Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Oil Filters, whose is best, and Why?
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
thinness might be a factor on boats where there might be water and rust but if Purolater was getting lots of shell failure complaints (and I have never heard of any except in the minimopar test of THICK Mobil one seam failures) I think Purolater would fix it quick. To me its not a problem. If I lived in Alaska on -10 degree mornings and I reved a cold engine to 5000 RPM maybe a concern but otherwise not a factor. the small filter area of the Wix and K Mart Max pro Penske brand is what puts me off even tho it "feels better" in your hand.
Later,
Al
"Correlating Lube Oil Filtration Efficiencies with Engine Wear".
Abrasive engine wear can be substantially reduced with an increase in filter single pass efficiency. Compared to a 40 micron filter, engine wear was reduced by 50% with 30 micron filtration. Likewise, wear was reduced by 70% with 15 micron filtration.
Controlling the abrasive contaminants in the range of 2 to 22 micron in the lube oil is necessary for controlling engine wear.
The micron rating of a filter, as established in a single pass efficiency test, does an excellent job in indicating the filter's ability to remove abrasive particles in the lube oil system.
Now, there are a couple of different ways of ensuring that you are getting this higher level of filtration:
Deal with a company like Baldwin or Fleetguard who give out this information freely on their 1-800 tech lines.
Use a filter that is KNOWN to have synthetic or glass media. (some companies tell you what the media is but are reluctant to give out micron ratings)
Fleetguard is especially good in my opinion as they will list upgrade filters on their web-site (or tell you about them on the 1-800) for many applications. These "upgrade" filters are a match that are built with an upgraded media, often glass or their proprietary Stratapore.
I looked on the Fleetguard site and though it was vague - no micron sizes or test info for oil filters.
like for a 4 cyl Camry purelolater l 14476 what do they sell as a replacement and what does it do better?
I did also say that upgrade filters are available for MANY applications, please do not be surprised if your Toyota does not fall into the "many" category.
What are upgrade filters? Please read the post.
My assumption is that the 6607, as the smaller filter, fits each and every Hyundai out there and the 2808 if clearances will take the larger filter, is the way to go.
I'll e-mail Champion Labs and see if they respond. I know this has come up on other cars. I am a bit, worried, however, by the Mark Salem comments about different filter media being designed for a particular weight oil. Since Hyundai allows everything from 5W30 to 10W40, I don't think this is a big deal.
tsjay-- If you're still out there, any thoughts on this?
http://www.saabclub.com/237/oilfilt.htm
See if you can cross reference it somehow to the Pure One filter by finding similar applications or possibly direct cross reference.
Then go to the back of the Purolator book, about page 930 and look at all the specs for the two filters. (diameter, length, head specs, and bypass setting)
You have me curious because last time I checked there was no equivalent oversize for the 6607 for my Sentra. I wonder If they came out with a new filter?? Let us know.
Al
The Purolator "Premium Plus" (Figure 6) is a lot like the Fram, right down to the string, but the filter's end plates appear to be of a higher quality cardboard, and there is almost double the area of filtering medium.
Does any Purolater use "cardboard" end plates?
Anyone know?
Re Fleetguard - I would feel better if the micron rating was listed somewhere vice someone "telling you on the phone" and hopefully they might have one for the filter I listed which was 4 cyl Camrys 92 to 96 and maybe more - lots of those on the road.
Maybe they do that on low prod models like saabs?????????
or the saab club post is wrong????
Just a note about these famous cut-it-open type tests, while they are useful in determining the quality of construction, they can never show you how loose the media is. The media in the filter above is particularly loose!
Just a note about OEM replacements, companies such as Fleetguard, Wix, Baldwin, and Purolator closely match the specs. of the original OEM filter that their filter was designed to replace. Do not blame them for building a filter with big holes, blame Toyota. (in this case) This is where upgrades come in - what they mean is that it utilizes an upgraded media from what the OEM has.
If you go to Fleetguard's site and type in LF581 (chev. truck application) in the Part Details lookup, you will see that there is an upgrade available, the LF3538. It uses synthetic media and the micron ratings are as follows:
73% 10u, 100% 30u
Now that is better!
This is closer to what you will get with a good filter like Mobil, Amsoil or Pure One and in my opinion, they are worth the extra money.
The Super Tech catalog calls for the ST2808 on the 2001 Hyundai Elantra.
The ST6607 could be used as a smaller alternate, however the correct filter
which we recommend is the ST2808.
The only air filter we have available for this application is the Champ
AF7999. For the nearest Champ distributor in your area, please contact our
Customer Service at (800) 851-3641.
If you have any other questions, feel free to contact us at any time.
Thank you.
Chad Garrett
Technical Service
Representative
Champion Laboratories, Inc.
It is interesting that the Fleetguard mentioned above is even more efficient than than Mobil filter, but of course, its capacity could be another story.
There are several things to consider when substituting oil filters for
automotive applications. Although one filter may look like another or spin
on in place of the other, it may have a different by-pass valve setting or
valve location which may obstruct proper flow through the filter. One
filter may also have different construction levels, such as a heavier duty
shell or backplate. If a lighter constructed filter was placed on an
application that had a higher burst pressure requirement, the filter could
overpressurize and expand. This could cause leakage and in turn could
cause serious engine damage.
These factors are only a few that need to be considered when looking at
filters. Champion Laboratories, Inc. does not recommend the use of
alternate filters for applications if it can be avoided.
If you have any other questions, feel free to contact us at any time.
Thank you.
Chad Garrett
Technical Service
Representative
Champion Laboratories, Inc.
I think that most descriptions of filters show that the Mobil filter did have far better media than most of the other Champion brands. I'm not sure whether there's two levels of filter quality or three, with Bosch being somewhere in the middle. My assumption is that SuperTech, Deutsch (if there is still such a brand) and STP are all similar. Don't know how the Champion in-house brands such as Lee and Champ pan out either. I'm kind of burned out in bothering the rep. that replied to my e-mail. The Champion Labs web page makes it easy to contact a tech rep. and they do respond promptly, if someone else wants to give it a try.
In Walmart I picked one up and lo and behold' it was huge, in comparison to the OEM, and the SAME price as the PF47 'tea-cup model. The Fleetgaurd internet site was a help in confirming the case dimensions, and thread size. With the PF 52 under there now (put it on this morning) there is still lots of room around it and the engine finally looks like it has a filter!
Checked this larger PF 52 cross over with Fleetguard, and this was the reply.....
" We have the LF780 as the lube filter used on Park Ave.'s,
1997 model with 3.8L engine."
Obviously, the Fleet guard LF 780 has the specs and case measurements as the PF 52, so what gives with GM putting on the tiny '47?
Guess GM doesn't read the posts on this site.
Let remind everyone that I have a friend at NAPA that has a 1982 Chevette that he bought new and has put over 200K on it. He uses WIX filters that say NAPA on them, and petroleum oil (NAPA/Valvoline). He changes both at 7500 mile intervals, and now adds a seal swelling agent.
http://www.hastingsfilter.com/engineering/98_4.html
In the S.A.E. report that I quoted from earlier, they showed examples of how the J806B can be somewhat misleading and how it is more meaningful to select a filter by its beta ratio test values.
Filter tests are confusing, and that's for sure! I am certainly not an expert on filter testing.
I do know that a single pass test uses glass beads of some diameter or other, and maybe everyone isn't even using the same size beads?
The good old J806 is the test that I am most familiar with. This tests circulates oil through a filter, with the oil being clean at the beginning of the test. They introduce contaminate at a steady rate and wathch the pressure drop across the filter build up to a termination pressure.
Efficiencies are taken at four hour intervals by sampling the oil upstream and downstream from the filter. These samples are weighed and then strained through a millipore filter that catches even the tiniest particles. The oil is diluted with petroleum ether before being strained through the millipore filter. Otherwise, it wouldn't even drain through such a tight filter.
The millipore filter would be bone dried and weighed clean and then again after the oil is strained, so the difference in weight is the amount of dust trapped by the millipore.
The efficiecies at the four hour intervals are reported and then the "weighted average efficiency" for the entire test is calculated.
The J806 results are reported as hours of life (until terminal pressure is reached) and the weighted average efficiency.
Nowadays, the multipass test is very popular, and the principal is the same, but the efficiencies are obtained by in-line particle counting, and the particles are categorized by size.
So, you have to be careful that you are comparing apples and apples when you compare test results for filters.
Tom
Super Tech filters use a media that is 50% efficient for 20u particles.
Al
http://www.filtercouncil.org/
Has some decent info in the Technical Data section
Yse, Super Tech filters will undoubtedly do the job but, if you are really concerned about filtration and engine wear, a filter with a good tight media will obviously remove more of the particles in the 5-22 micron range (going from memory) that are responsible for most of the wear in an engine.
Now, if you really want to get crazy, you can go wtih bypass filtration...........
brennke:That difference of 50% at 10u for a premium Mobil 1, versus 50% at 20u on a cheapo Super Tech seems startlingly close!
If we can't get a definitive answer on particle size for these SAE tests,they are TOTALLY meaningless.I can design a fiter that will remove 100% of all particles the size of say a BB.These tests certainly refer to a given particle size.I really don't think the SAE would have developed them if they didn't.We need the parameters.
It would seem a graph or curve at micron ratings from 2-3u on up to 40 or 50u would give a real picture of a fiter's capability(since we have seen posted many times,the damage associated with different size particles).
What I'm trying to say is that it would be equally important to know what the Mobil 1 and STech do at 25u,30u,etc.We are now interpolating those values mentally(maybe correctly,maybe not).
Single and multi-pass efficiencies help fill in some blanks,but don't give the whole picture.
Another question:Say filter "x"gets 98% of 10 micron particles.How much damage does the remaining 2% do?Logically it would be very little.But is that the real-world situation?Do we really need 99.9% or will some other arbitrary % work well to keep engine wear reasonable?
http://www.minimopar.net/oilfilterstudy.html#mobil1
"Mobil 1
M1-301
Like the Champ filter, this filter is made by Champion Labs. However, it uses a unique end plate and a thicker can that make it the strongest filter available for wide distribution retail sale. It also uses a synthetic media, which inproves filtration and flow. I'm happy to say that this filter is NOT a fake. It is definitely a unique design.
It uses a synthetic fiber element that can filter out very small particles and is very strong. It is rated just under the Purolator Pure One as far as filtering capability, but is still very much above conventional paper filters. It also has a very strong construction to withstand high pressure spikes during start-up. However, as with all Mobil 1 products, expect to pay 2 - 3 times as much for this filter.
I have received many reports of these filters failing at high pressures. It seems that the seam where the backplate crimps to the case can split."
That last paragraph has always been a bit troublling to me, expecially given the apparent quality of construction.
Also,no one has commented on my question in a previous post."If particulates are held in suspension in a given oil,is that a good thing.Concensus of posts seem to say it is.But does that not mean that the particles go where the oil goes...in between moving parts where wear occurs?
So the bottom line is,we really don't know what we need to PREVENT WEAR in a filter.At this point,are we not guessing,given what we actually can find out about any given filter?
Finer filtration has been proven to eqaute to less engine wear in gasoline engines, diesel engines and in four-ball wear testing. (S.A.E. Paper 881825) If you look at diesel engines, where more particulates are introduced into the oil, it is very common to see bypass filtration installed as standard equipment by the OEM. In fact, there is even such a thing as a full-flow filter with a bypass filter section built right inside the same can. Now why would these companies go through all this trouble if there was no gain?
Frule, if you give me an email address, I can send you a very informative article.
The postings are now becoming far more esoteric, as opposed to practical, so we must not lose site of the value of the "road work" already completed. Perhaps it would be helpful if we reiterated our findings to the present. Any one want to handle it, or start it off?
No one seems able to show this via any study or tests on day ot day drivers. Big rigs, etc. sure, they are looking for one million miles, the ave car owner, 200,000 maybe and that will take 10-15 years to do. So, what is practical?
For my money, we have established WIX & CHAMPION as the leading manufacturers who produce very acceptable filters under many names. At the present, I am buying filters from those two makers that are sold at K Mart, Walmart, and AutoZone. Biggest bang for the buck is a pleasure of life at those places! (:oÞ
I like champion too but I still think wix, for their reputation and time in busines, shorts people on the filter area for the price. Their filter area is small, price the same
Filter efficiency is very relevant to this topic and is not something that should be ignored because some find it uninteresting.....or is it that their favorite filter does not hold up well under scrutiny?
That means that MY distillation of the information WE have placed in this thread is that for ME, Wix and Champion are the best choices. That which is esoteric is that which is made from the very best there is. I noted that the thread is now focusing in on the esoteric. I suggested that we ought not lose sight of the value of the lesser filters that are fully acceptable, but may not be the best. These filters are practical for use. I prefer them. You apparently don't. I'm fine with that difference in our opinions. Now, REALLY-- aren't you?
The point of ALL my recent posts was to point out my feeling that I have very little to go on when deciding to choose an oil filter.Some users are equating price with quality.(Mobil 1).This may pan out.However,there are reports of split canisters and clogged media causing early bypass(and thus NO filtration).So is a filter that gets more of the smaller particles necessarily better in light of these anecdotal problems?I don't know.
Are cardboard endplates deleterious to actual performance?I don't know.But,I'll avoid Fram anyway.
Are Super Tech filters,with their high single/multiple pass efficiencies adequate?Or even excellent?I don't know,because I have yet to find out the micron ratings involved in those 2 tests.
The one thing that seems to be well documented is that a lot of engine wear occurs with particles 20u and smaller.Will that show up in a way that renders an engine useless at 75K?100K?150K?etc.I don't know!
JMO,but after reading the entire forums on oil and on oil filters,I have a much better grasp on the capabilities of the oil I will use than the capabilities of the various filters.
At this point no one can provide an informed answer.
The only major problems I am having with filters now is that the drain back valves/gaskets are pretty much useless, especially after 6 months on the engine. Seems that these silicon gaskets will let oil flow back slowly/seep overnight regardless of who makes them. Only hope is to have an engine with a vertical filter mount
I agree it is true that using inferior filtration is not likely going to cause your engine to pack it in before 200,000 miles. The way I personally see it is that it is more about slow degradation and about what condition the engine will be in at that mileage and beyond. What is the compression going to be like? What about oil consumption, worn valve guides and seals etc. Wear and degradation (of performance) in an engine will increase at an exponential rate once it reaches a critical point - staying well back from that point is the key to long life.
Of course, for many this will not be an issue as they will not hang on to their vehicle that long, so maybe the question could be "what is the best oil filter..........for my situation?"
My guess its use is in filters purolater buys from someone else (they were on the SAAB web page when I first saw them) ).
I hope its not a trend with Purolater.