Who was it who mentioned Fram oil filters and dropping oil pressure?

One company making a better oil filter than another is not a 'superstitious belief'. Gonna tell me Chevys are as high quality as Toyotas now?

Hey! It's got PTFE, the 'slipperiest substance known to man'. That's gotta be worth something.

I tried Slick 50 a couple times, but I usually don't add it more than once every 4th or 5th oil change, on cars with old engines. Won't put it in my Scion for at least 15 years!

Here's how I got started. I have an '89 Mazda 626 with Hydraulic Lash Adjusters. After I had the car for a few months, it started making this horrible clacking noise. That's when I found out about the HLAs and found a web site describing how to replace them. I had tried Castrol GTX, the oil I have been using for 30 years, and tried Marvel Mystery oil, hoping to free it up and 'fill' it with a lighter grade oil, both to no avail. I was due for an oil change, so I went to AutoZone, they had the HLAs in stock, $55 for four. The engine takes 12. I'll look for the collapsed one and replace it. Then I saw the QS with Slick 50, so I picked up 4 quarts. Can't hurt.

I changed the oil, disconnected the coil (I like cars with a single coil just for this reason...), cranked the starter a few times until the OIL light went off, connected the coil, fired it up and...NO MORE CLACKING!

I held onto the HLAs for a few more days and then returned them, and haven't thought about replacing them since....they just don't clack any more!

No, particles 20 microns in size (aprox 0.001 inches) will cause wear ANYWHERE the clearances are close to 0.001 inches - they will contact both surfaces ans scratch at least one. Particles only 1/4 that size can flow through between parts without contacting them at all, therefore causing no scratches/wear. Not too many engine clearances down around tha 0,00025 inch range.

Who mentioned toilet paper filters? Sure not me. The "average" full flow filter, regardless of filter media, can hold up to 1/4 cup of "crap" and still flow oil - There is space between the filter media and the can, as well as space between the pleats. When the space between the pleats fills up, the filter can no longer flow oil - but the crud that gets caught by the filter and then settles out, just fills the "cup" of the filter. This DOES work best with a "hanging" filter setup where the filter base is UP.

If a dollar more per change (or even often a dollar LESS to use a filter that isn't orange) will provide better filtration and lubrication, reducing the chance that I'll have to dissassemble the engine in my car before I throw it away at 200,000 plus, I'm sure going to use the better filter. I sold my last car at 18 years of age with a decent body and good running engine and transmission for 1/4 what I paid for it 12 or 13 years earlier.

Wasn't so lucky with my last van, which had a rebuilt engine of questionable quality installed when I got it (ac delco crate 3.8) that only went 98,000 km in 8 years.

It should not - but MANY FRAM filters DO leak past the bypass valve. Take one apart and the question won't be how or why, but how can they NOT.

There are a VERY few that have the filter bypass built into the engine. The 1969 Corvair is the last I am familiar with that had it. That engine had a filter bypass, a cooler bypass, and a pressure regulator, all built into the engine.

The VAST majority of engines today require the filter to have a built-in bypass valve.

But if it DOES, you know engine clearances or a worn out pump are NOT the issue.

Avoid Slick 50 at all costs. It's very bad for your engine.

My uncle used it in his Kenworth grain hauler and reported engine temperatures dropped 15 degrees or something like that and idle speed increased something like 25 percent - indicating reduced engine friction.

I tried it in one of my vehicles and found absolutely no improvement in operation - no reduction in (minimal) oil consumption, no reduction in fuel consumption, no reduction in operating temperatures (but it was a 3.0 liter Aerostar - even with a good thermostat it needed a "winter cover" to get any heat in the winter).

DuPont says do NOT put teflon (they are the manufacturer) into an engine - and there have been reports of it (the teflon) being caught in oil filters, restricting oil flow, so I choose not to ever use it again.

Care to document that?

I had the pan off a '78 Civic for some time while doing major repairs once. After I put it back together and started it, it blew out the oil filter gasket and sprayed oil on the front of my garage door! The OPRV was stuck closed. I took it off and freeed it up and cleaned. Everything good after that.

Carl

If you use any brand oil filter and follow the maintenance recommendations of the engine manufacturer it is extremely unlikely that the engine will fail in any way before you reach that point where you are no longer willing to keep the rest of the car running. So the question of whether one filter may be better than another is completely moot except to idiots who hold superstitious beliefs.

In the long run insisting on one brand filter over another is going to have just as much effect as performing ritualistic dances and mumbling voodoo incantations in an attempt to extend the life of an engine.

-jim

It's best to avoid brands of filters that are known to be so poorly constructed that they have a history of failing catastrophically. It really doesn't cost more than a trifling amount of money to use a decent filter, especially if you plan ahead. I.e. I stock up on Toyota filters when there's a $3.99 coupon from the dealer (which includes a drain plug gasket as part of the deal, bringing the net cost of the filter to $2.99 since a drain plug gasket usually sells for $1 (must be the highest margin part sold by dealers and auto parts stores).

Sure the odds are that even with a poor quality filter you'll get lucky and not be one of the ones who has one fall apart, but why take the chance when there's no real monetary savings in doing so?

All the filters on the market have about the same history for catastrophic failures. One brand may have a large number people who share a belief in imagined failures. Look up what the American Psychiatric Association has to say about "mass hysteria". I believe that organization is also peddling medications that they say will provide a cure for this condition.

What about someone who doesn't have a Toyota?

Is it a matter of faith? If you believe then the filter won't fall apart? Or maybe voodoo witch doctors cast bad spells on some engines if one doesn't follow the true believers.

-jim

Or people who are on the skinny end of the bell curve, and have long term relationships with their cars.

Unless you happen to be the one unlucky bastard whose oil filter blows apart on a cold morning, and/or you're expecting your engine to last longer than 100K miles. I prefer to use "known good" filters to minimize my risk.

nate

Using a "known inferior" part and counting on the engine to last is what takes faith - and mabee a supersized side order of stupid to go with it.

There is no evidence that what you are spouting is anything more than a superstition. It is not supported by eveidence. There are millions of engines that don't have the problems your superstitious beliefs say they should be having. The obvious common thread in the vast majority of the anecdotes about Frams is that the problems occurred in engines that were already in terminal condition. It appears to me that it is at this point when the owner can no longer deal with the reality of a failing engine that one is most likely to turn to superstition and folklore for the answers.

Take the guy who insists that Fram oil filters are no good because he hooked up a drill to the engine he just rebuilt and blew up the oil filter. This guy obviously has serious mechanical problems. The engine that he was speaking of comes equipped with both a pressure regulator and a filter bypass in the engine. But instead of looking for the real cause of his problems he is more than happy just join the gang of Fram bashers and forget about reality.

Well your not minimizing your risk by avoiding Fram. Nor would you be increasing your risk by using Fram oil filters. An oil filter is not that complicated. It is a product like soap or cornflakes and we could argue the merits of those products endlessly also. But there really isn't enough meat to those arguments to be interesting at all, unless you start throwing in some super natural beliefs.

-jim

"Honeywell testing of filter efficiency and capactiy of models equivalent to PH8A, 3387A and 6607 under ISO 4548-12 for particles >

20 microns."

From

"SO 4548-12 is derived from the ISO standard for Multi-pass filter testing (ISO 16889) which is based upon testing of hydraulic filters. This test requires filter manufacturers to determine the average particle sizes which yield Beta ratios equal to 2, 10, 75, 100, 200, and 1000, using the multi-pass test stand approach. The multi-pass test bench must contain On-Line Liquid Automatic Optical Particle Counters and calibrated using certified calibration fluid with a known particle size distribution. Particle counts are taken upstream and down-stream every minute of the test. The new standard gives a better interpretation of a filter's overall performance...."

I NEVER SAID THAT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Again, what I said was - "If you remove a lot of very small, non-harmful particles, all you are doing is pluggin up the filter sooner and reducing flow through the filter element, resulting in the filter going into bypass mode, and in this case, you aren't filtering anything."

This is not at all the same as saying - "you are the one who claimed the extra filter efficiency was unnecessary"

SAE J1858 Full Flow Lubricating Oil Filters Multipass Method for Evaluating Filtration Performance, Standard

".....SAE J1858.....reviews the ability of a filter to remove contaminants of a specific size from the fluid stream at a specific moment in time. The test can be repeated to suggest efficiencies over the life of the filter. Results are reported as a ratio between the number of partials of a given size entering the filter and the number of the same size particles exiting the filter. The difference between the two is referred to as the BETA ratio."

See above - "the standard FRAM Filter (the Extra Guard)." Wasn't that clear enough?

So where can I read one of the tests?

Actually I agree with this statement. I certainly believe that regular filter replacement is important and that replacing a Fram at every oil change is better than leaving a better quality filter in place for two or more changes.

So what is your criteria for picking Fram? They are not the cheapest. In my opinion, they don't appear to be well made. They don't claim particular good filter efficiency. Is it the Orange paint?

This is not the same situation as a gasket. There are no metal surfaces clamping the paper end caps in place. There is a gap above the end cap, and only glue holding it to the fitler element below. The Fram "Extra Guard" construction invloves gluing the open ends of the filter element to the end caps. I've seen other filters that use just a simple retainer (think plastic or paper) at the top of the filter element, but these filters glue the pleates together, closing off the top of the filter element. Fram just glues the open pleats to the paper end cap. The only thing holding the end caps to the open ended pleats is the glue. Try gluing a thing piece of paper perpendicular to another slightly thicker piece of paper and tell me how well that works. Most of the time the Fram filters have enough glue to securely attach the peats to the end cap, but I've cut open used Frams where the pleats were separated from the end caps. The only other filter I've seen using a similar construction technique is a Delco.

Not true. Several use plastic (not Fram). For an example see

.

Look at the Motorcraft picture I sent you in a link to earlier. The filter element is potted into a >0.1" thick glue mass contained by the metal end cap. You might tear the filter media, but you can't pull it out of the end cap without tearing it (I've tried). I've cut open Fram filters where the filter media had detached from the end cap - most likely becasue the glue they used didn't seal the media to the end cap properly. For good Fram filters, there is a thick bead of glue built up on both sides of the media, securing it to the end cap. However, it seems sometimes the bead is thin or mislocated and there is not a good bond (my theory). This is far less likely to happen with the sort of metal end caps used by most other filter manufacturers (again, my opinion).

Not ture. Again, go look at the Fram bypass valve and expalin how it works given your claims.

How do you know that? There is a filter test to test burt strenght of the can. I don't have a copy of it, so I have no idea if it also evaluates the whether the Fram end caps stay in place.

I don't appreciate being called a liar. I think you are wrong about the forces not being able to cause a separation. Go look at the picture of the Fram filter and expalin to me how their bypass valve works if you are right.

Well made filters with cardboard end caps are OK. This is not always the case with the standard Fram Filters (the so called "Extra Guard"). I'll bet that your Chevy had relatively thick end caps that were firmly attached to the end caps. I've had farm tractors that used cartrigde type filters and never had a concern either. And if they failed, at least I would have known it when I replaced the filter. Hard to know what is happening inside the orange can if you don't cut it open.

By the way - didn't your old cartridge filter include a metal cannister on the outside and on the inside of the filter media? And are you sure it did not have metal end caps? I looked up the P/N for the old Chevrolet V8s I looked them up for several years), and even Fram's picture of the cartridge shows an external metal can and metal end caps.

Some just had plain metal end caps, see::

?pk=55345?pk=55346 I assume these got a separate gasket.

There were also versions that had meal end caps, with a paper gasket on top. See:

?pk=55767 Or metal end caps and rubber gaskets, See:

?Part=51123?Part=51143 Is that what you had?

I never could find a picture of a Chevy V8 filter with paper end cpas. I have seen such filters, so I know they exist. My MF175 used cartridge filters with a metal outer cylinder and paper (thick paper) end caps. But that filter went in a can that had a spring loaded metal plate on the bottom and a flat sealing surface on the top. The end cpas were well suppoted - unlike the paper end caps in a standard Fram fliter.

You have no proof they work as well, you just think they do. Maybe they are good enough, but in my opinion, they are not a good choice. For my use, there are better constructed filters available for the same money or less. I can't see why I would buy a Fram Filter when most stores carry filters I like better on the same shelf.

I think you should have said - "I find no particualr reason to listen to people who don't agree with my beliefs ." As far as I can tell, you don't have a sound scientific reason for preferring Fram filters over other brands.You "believe" "they work as well as the other brands," but don't actually have any proof of this and in fact I am not even sure what you are including in your list of "other brands." If I am wrong, enlighten me. Otherwise, how is our opinion different from "people who believe in witchcraft."

Fram fiilters may be "good enough," but I can't see spending more to get a barely adequate filter, when for less I can get better than adequate. If a Motorcraft or Wix fitler cost significantly more than the standard orange Fram filter, then I might reconsider and buy the Fram. But, I can't see paying more or even a little less for a Fram filter. Even if the end cap joint is 100% reliable, the standard (Extra Gaurd) Fram filters still appears to have an inferior anti-drain back valve (comapred to the equivalent Motorcraft) and an inferior bypass valves (compared to almost any other filter). The higher priced Fram filters do include the better silicone antidrainback valve, but they cost far more than Motorcraft filters that include this feature as standard.

Ed

Define quality and how it is fairly measured and then I'll get back to you. If an oil smoking car with faded paint, crumbling interior plastic, and weekly trips to the local garage qualifies as quality, then Toyota is number 1.

Just like GM, Toyota has built some real POS cars. Only the Toyota wackco believe otherwise. I have no problems with people buying Toyotas (heck, in my immedaite family, more than half the vehicles are Toyotas!), I just think all these claim of supernatural Toyota quality and reliability are a bunch of hooey. You guys have spent too much time listening to Toyota ads and reading CR. I won't argue that Ford, or GM, or... have not built some real junk - they all have, but so has Toyota. For instance - at least four times a year I have go help one of my elder neighbors with her Corolla...seems like there is always something going wrong with it (besides the faded paint, oil smoke, and crumbling plastic). This is not some high mileage ancient Toyopet. This is a Corolla, less than 10 years old, with less than 80k miles. She gets the oil changed every three months, even though she only drives it about 500 miles a month. It is not abused, no teenagers have ever driven it. It is even protected by RNC bumper stickers....

As for your question....I think a Chevrolet Silverado is a better quality vehicle than a Toyota Tundra. In fact I don't even think it is close.

Ed

G-d saw those stickers and put a curse on her Corolla.

Well that must explain why the SO's parents have such good luck with their Toyotas - they are protected by the Oboma stickers.

Ed

To quote someone with whom you appear to have a lot in common, "unsupported assertion."

You mean to say that a drill can spin an oil pump faster than a running engine? What if the OPRV were found to be in good operating condition? What if instead of a drill it was simply a cold start on a cold day while the engine was filled with the factory-recommended grade of motor oil? No, your mind is made up, no sense confusing you with facts.

You have yet to demonstrate that to my satisfaction, while there's plenty of evidence to the contrary.

Or you simply make judgements based on construction materials and techniques as well as in-service failure rates, in which case the Fram comes out on the bottom of the pile.

nate