Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Oil Filters, whose is best, and Why?
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Here's The Champion Labs response:
"Wal-Mart has requested we consolidate some part numbers in the Super Tech filter line. In doing so, the ST2808 will now be labeled as ST3593A.
The ST3593A is fitted with an anti-drainback valve as well as a by-pass valve; as was the ST2808. The SuperTech filter line meets or exceeds all original equipment requirements for fit and function.
If you require additional assistance, please feel free to contact our
Filter Hotline at 800-882-0890.
Thank you.
Dale Hayes
Technical Assistance
Representative"
I have had TLC's since a older 87 onto a 97. Toyota has seen fit to resize and change the oil filters for the I6 engine at least three times that I know of. Equivalents have gone from like a Fram PH8A (softball and larger size) to an intermediate to the current AC Delco PF53(baseball size).
For the Fram PH8A in 1987 IF I was lucky, I could catch a sale and buy two for 2.50 . OEM filters were 3.50 if you bought a case of 10. Today OEM filters can be had for 4.50-6. I can buy the SuperTech equivalent for 1.97 24/7. SuperTech advertises 98% single pass and 99% multiple pass efficiencies.
In my view the filtering media as gotten better and cheaper.
In this case, I think Ford knows what they're talking about.
If I remember correctly, the Motorcraft filter is a Purolator Plus can with some of the PureOne refinements.
Over the weekend I used my last old-style blue can ST2808 for an oil change on a 98 Isuzu Trooper. It's a horizontal filter mount. If I remember correctly, the new ST2808 should work fine in a vertical filter mount, as is the case on our other vehicle which happens to take the same filters as the Trooper. So my leftover 2808s shouldn't be a total waste. Or am I better off just returning them?
It can be that the lowest failure rate percentage is really what we are buying,advertising and hoping for.
http://theoildrop.server101.com/cgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&- amp;f=6&t=000513#000024
"Our goals are to try and see if we can watch bypass valves, when and how long do they stay open, oil drop across filters when oil is cold, when hot..."
Since I have all the same equipment, I will be doing some tests with transmission fluid to test remote transmission filters of the FL-1A size family.
I think this is a call for sharing more technical data, which I am guessing the OEM's are loathed to share.
If not, be prepared to laugh YAO.
http://forums.vwvortex.com/zerothread?id=691260
I've did a quick browse through this thread and have seen some issues about proof how schaeffers oils does or does not hold up to a full synth.
First, yes they have a 5w30 full synth that is not api certified. It is good, but for what you pay it's not that good. The blend can hold it's own for long extended drains as the full synth's can. Reason, well, in short, schaeffers doesn't just use one or two barrier additives, but 5 different combinations. moly,zinc,phos,penetro,antimony. Also, included is a surfactant the breaks the ionic tension of the additives giving it a better spread across the surface, like water, additives has ionic tension which if you were to fill a glass up to the brim with water, it will hold, but with a surfactant, it will break the tension and flow over. This is also commonly used in a good coolant additive such as redlines or schaeffers clean and cool.Another reason is they use more antioxidants vers detergents so it doesn't rely on having a higher tbn as the tbn drop is slower than those with higher tbns based on the antioxidants that neutralizes the acids before they become and acid, thus it doesn't affect the base oil, unlike higher tbn oils, then will lose their neutralizing effect sooner then rely on the tbn(detergents) to clean up what the acid's. Because of this, you'd want a full synth because acids attack the oxidation of the base oil, so if your not using as much antioxidants then a higher tbn is needed but also a higher level of base oil so it isn't oxidized as easy. That's why schaeffers blends perform as well as any full synth.
Now, as for proof, Al did an analysis with the full blend, which I told him at that time of purchase he was wasting his money on as it wouldn't perform much if any better than the blend. Now his analysis was compared to m1 and did better than m1, but also compared to analysis all over my board, it shows no better than our blends. I personally have been doing a 4k oil analysis on my car, first with the 700 15w40 blend with a m1 filter.. Analysis showed a good report, then to prove that wear protection isn't based on the base oil but the additives, I switched over to the exact same oil only it doesn't have the pao and carries the same basic additive package as when most change up from a mineral they change brands to a full synth and thus different additives and my contention is that it is the additives that make the oil, not the base oil contrary to popular belief.
Ok, now I have done the second 4k drain with a full mineral oil but only this time instead of having used the m1 filter I had used the cheapest fram filter I could get to ensure that it had nothing to do with the filtration. Well, to mine and many others surprise, the mineral oil came back with much lower wear numbers!. Based on this, it now struck me as to what might be happening. Maybe that flow has a lot to do with wear protection, particularly in stop and go traffic. So, this is where I decided to run the 5w30 mineral based oil again with the same fram filter to see if having a thinner oil will help the numbers even more. I'm currently on that now. Based on this information, this is why I setup the oil flow test. Yep, as always, there's always someone that thinks just because I do this, it's not proof enough it means anything. No problem, but There's a lot more going on with this test than has been brought out at this time.
We are going to bring up the oil temp to 200degs and redo the test. I also have a way to possibly check the antidrainback valve for back pressure reliability. Also, since I do have a virgin fram filter with documented flow on this setup, when I do my oil change, I'm going to dump my old filter, and place it on there and measure what kind of resistance if any I may have on a 4k used filter based against the new one.
Anyway, enjoy seeing you guys still pondering on oil and filters, and hopefully I'll keep some of you amused with my backyard test, but from where I stand, I've seen way to many " BS " data from many oil sites that have not established anything but say it's so, at least I'll take a stab at base line pressure tests and see what happens and so far, from what I have seen, m1 filter will never go back on my car at this time, as wear analysis and my pressure test has shown both that the 10lb drop was all it takes to increase wear. The wix/napa silver would be my second choice based on what we have so far seen.
Anyway, have a good one, As I'll be going back to my site not to bother you anymore. Enjoy, hope you're all doing well. Cheers! Bob.
Also those tests where done in the coolest part of the day and night, temp was average of 75-77degs.
Many talk about how it's much harder on the oil driving in town than on the hwy.. Ever really wonder how?, consider this. At idle, you may have say 28lbs of pressure of oil wedge at the rod bearings, and when you accelerate, you pump immediately jumps the flow up causing oil pressure to rise to say 40lbs from the filter back to the pump and depending on how long it takes for the oil to flow through the whole system which is anywhere from 3 to six foot(length of the motor at least twice,bottom and top cams), the longer the time it takes for the oil to build up the pressure you rod bearing is squeezing out the 28lb's our pressure easily as opposed to the 40lbs it normally would have. Each time you hit that gas from a stop, this occurs, thus scuffing the bearings when it shear the oil's hydrodynamic condition since there isn't enough oil pressure, this is whey the boundary lubricant becomes more important than ever in this condition. Obviously, it is better to have that 40lbs of wedge effect at the bearings which will protect better than just relying on a boundary condition.
Thanks
Dejan
Under normal conditions I just don't see a oil filter as a useful appendage and I am trying in my own testing to see if this is true or false. For me it its the oil and driving conditions that make the difference, especially if you chagne every 3000 miles. then, you may not even need a filter
UNIT 2000 MAZDA 626 LX-V6
MI/HR ON OIL 10,000
MI/HR ON UNIT 60,000
SAMPLE DATE 4/6/2003
FIRST NUMBER IS MY OIL AND SECOND NUMBER IS UNIVERSAL AVERAGE
ALUMINUM 7 4
CHROMIUM 2 1
IRON 33 12
COPPER 7 6
LEAD 23 5
TIN 0 13
MOLYBDENUM 75 0
NICKEL 1 0
MANGANESE 1 1
SILVER 0 0
TITANIUM 0 0
POTASSIUM 2 0
BORON 108 38
SILICON 11 9
SODIUM 9 6
CALCIUM 2951 1304
MAGNESIUM 73 481
PHOSPHORUS 801 747
ZINC 963 880
BARIUM 0 1
VISCOSITY @ 210 ºF 64 55-62
FLASHPOINT IN ºF 415 >365
FUEL % <0.5 <2.0
WATER % 0 <0.05
ANTIFREEZE % 0 0
INSOLUBLES % 0.04 <0.6
LAB COMMENT:Nothing too unusual showed up here. This oil was run quite a bit longer that what we
normally see and this is the reason for most of the high wear. The universal averages column shows typical wear from this type of engine after 4,000-5,000 miles on the oil. Lead at 23 ppm shows mildly high bearing wear, though everything else looks okay. The TBN was 3.5 which is low, but not a problem. 2.0 or less is considered a problem. The oil started at 10-11. No fuel or anti-freeze was present. Suggest going 11,000 next oil and resample at that point to monitor.
Personally, I don't think filters make much diff in modern engines using quality oil. I sent in a smaple this past weeekend with the primary diff between it and previous samples being that I did not change the filter at 6000 miles as I did in the others, this one the filter went 10,000 miles. So, results should be interesting. I feel the results will be the same and changing the filter has no effect but I will await the report to confirm it.
If you want to better protect the engine, then change more frequently.
This is not necessarily true. If you can reduce the wear per mile driven by changing oil more frequently then yes, but chances are you don't reduce the wear/mile you just reduce the total amount of wear as shown in ppm. 1 ppm of iron at 500 miles is equal; to 10 ppm of iron at 5000.
I use the Amsoil SDF filters except in one care where I use K&N. I have changed my phylosophy from filtering to flow and I now feel that flow is more important then filtering.
If you switch to Amsoil do not assume you can go 20,000 miles in a year. Highly hioghly receommned analysis at 10,000 to see if the oil is holding up.
Each engine and driving condition is differnet as some simply cannot do it. I have yet to find an engine of mine that can go beyond 12,000 miles and get a decent oil analysis report. IF you go to Amsoil use the 5W30 series 3000 (gas/diesel oil) better additive package then the regular 5W or 10W synthetic they sell. I use the 10W and cannot get beyond 12,000 miles, 7500 on my Toyota. Toyotas just beat the oil up bad. Do not be sold by an overzealous Amsoil rep that the oil can go 25,000 in a year. It rarely can.
the other question is if the wear rate is 10 ppm of iron at 5000 miles but goes to 30 ppm in 5000 miles how much sooner will that engine fail if we just continue on with the same oil and change habits. No one knows and so much is dependent on the individual engine, climate and driving habits.
The 3K oil and filter interval nullifies any reasonable concern in this matter in the vast majority of cases, as you implied.
OEM-90915-YZZA2
Fram-PH4967
STP- S4967
I forgot the numbers for the M1 and Bosch.
Oil changes are between 2500 and 3000 all the time. Car "uses /burns" 1/2 quart between changes and no leaks. Let the advice (and insults due to being naive) fly. I definitely want to use a better filter than that four letter word but the $13 M1 just hurts.
I did cut the OEM and in this extremely small filter, the length of the material was 13 inches longer than the Fram. This will definitely be better choice than F. I am picking up my 2003 Sequoia in 2 weeks and want to start right with it (probably M1 and synthetic) and hopefully double the 160k on my current Toyota.
Anybody have experience with BG Products? My local Toyota dealer uses their stuff for in house services (tranny and fuel injection). They actually pump out / through 15 qts of tranny fluid then change filter. What a difference in fluid color / clarity as to what my friend had done at AAMCO. On my car they used a synthetic gear lube (synchro shift 2) that actually cleared up a light grind on shifting. They said it was the synchros "dragging" with the regular GL-5. Also cleaned fuel injectors and added 44k cleaner to Gas and MOA during oil change. All I know is my car has not run this good since it was new.
Thanks in advance for your advice.
The other thing is that on a 1987 TLC I ran almost strictly FRAM's PH 8A filter with Mobil One 5w-30 for app 250k miles on 15k intervals.