I have a 93 chev. S 10 - 4.3 -that has developed a plugged oil pump
from a Fram oil filter. One of the crank bearings has been wallered out
and is a knockin now. I am wondering if I can open exhaust and intake
valves and still use the engine for a couple of months and run it on 5
I am sure the rod bearing is bad and most likely the crank-but a couple
of weeks more and I can afford to get one from the salvage yard. Any
suggestions would be appreciated.
Yea. Can you back that claim up about the Fram filter? I don't see them
doing anything except replacing your filter, but who knows. It depends
on the case and the proof. If you have 175K on the motor and only
suspect the filter, you are out of luck. If there is a physical
deformity in the filter, you could have something.
I think you could disable the fuel injector on the bad cylinder and
take the load off that cylinder pretty much. No sense spending much
time on it.
I only used Fram filters -when I removed the plug to change oil I found
all pieces of filter remnants-and after running a can of Sea Foam
through the system-i found even more filter elements..But I am not
going after Fram-why bother with a high mileage motor(225,000)...I also
have a 92 Astro van with the 4.3 "W" and it is still running after
295,000 and still using Fram...Just happened to be the one that went
I thought I was the only one who had a Fram failure until the internet got
popular and I started to see messages from others, then the guy who made
the web site and cut them apart so I cut mine open and I could tell they
were cheaply made.
Mine was a fuel filter that failed and it was back before they started
putting them under the body so I had a leaky filter which could have easily
started a fire, I was very lucky.
Sure there are many people who use fram and get lucky and don't have a
failure, but there are people who drive without seatbelts, or drive 30mph
over the speed limit and don't get caught, but sooner or later their luck
will run out.
I know the site you mean. This guy was well meaning, but appearance of poor
quality does not automatically equate to failures.
Lots of hearsay erupted after this, but when asked if anybody had actually
sustained a failure, most either got quiet, or answered with 'everybody
or 'I heard', or similar.
This is the same sort of rumor and innuendo that plagued Slick 50. When
" Did it happen to you?" or "Are you sure that this is what caused the
there were few or no documented cases. (Slick 50, whether it was a good
or not, lost a legal maneuver because they made claims that they had no
test date to back up. Unsubstantiated advertising, as it were. AFAIK, it
proven that the product had caused failures nor that it did not provide some
of lubrication enhancement. It is still on the market.)
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.