Oil Filter Information

For anyone that has not already made up their mind and actually wants to use the best filter for the money, reading this post and also the links to other pages is a necessity!

formatting link
It is a HUGE study and will take some time to read, so be ready to take notes.

Good Luck, Bruce

Reply to
Highcountry
Loading thread data ...

Groan. Read the warning on the website.

If you want to determine the "best" filte, use the SAE tests, not an eyeball evaluation.

Reply to
John Kunkel

Many people ignorantly cite the study to damn the entire Fram line of filters out of hand, yet the author of the study has the Fram Tough Guard in the "Recommended" list. Imagine that.

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

If nothing else, all that pile of information should make you aware that there are really CRAPPY filters out there compared to the better ones! And in my opinion, an SAE approval is the automotive version of a UL listing for home products--someone paid the License Fee.

I highly suggest you spend a little money and chop up a few of your favorite brands and do come comparison. Two things that are difficult to ignore are the Square Inches of filter material and the type of Relief Valve.

Don't just buy a pretty paint job!

Bruce

Reply to
Highcountry

It's still better than an eyball evaluation, actual filtering ability is more important than looks.

Square inches of material means nothing if the material is less efficient.

Reply to
John Kunkel

Yes, but an eyeball evaluation can reveal weak construction, poor assembly, and lots of other things that would make me avoid a filter. And presumably a smart buyer would ONLY be comparing filters that meet the same approvals and wouldn't even bother with fly-by-nights no matter how "good" they look to the eyeball anyway.

Ah, but here's the rub. An efficient filtration material will have more flow resistance per unit area than a less efficient material. So if you have a MORE efficient material but LESS area, you pay a huge price in backpressure which just means the bypass valve opens sooner. IOW, if you see a filter with far less filtration area than another, odds are it has a far LESS efficient filter material.

So in the final analysis, more area is a good thing, provided that both filters trap the same minimum particle size.

Reply to
Steve

You sure that's how the filtering industry defines "efficiency"?

I don't see that conclusion. If the filter material has more resistance per unit area, it's just as likely, if not more, that they will use more area to give overall better properties (including the ability to hold more total crud before hitting high resistance).

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 think we're in violent agreement, Bill. I was pointing out that when you do see a filter with relatively little surface area, it probably has a material that has holes bigger than Kansas so as not to generate back-pressure.

Reply to
Steve

Yep - you're right. I still would like to see what the filter industry uses as a definition of "efficiency".

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

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.