Daniel Stern, Bob Shuman, and possibly others.

Why the beef with fram oil filters? Granted they are cheap but is there something I missed when our 92 Dynasty 3.3 lasted from 185,000 miles when aquired to the current 250,000 miles running half scale on the pressure guage at anything above idle the whole time up until the oil pump died (I think). We ran Mobil-1 5W30 or 10W30 depending on the season and fram extra guard filters (black textured grip) the entire time BTW. Is it possible that the frams killed the pump?

On an unrelated note when we first got the car it had shifting issues (classic dexron III poisoning symptoms) so I removed the pan and filter and then put the pan back on with 1 bolt in each corner and let the car sit for the next 2 days to drain. I then put the new filter and pan on tightening the pan bolts in a star pattern until the rubber gasket was evenly compressed all the way around (no torque wrench). The flush procedure consisted of disconnecting the cooler line from the radiator and idling the engine in neutral while letting the trans pump out the old fluid into a milk jug and pouring fresh ATF+3 in using a funnel until the fluid coming out went from being burgundy colored to being bright red. I then reconnected the line and did the final level adjustment making sure it was exactly on the full mark with the engine hot. I then disconnected the battery for 15 minutes, reconnected and ran the car in reverse and all the forward gears with the wheels off the ground for several minutes each including many shifts to teach the TCM the new CVIs. We haven't changed the fluid/filter since then which is bad I know but have had zero problems with the tranny. The only times it ever went into limp home mode were a few times from radio tower interference and a few times from rough roads, gravel, etc. knocking the column shifter to neutral at speed. If I fix the oil pump or whatever is wrong with the engine I will also do another filter/fluid/flush on the tranny at the same time. Any transaxle that could survive a poisoning, at least 2 missed fluid changes, and lots of hard driving (Wide open throttle acceleration, tire chirping, cruising at 110 MPH for many miles @ WOT) has got my vote as being a winner. If nothing else it sure blows that other post that said that the life expectancy is only 60,000 miles out of the water.

Reply to
Daniel Armstrong
Loading thread data ...

I read the filter evaluation link that had been posted here and decided for myself that fram was all hype. Their filter construction was worst of the entire lot. I had used them when I was a lot younger as well, but switched to Purolator about 15 years or so back.

I'd personally say your 3.3 survived as long as it did because it was a solid, highly reliable, and very evolved engine design. You also do not say how long you went between filter and oil changes, but that too may have contributed to your experience.

On the transmission, I am not familiar with which transmission the Dynasty used. I thought it was the three speed, but perhaps it used the same

4-speed Ultra-Drive which had the bad reputation. The 3-speed was an excellent transmission. I had one in a 1987 LeBaron GTS and it gave me excellent service. Also, keep in mind that the MiniVan is a whole lot heavier than either the LeBaron or Dynasty so put more strain on the transmission. I know my 1990 Grand Caravan with the 4-Speed died at 6.5 years and 48K miles.

Bob

Reply to
Bob Shuman

The only transmission available behind a 3.3 is/was the 41TE/604

Reply to
aarcuda69062

Unlikely, given the mileage IMHO. The Fram TG and EG are acceptable filters. Not great, but acceptable. They are the most popular oil filter sold in the US. If they were crap, there would be legions of cars on the sides of the road due to oil-related failure. They may not be the best for the price, but they will work just fine for short to average OCI's. There are all sorts of threads on the pluses and minuses of Frams at forums.bobistheoilguy.com.

Having said that, I don't use them on my cars, as I think there are better filters for the money. But if I couldn't get my regular filter, I would use a Fram.

Before you completely condemn the oil pump, have the pressure checked. On my

89 Acclaim 3.0L, the oil pressure sender unit crapped out, causing low dash gauge readings. Replacing the sender fixed the problem.

Good luck.

Bob

Reply to
Robert Meyer

IIRC, the Fram filters allow some of the contaminants to backwash.

-- Christian

Reply to
CMM

Oh, no.

Not again.

Do a googlegroups search.

Reply to
Daniel J. Stern
[Fram]

IOW, his 3.3 and many other engines survive *in spite of* Fram filters, not because of them.

Yep, it did.

Reply to
Daniel J. Stern

They're very cheaply made internally. Is the way they're made adequate? Probably (most of the time). But I'd rather err on the side of caution by sticking with filters that have more consistent manufacturing tolerances (filter end-caps, media folding, end-cap attachment, and especially the anti-drainback valves).

I've had random Frams in the past where the drainback valve would let the filter empty when the engine was turned off and I'd get a very LONG interval after start-up before oil pressure came up. Never had that problem with a Purolator, Wix, Motorcraft, or A/C.

What I'd rather ask is why some people rabidly DEFEND Fram? What is there that makes them *worth* seeking over any other filter? (I had a guy tell me that they match his Hemi-orange Mopar big-block once, but that's pretty darn lame if you ask me...).

I doubt it... but if you have a Fram on it now and the media collapsed into a wad inside the can because of the paper end-caps, the pump might just be fine and its the filter that's restricting the oil flow (I've seen that happen too).

Reply to
Steve

adequate?

caution

Isn't there a TSB for Dodge deisels that say *not* to use a Fram filter because it doesn't have a backflow device and can HARM the engine by depriving it of lubrication at start up?

Reply to
TNKEV

Yes, and there's a corresponding TSB from Fram saying "Our filter is fine! Is too! Is too! Is too! Is too times a finity! Is too is too is too!"

Reply to
Daniel J. Stern

I've only seen one oil filter part that does not have an anti-drainback valve in it (and that only in certain brands - and the application is for a certain Subaru engine). Subaru's spec. for the filter is without the valve because they put a check valve in the engine itself. I checked a couple of brands of filters in the store for that application

- and - beleive it or not - the Purolator was lacking the valve, according to the Subaru spec., and the Frams (IIRC, both the base line model and the Tough Guard) both had a valve in them.

If there is another part in any line of filters that for whatever reason, does not have an anti-drainback valve, I'd be interested in the filter part number.

Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x')

Reply to
Bill Putney

TNKEV is confused, probably by Toyota's ad blitz for their own filters (in which they implied that other-brand filters for Toyota applications don't have antidrainback valves, which is nonsense).

The TSB for Cummins Diesels in Dodge Trucks does advise against Fram filters, but not because of a lack of an anti-drainback valve. The reason is far simpler: The filter's construction and materials don't meet Cummins' specs, and cause engine oiling problems as a result. I have seen the TSB, but I don't own a copy of it. It is also several years old.

Reply to
Daniel J. Stern

That makes a lot more sense.

Not related specifically to TNKEV's or your post, but worth mentioning in this overall discussion: Different levels of filters within the same brand use different materials in the anti-drainback valve. The inferior material, usually reserved for the lowest end of a given brand of filter, is nitrile (or is it neoprene - I forget which). the better/best filters use silicone materials for the valve. The silicone is more compliant and not prone to leak as are the nitrile (neoprene?) valves. And certainly, some brands do not use anything but silicone in their valves.

Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x')

Reply to
Bill Putney

I knew nothing about the Fram filter issue until about 3 years ago when I came across the infamous internet testing post. I have taken several brands of filters apart because of it, I am not a engineer but, what I did find on Fram is that all of their higher end filters are equal or better internally that most. They now use silicone for their gaskets and for their anti-drain back and their filter media is a resin composite. Personally, I think it is all BS, my Ram has over 200k on it and I have always used Fram filters. It burns no oil, uses about 1/4 quart in 4000 miles and my last compression check with leak down meets factory specifications. I think there is a chicken little syndrome about Fram filters, after all if they did not meet MFGRs specifications it would be in every owners manual on every vehicle and there would be TSBs out the ying yang. Also, top shows like Goss's Garage with Pat himself who writes for Motor Week saying do not use Fram.

My 2 Cents Coasty

Reply to
Coasty

I assume it's still true that Fram may actually have ADBV's, but that they don't work. This was the case 10 years ago anyhow and I haven't heard of their quality improving any. Certainly not worth taking the chance when a Wix or Purolator is the same price.

nate

Reply to
Nate Nagel

Sorry to bring up a sore subject on the filters.

Change interval was always 5000 to 7500 depending on when I had time to change it because my parents both worked and usually one or the other would have the car until close enough to dusk that there simply wasn't sufficent time to do the job properly. We did go 15000 between changes with a filter every 5000 once just to see how long it would take to turn Mobil-1 completely black and cruddy.

According to my sister's boyfriend who has the car it does show some pressure if the engine is revved. I have not started it to check it for myself. The sender port should be standard tapered pipe threaded so it shouldn't be hard to hook up the mechanical oil guage I have.

The car developed an oil drain plug leak when they started driving it (cars seem to have odd and off the wall problems when my sister drives them) so they were going to use cheap dino oil in the engine until they could get a new oil pan and shortly after that was when the pressure problem started. I almost think it is like a cat/dog that you feed expensive food to for a few years straight then switch to cheap for whatever reason and it makes them sick, the engine is just rejecting the cheap dino stuff.

The trans is the good ol' A604. I mentioned crawl home/limp home mode in my OP so it should have been obvious that it has the 4 speed as the A413 3 speed is mechanical and does not have a crawl home mode.

Is disconnecting the cooler line a preferred method of flushing the trans or is there a better way?

Reply to
Daniel Armstrong

That's a matter of opinion and one's priorities. *If* your priority is to replace very close to 100% of the old fuild in one sitting, then, for the DIY'er, that's the way to do it. If you would be satisfied with 40% fluid replacement, then dropping the pan is the way to go for you - especially if you have to replace the filter anyway (must drop pan).

One could argue that doing the pan drop at more frequent intervals would be equivalent to 95+% fluid replacement (at longer intervals) using the disconnected cooler line method.

Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x')

Reply to
Bill Putney

It obviously had at least some dexron in it when we got the car due to the symptoms(VERY jerky shift to first when slowing to a stop) and that is why I used that method. My current plan is to do it that way again due to having gone 65000 without a change and then I will try every 20000 from then on by just a pan drop if the fluid is still fairly bright red. I also plan on putting this engine and trans in a different car because the car has bad rear end collision damage and the suspension is falling apart (bushings disintegrating, pulls to right and nose dives on right front corner when braking). It should be easy to find another car/van with a 3.3/3.8 that has a blown trans because most people in my area seem to think that dexron III is the only fluid in existance and that it can be used in all makes and model car transmissions and power steering systems.

Reply to
Daniel Armstrong

anti-drainback

I can't believe you say this considering the Fram website itself clearly shows they are still using cardboard end caps on the Fram Tough Guard filters. That IS one of Fram's "high end" filters. The Low End Fram filter is the Extra Guard filter.

Only the Racing Oil FIlters appear to show metal end caps.

Additionally, the Fram Double Guard contains Teflon and DuPont has stated that Teflon is not designed to be used inside of internal combustion engines.

And Fram is also pushing a "high mileage" filter now with special time release additive gel for the oil. Once again, it's the old oil additive snake oil scam again, this time used to sell oil filters.

Seems to me that your choices of Fram are:

High Mileage - contains a snake oil that is against all auto manufacturers recommendations to NOT use motor oil additives.

Extra Guard - cardboard end caps, cheap low-end filter, you have already said the low end Frams are garbage

Tough Guard - once more, cardboard end caps.

Double Guard - releases Teflon into the oil in violation of the Teflon manufacturers - DuPont's - recommendations

Racing Oil - seems to be equivalent to the industry standard in oil filters - metal end caps, silicon valve, etc. - only problem is it's "low restriction" racing media - is it low restriction because it's filtering isn't as tight, thus allowing larger particles through?

The -lower end- Purolators aren't cheap cardboard end cap construction. Why pay for a high end Fram that is equal in quality to a low end Purolator? Why not pay for a high end Purolator which is probably even better than the high end Fram if your goal is to pay $10 a filter?

For starters, the manufacturers specifications for oil filters are just like their specs for any other part you buy for your car - buy the filter from the automaker. I don't think a single automaker recommends an aftermarket filter from anyone.

Secondly, there's a number of folks who have posted about Frams that have split or burst or exploded, just Google for this and you will find lots of postings. But you won't find postings saying that other manufacturers' oil filters have split open.

There's also folks been hurt by recalled Frams for motorcycles - see here:

formatting link
If it happened once, that indicates poor QC and thus greater chance of it happening again.

I don't see any recalls for Wix filters, by contrast.

Ted

Reply to
Ted Mittelstaedt

anti-drainback valve

filters (in

One of the Techs I work with handed me the TSB about 6 months ago and I looked for it the other day and again this morning, I asked and he told me that bulletin is no longer available.

Reply to
TNKEV

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.