a cause of our problems.

First, I removed my pre-oiled (just as it came with the kit) filter and cleaned and washed it using K&N filter cleaner. I washed out what amounts to about 60-70% of the oil. I then let it air dry and reinstalled it.

Second, I installed the dry filter sock that came with the kit. I did not initially install it since I never drive in the rain or in inclement weather with my 996. I figured that this filter sock would cut down on total air volume through the filter closer to stock specs and would, potentially, also reduce the "air turbulence" that has been written about as being a factor that can throw off the MAF.

Third, I removed the MAF and cleaned it with electrical cleaner, then reinstalled it and made sure that all clamps and screws were absolutely air tight and properly seated.

Lastly, I purchased 100% aluminum screen door mesh material from my local hardware store and installed a round piece of this mesh between the filter element and the plastic air intake throat (effectively securing the mesh by slipping the mesh over the intake throat and then slipping the filter over the mesh and tightening the hose clamp that holds on the filter.

After this installation, even after hard driving, violent deceleration from freeway speeds, etc., no more stalling and, so far, no CEL (I pulled one more code that cylinders 1-3 were at the lean limit, but that is it so far).

I will keep you all posted with further developments. Some of you may try just cleaning the filter and installing the sock without installing the mesh and see if that cures the problem on it's own.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
I installed the K&N Intake kit about a week ago and, thus far, have several observations.

Initially, the primary difference I noticed was the sound of the intake and the overall "note" of the car on hard acceleration. I already have the porsche sport exhaust on my 99 C2, so it primarily "screams" more at full throttle and actually rounds out the exhaust note nicely. Obviously, the car is louder and more aggressive, although not so much from inside the passenger compartment.

As far as a power difference or faster throttle response, I do not notice much if anything. Obviously, without dyno testing this is subjective. Possibly, since I already have the sport exhaust, my motor may already breath better than stock and may negate some of the difference that may be noticed by other installers...or it could just be a more aggressive sound coupled with wishful thinking :)

After about 20 miles of driving, the car died for the first time (since I've owned it) on sudden deceleration when braking down off a freeway offramp. Of course, it started again immediately.

During the following day, this happened 3 more times, always on sudden, longer deceleration.

Finally, yesterday the CEL came on for the first time (also, since I've had the car).

I pulled codes with the Durametric system and came up with:

P0102- (factory code 115) Mass Airflow Sensor: Below lower limit

P1123- (factory code 27)Oxygen sensing Adaptation Range 1 (cylinders 1-3): Lean Limit

P1125- (factory code 35) Oxygen sensing Adaptation Range 1 (cylinders 4-6): Lean Limit

If anyone has any insight into these codes and reasons why they would be generated, please let me know. To me, this looks as if the system obviously does breathe better if it is causing a lean condition...I am just surprised that the adaptive engine control system cannot increase fuel volume enough to keep up with the increased air flow. Obviously, these codes may have been generated only during those sudden deceleration stages of my driving when the car died and I suddenly got off the throttle and cut off fuel flow (but engine vacuum still kept the air sucking in at full volume). At least that is my theory.

As far as the MAF fault, I'm not sure. I installed it properly, the system is sealed properly and I did not reoil or overoil the filter. I installed it as it came.

Any help or insights would be great. Thanks guys!

Just to add to the growing number of posts on K and N air chargers. I have had the same problems. CEL PSM and ABS lights on just after shutting off the throttle at high RPMS My Durametric showed P0102 and the voltage output of the MAF stayed low despite increase of RPM

Two MAFs gone and the third being fedexed to me now.....

So far an enthusiastic promise from K and N to investigate but no resolution so far. The two people I have spoken to at K and N say that they are not aware of a problem with their intake and the 996. This is strange as I've now seen other posts from other 996 owners with the same problem who have contacted K and N for help.

The K and N web site has some pretty convincing videos that indicate that filter oil is not contaminating MAFs so I begin to wonder if there is some other flaw in the design of the K and N air charger? I have never heard of anyone having a problem after fitting a K and N filter in the original Porsche airbox. It seems to be only in cases where the cold air intake kit is fitted.

It must be difficult for K and N to take into account the characteristics of every manufacturer's MAF but given that this product has been on the market for at least a year and they must have had several customers calling with issues so I'm surprised that they do not have an answer.

Obviously I am really unimpressed with this whole issue and would not be surprised if I soon have to replace all the original airbox parts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been using the K&N kit for over 4K miles and have not yet had any CEL's, stalling or problems.

I did not remove/add any oil to the filter and have the dry sock over the filter. I live in Hawaii and it rains frequently, with quick downpours and the dry sock keeps the filter dry, with no problems from the rain.

02 996C2 Cab.

43K miles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I installed the K&N Intake kit about a week ago and, thus far, have several observations.

Initially, the primary difference I noticed was the sound of the intake and the overall "note" of the car on hard acceleration. I already have the porsche sport exhaust on my 99 C2, so it primarily "screams" more at full throttle and actually rounds out the exhaust note nicely. Obviously, the car is louder and more aggressive, although not so much from inside the passenger compartment.

As far as a power difference or faster throttle response, I do not notice much if anything. Obviously, without dyno testing this is subjective. Possibly, since I already have the sport exhaust, my motor may already breath better than stock and may negate some of the difference that may be noticed by other installers...or it could just be a more aggressive sound coupled with wishful thinking :)

After about 20 miles of driving, the car died for the first time (since I've owned it) on sudden deceleration when braking down off a freeway offramp. Of course, it started again immediately.

During the following day, this happened 3 more times, always on sudden, longer deceleration.

Finally, yesterday the CEL came on for the first time (also, since I've had the car).

I pulled codes with the Durametric system and came up with:

P0102- (factory code 115) Mass Airflow Sensor: Below lower limit

P1123- (factory code 27)Oxygen sensing Adaptation Range 1 (cylinders 1-3): Lean Limit

P1125- (factory code 35) Oxygen sensing Adaptation Range 1 (cylinders 4-6): Lean Limit

If anyone has any insight into these codes and reasons why they would be generated, please let me know. To me, this looks as if the system obviously does breathe better if it is causing a lean condition...I am just surprised that the adaptive engine control system cannot increase fuel volume enough to keep up with the increased air flow. Obviously, these codes may have been generated only during those sudden deceleration stages of my driving when the car died and I suddenly got off the throttle and cut off fuel flow (but engine vacuum still kept the air sucking in at full volume). At least that is my theory.

As far as the MAF fault, I'm not sure. I installed it properly, the system is sealed properly and I did not reoil or overoil the filter. I installed it as it came.

Any help or insights would be great. Thanks guys!

Just to add to the growing number of posts on K and N air chargers. I have had the same problems. CEL PSM and ABS lights on just after shutting off the throttle at high RPMS My Durametric showed P0102 and the voltage output of the MAF stayed low despite increase of RPM

Two MAFs gone and the third being fedexed to me now.....

So far an enthusiastic promise from K and N to investigate but no resolution so far. The two people I have spoken to at K and N say that they are not aware of a problem with their intake and the 996. This is strange as I've now seen other posts from other 996 owners with the same problem who have contacted K and N for help.

The K and N web site has some pretty convincing videos that indicate that filter oil is not contaminating MAFs so I begin to wonder if there is some other flaw in the design of the K and N air charger? I have never heard of anyone having a problem after fitting a K and N filter in the original Porsche airbox. It seems to be only in cases where the cold air intake kit is fitted.

It must be difficult for K and N to take into account the characteristics of every manufacturer's MAF but given that this product has been on the market for at least a year and they must have had several customers calling with issues so I'm surprised that they do not have an answer.

Obviously I am really unimpressed with this whole issue and would not be surprised if I soon have to replace all the original airbox parts.

You are burning out your MAF, not because of oil but because of current. You are getting too much air past the MAF casuing the burn out over time. Why don't you guys take a reading of the MAF at WOT and redline. Seems to me if someone changes their intake system they would want to know how the mod effects the engine? :o

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.