Oil Relocation Kits - Harmful to your engine?

De nada. ;-) (And that's about the limit of my Spanish...)

A pain in the ass you can live with, it's the absolutely impossible ones that need a remote kit - and the design engineer needs to be shot for putting a service item in an impossible spot in the first place...

There's a special level in Hell reserved for the all the engineers who make things that look beautiful - but are impossible to repair without busted knuckles and/or total disassembly.

And dropping the skid plate to change the oil filter certainly counts - I would have grabbed a plasma torch and cut an access hole in the skid-plate if they stuck me with that one.

If the remote filter kit had the relief valve in it, you would probably be OK, but I don't know of any that do.

With remote filters, there's a lot more things to go wrong, between the seals from the adapter to the block, and all the extra oil hoses - KISS. The less things you add that can break, the less that will.

There are other spin-on oil filter designs that fit those cup-end filter wrenches - and just as many different sizes of cup end wrenches needed to fit them, because each brand has a different flat count on each size...

-->--

Why? I didn't see where anyone had a bad thing to say about the remote filter just several people that thought you should use a specific filter on the remote unit. Did I miss something?

Steve B.

Not sure why anyone would need a relocation kit unless it was a real pain to get to. And even then...

I have to drop the skidplate to access on my 3L, but its only 4 bolts and I just spin the filter off by hand and spin on a new one. Takes all of 5 minutes.

Nothing but a 12mm and 14mm socket and wrench is needed for a full oil change. (well, next to someplace for the old oil. And the new oil, fitler, and oil treatment. :)

Steve B. wrote Sun, 19 Sep 2004 02:21:37 GMT %n

I ordered a remote kit specifically for a 2000 Toyota 4Runner. The kit that arrived was designed to use a PH8A or equivalent-sized filter.

The oem Toyota filter or any matching aftermarket filters would simply not fit the remote kit.

Assuming that you have changed oil every 3000 miles that is a total of

80 Fram oil filters that you have used.

If the failure rate of Fram filters in service is 10%, (1 in 10, or 10 in

100 filters) it is easily possible that you would have never experienced an oil filter failure - ie: there was a 90% chance that every time you bought a Fram oil filter that it was a good one that wasn't going to fail.

Thus I don't see that your testimonial is worth much. Come back after you have

300,000 miles on your Toyota and tell us then how good Fram filters are.

Ted

I got a nifty filter wrench at Sears--has a rack & pinion setup internally so when I twist it CCW its jaws clamp onto the filter. Fits just about anything. Only caveat is that on a really tight filter I've heard it can crush the can before unscrewing it, but I've never met a filter that tight.

So what... it's trash anyways :)

--- Rich

What if it's over your head? (:

WARNING: Finish all liquid refreshments before proceeding.

s p o i l e r

s

p a c e

So you get dripped on a bit, big deal - it's all good. "Oily to bed and Oily to rise makes a gearhead healthy wealthy and wise."

Or something like that... ;-)

-->--

From your claim he should have had 8 filter failures. He's had none. I'd give his claim a lot more value since it's based on ACTUAL filter usage, then the observations made from hacksawing filters apart and commenting on the quality of the spot welds and whether or not the endcaps had glue dribbles on them.

Ludicrous request.

-- Elbridge Gerry, of Massachusetts:

"What, sir, is the use of militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty. . . Whenever Government means to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise a standing army upon its ruins." -- Debate, U.S. House of Representatives, August 17, 1789

How do you figure that? Just because the failure rate is 1 in 10 does not mean he's automatically going to have every 10th filter he buys fail on him. Statistically, that is what the AVERAGE person would have happen. But these sorts of statistics are totally meaningless when applied to a SINGLE person in the sample group. Maybe he's just been one of the lucky ones. Maybe someone else has had EVERY filter they bought fail - that is where you get an average from.

And in any case I said "IF THE FAILURE RATE" I didn't say that the failure rate WAS that for Frams. I don't know the actual failure rate but as failure rates of any product are partly determined by quality of construction (ie: your spot welds) it is pretty clear that Frams fail at a higher rate because their construction is poorer.

I used 10% because that makes it an easy calculation for the example, since evidentally so many people in this forum are math-challenged. It's a shame that so many people in this forum are unable to see the difference between an example that is setup for illustrating a point, and an actual example of something that happened.

You don't hear about many oil filter catastrophic burst failures, this isn't a common problem. As nobody tracks auto repairs (other than the automakers and they only care about in-warranty repair tracking) nobody really knows what the average burst failure rate of an oil filter is. If Usenet is any kind of a guide, it's probably under 1%. I would theorize that this is because the auto oil filter is so overengineered for strength in the first place - because a burst failure is so catastrophic - that even the worst examples don't have a high burst failure rate.

And of course, if the filter fails internally, nobody is going to know because it will most likely clog and the bypass valve open. The only evidence would be a slightly dirtier oil at change time and nobody is going to notice this.

But there IS a failure rate for oil filters, no doubt about it. I submit that it's higher for Frams, a lot higher, due to their construction. Please now provide a logical argument showing how something made more shoddily is going to have a better failure rate than something made better, the designs being equal.

The folks that saw them apart also use them. And some of them even have testimonials as well. Since you give his pro-Fram testimonial so much credit, why don't you give the anti-Fram testimonials equal credit?

Now do you finally understand the futility of arguing with testimonials? 4 out of

5 dentists!

Ludicrous that a Toyota would make it to 300,000 miles? At least that we agree on.

Ted

Ted sed:

Dat's cuz "if" is a perty small word, and proly got lost in the eyeball shuffle...

And altho it was argued oppositely in terms of the filter material itself, chintzing on welds etc would in all likelihood *correlate w/ some kind of "irregularity" in the media itself*, porosity or otherwise. People, and mfr's in particular, usually don't kick the dog w/o kicking the cat.

Probably another thread, but my impression of automotive lore is that Toyota's would be statistically *more likely* to make 300,000 miles...

Your overall point is spot spot on (spot weld??): if the cost is the same, why *reward* a chintzing mfr?? And, why take the chance? Which proves that you don't nec get what you pay for!

Your points about oil filters and "consumer behavior" are really interesting. AZGuy's point about a filter poss. being too fine (toward the end of again hustling the consumer) was also astute. We are, as consumers, but fish in a barrel.

Actually, one of the better threads I've read in a while, from everyone's input.

If he was buying a case of filters and then using them one at a time over the life of the vehicle your view might have some merit, but as he's buying them as he needs them and therefore is getting a "representative" sample of many manufacturing lots, he is very likely to hit the average, whatever it is.

No, it's not at all clear. You can't tell squat from the eyeball analysis as to failure rates. Those cardboard end caps you talk about, what makes you think they are going to fail? The pressure of the oil when the filter is in service pushes the caps ON, not off.

Look, you gave the example and I showed how your conclusion, which you attempted to base on your example, was 180 degrees wrong.

Then why are you obsessing over how strong the can is? I've never had on burst and not a single person I've known in decades has ever had a filter burst. It's really a non-issue except for those few special cases people allege and even that, the VW's that supposedly burst filters.... my wife, and both sisters had VW and never had any bursting problems with the filters.

How does a filter "fail" resulting in a "clog"? Or do you mean it fills with "dirt" and goes into bypass mode. Based on the couple of used filters I've hacksawed open, I'd be shocked if that happened on anything other then a vehicle that was totally ragged out and burning a quart every 100 miles. None of the used filters I've opened had more then a tiny little bit of stuff on the paper. Most of the dirt you see in your used oil is the stuff that's so small you don't need to worry about it and the filters are not supposed to be taking it out.

The only evidence would be a

You can submit your opinion all you want. That proves nothing.

Please now

Because nothing about the fram design logically means it won't provide the same level of filtering over it's 3000- 6000 mile life. It's just a filter, it's not supposed to be a work of art.

The credit I'm giving him is that unlike you, he has an evidentiary basis for his opinion, you have, well, nothing but an opinion. There are lots of testimonials for how great K&N filters and Gas Magnets are

- does that mean you believe them? And if you saw two gas magnets and one was REALLY WELL MADE would you think it worked better then one that was poorly made? Or would you say, wait a minute, even if this magnet gizmo does work, why would it matter if it had a really nice coat of paint on it and cost more the one with the same amount of magnetic flux with a lousy paint job?

Hmm, you base your view on hacksawed eyeball observations and declare a winner, while the guy who actually used them with zero problems for nearly 300K you discount as meaningless data.

Ludicrous that you would think another 30K would prove something more then what we already know.

-- Elbridge Gerry, of Massachusetts:

"What, sir, is the use of militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty. . . Whenever Government means to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise a standing army upon its ruins." -- Debate, U.S. House of Representatives, August 17, 1789

But think about it from a different viewpoint. If two manufacturers are targeting to have a $5 filter, which would you rather have, the one with the heavy metal can and great spot welds,which accounts for $4 out of the $5 cost, leaving them $1 to spend on the actual filter media... Or the other manufacturer who uses thinner metal and who's spot welds don't look as pretty (but are more then adequate) and which account for $3 of the cost leaving $2 to spend on the filter media itself. In the absence of REAL DATA on any of this, we just don't know do we.

-- Elbridge Gerry, of Massachusetts:

"What, sir, is the use of militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty. . . Whenever Government means to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise a standing army upon its ruins." -- Debate, U.S. House of Representatives, August 17, 1789

Where I've heard of this happening is usually at an autocross where someone is making a hard run and getting to near-redline speeds without checking to make sure the oil is properly warmed up first (and probably running 15W40 or 15W50 oil as well... remember we're talking VW's here, they like thick oil) Admittedly not a common scenario, but one that is of concern to some of us.

That doesn't mean that there isn't an apparently better made (i.e. Purolator or Wix) product available at the same price. There's not necessarily a correlation, but it does seem reasonable that if more care were taken in the manufacturing and materials used that more care may have been taken in the design as well. In my mind, it's just not worth taking a chance.

I've seen quite a few instances of vehicles with "upside down" filters and running Frams showing evidence of a faulty anti-drainback valve. If that doesn't count for anything, what does? It is clear to me that the filter was the problem, as it seems farfetched to assume that the oil itself had thinned so much as to require several seconds to build pressure on startup when after an oil change with a different filter it only took a fraction of a second.

I guess what this whole discussion boils down to is that some people are satisfied with "good enough" and some are always looking for the best value for the money. I consider myself in the latter category, which is why I avoid Fram and also always use "fleet" oils (a.k.a. HDEO's or "dual rated" oils) when I don't run synthetic. Doesn't cost me a penny more than regular name brand stuff but gives me that little extra cushion against problems, or maybe a few extra miles at the end of the engine's life...

nate

Is this just a little blown out of proportion. I have used mostly Frams and some other brands and not had a problem in 294K miles. Never seen the checkvalve fail, at least when I take it off, only a little oil drains out. When I cut it open, a bunch gushes out.

The 3L does not seem that picky. I have had as little as 2qts in it (normal is 5qt) and a much as 9qts. It's still going down the road.

On Tue, 21 Sep 2004 05:40:58 -0700, Proctologically Violated©® wrote:

a relocation kit would work good for people wanting to change their oil filter more frequently... like those who believe in the 10,000 mile oil change.