Of course, when I was a kid we had American vehicles. Dad was a Nash/Rambler man, so we always had one or the other. When he died Mom couldn't drive with the truck clutch that was in the Rambler wagon, so she got a Valiant wagon with a push-button trans. I don't know what happened, but a couple years later she traded it for a 1964 Chevy Nova with the straight 6. WHAT A CAR! Last time I saw it I think it had 250,000 miles on it, and that was in 1974. No rust, and still looked good.
Novas were too expensive and too large by that time, and theat's when we bought the first new Toyota, a 72 Corona. My stepfather bought a 1973 Caprice of Crap, and in 1978 they traded both for a Zephyr. That's the car that had the tranny problems; like you, two trannies. When they wouldn't replace the second tranny at 72,000 miles, it got traded for a 1986 Camry. Still have that car, with 85,000 miles on it. My stepfather had a couple of Toyota truck (after getting rid of a Ford Courier), and they never went back to American cars again.
BTW, my stepfather fought the Japanese in WWII. He didn't care...
But according to Jim, Fram are not the 'worst quality filters."
Also, many years ago CR did a report on oil filters. Since at that time I had two new Toyotas, I was pretty pleased when the little sidebar said, "If you own a Toyota, you're getting the best filter made from the Toyota dealer."
About 7? years ago, and I KNEW I was not buying "first quality oats". I knew what killed the original engine, and what engine was put in (I bought the vehicle for $500 after the engine had been overheated, and had an AC DELCO crate engine installed. for something like $2600 plus labour). A year later I had the tranny rebuilt for another $2600. Made it the most expensive vehicle I have owned since 1996, when that amount of money (total expendature) bought me a brand new Dodge RamCharger. That said, The Ramcharger was possibly the second most troublesome vehicle I have ever owned, and cost, without a doubt, the most per Km driven.
Well your not helping me out by quoting advertising. I didn't make any dramatic claims I said independent studies have shown that Fram did better on some of the tests that indicated it removed more of the smaller particles. I didn't say whether that was good or bad. According to SAE standards they all remove the amount of dirt needed to keep the engine running. It's been 30 years since I have seen an engine that was maintained on the manufacturers schedule that has died due to a lubrication related failure. If you want to worry about extending the life of a car worry about how to keep the upholstery or the
No you have failed to understand what I agreed was true. I agreed that overloading the oil filter is always a bad thing no matter how it happens. And i agreed that it may be possible that if person switches filter brands to one that is more aggressive after many many years of using one that is not aggressive that could make it more likely to overload the filter.
The point that you can't seem to wrap your head around is that brand new cars do not come with an accumulation of small particles in the engine crankcase. Whether or not you believe fine particles are harmful if the filter is not removing them from the oil then over many years and miles some of those those fine particles will accumulate. That is why when you wipe your finger on the inside of some old engines your finger looks like it is covered with black paint. Old cars sometimes do come with an accumulation of fine particles and that certainly makes it more likely that a filter that is more aggressive will become overloaded.
Well that's what it sounded like. You made your statement in direct response to the claim that studies have shown Fram to be more aggressive at removing the smallest particles. You then went on to quote pages of advertising copy that you seem to think was either proving or refuting the point depending on which way the wind was blowing at the time.
I quoted what you actually said. You quoted what you actually said. If what you actually said was meaningless and completely irrelevant to the discussion (as you seem to be claiming now) why did you say it?
You don't seem to get it - there is nothing particularly useful in regurgitating advertising copy. I pay no attention to what Fram says about Fram filters or what Wix says about Wix filters. When you say you are quoting somebody's advertising I usually skip to the next paragraph. i can see no point in trying to compare ad copy. Its even dumber than cutting filters open.
That is what you claimed. At least that was your direct response to the claim that independent studies have shown they do remove the finest particles.
You said: 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.
So what are you saying
1) this statement was complete fiction it never happens to any filter.
2) This is what happens to other filters never to Fram filters
3) This is what happens to Fram filters.
It's not my BS several studies have shown that Fram is better at removing smaller particles then some of the others. IMO It doesn't make much difference. Which brand removes the smallest particles is a moot point - its not worth even knowing. It's been 30 years since I have seen an engine that was maintained properly that had a lubrication related problem that led to its demise. Cars that have the prescribed maintenance die from just about anything else nowadays and it doesn't make a bit of difference if you used a fram or purolator or wix or whatever. If something else sends the car to the crusher anyway why worry about it? But if you are going to worry about it look at the studies that the truck engine manufacturers have done. The have good evidence that removing particles down to 2 microns will make a significant difference in ring and bearing wear.
Nope sorry I'm ot even in the least interested.
formatting link
Tell me why you are no longer beating your wife.
Well if Cadillacs are so great why offer a chevy. the cheapest filter you can find will do an adequate job.
Somebody pointed to consumer reports test. I would have to believe that it made a difference to be motivated to do your work for you.
Whether any of that is true or not makes no real difference. Even if "Fram filters use the poorest construction techniques blah blah blah" were true. It wouldn't make any difference. There is practically zero chance that using Fram filters for the entire life of an engine will shorten the life of the engine. So all this dissecting of filter parts and analyzing advertizing c claims is a massive waste of time.
You tell me how the relief valve works. The relief valve itself does not contact the cardboard end caps so I don't get what you are getting at. The endcaps are not in the same place so obviously they don't see the same forces. If you replace the relief valve with cardboard that cardboard would be affected by pressure.
And all of this is absurd anyway since if you have such a cruddy engine that you are threatening to blow the by pass valve the brand of filter is the least of your worries.
the glue not only attaches the end cap it glues the pleats together.
So?
Is that like a distinction without a difference?
I told you I have seen a lot of filters with that construction both before and after they were used. It looks like it works very well to me.
Based on your superstition.
I agree you have said you never had an engine failure and i do find that to be refreshingly honest. I didn't mean to imply you had made up anything. What I meant is the vast number of Fram basher stories I believe are made up. The think just like you do that "this cant possibly work" and so they feel compelled to create a story as a cautionary tale to others.
I have seen a lot of filter elements and none have torn. but i can imagine if they are overloaded the paper pleats will collapse inward and tear from the ends. But that would happen if the were glued to metal also.
So now your introducing the idea that fram uses more fragile paper for the pleats. All the filters i have seen the glue and endcaps are atleast
10 times stronger than the paper.
Well it does happen i've seen pictures. For one thing not all filters have the bypass valve. Some applications have the valve in the engine. So one way it happens is using the wrong filter.
Actually they aren't any more rigid.
I know the filter on the car i now drive never goes into by pass mode. It doesn't have one. And what do you think the pressure regulator does?
It's my answer.
reason I ask you to explain its working is simple. You keep implying
I'm doubt the area of the valve opening is less than the oil galley leaving the filter. Do you seriously think all these imagined failures are really going to happen. Do you believe that all the quality control departments that have look at these filters are so much dumber than you are? Any large retail chain that is selling the filters or any lube service center chain is going to have gone over all this much more thoroughly than you have, because they aren't interested in antagonizing customers.
I claimed that both your study of the advertisements and the study of filter guts are irrelevant. Putting a filter that is better than or worse than Fram on your car is not going to make a difference. All the people that i have seen that claim engine damage from fram are blowing smoke. They already had or would have had engine damage anyway and that is assuming you believe the story.
It is superstition when you think taking some action will have an effect and it won't .
OK you are a strange person then. Why do care if they don't do any harm. I must admit you have been the only Fram basher that comes across as being honest. I personally never thought much about filter brands until i observed the hysteria of others. As far as i can tell the way the manufacturers have got the bases covered it makes as much sense as worrying about the brand of gasoline you use. Sure there are differences. but it isn't really worth the effort to decipher them.
It likely didn't even allow much oil to go unfiltered. The force of the oil would tend to close in on any tears. It is the opposite of the forces of a balloon that pops.
OK I'm not going to go through all that. It's like reading your choices for brands of toilet paper. Its not like you are going to use these things over and over again. They don't need to be made like a swiss watch.
Show me where there was *any* significant change in the small-block Chevy V8 oiling system when GM changed the block casting to use spin-on filters. That Fram should not have blown up.
If I remember correctly, GM used a similar adapter for a few months to use up the "non spin-on" block still in the parts pipeline.
On Fri, 04 Dec 2009 15:03:00 -0500, snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca wrote:
Wonder if the overheating engine also overheated the trans. I've avoided cars that had any big trouble in their history - that I could tell anyway. Especially if it's in an ad that says "Runs. Needs a little work. Many extra parts tossed in." But trannies can go from "fine" to broke real quick, with no warning, so that's always been my main worry when I buy a used car. Been lucky so far with my Chevys. Only the '76 Caprice failed, where I had to drive it to a shop in low gear. Cost a few hundred to fix. But it was "acting up" when I gave the car away a few years after that. Daughter's got a 2002 Mitsu Eclipse V6. Wouldn't settle for my $2500-3500 gift first car I offered all my kids when they got their driver's license. With that they got free maintenance less parts, and basically just paid their own liability insurance. She had to have the Mitsu. We fought with her for a while but gave up, and I kicked in $3000 toward the car. She paid the rest of the $15k - took her about 4 years to get it paid off. Plus she paid about another $3k in maintenance, including a trans rebuild and balancer. And comprehensive insurance of course. Never stranded her, I'll say that, and it still looks new. Since she's been happy with the car, I'd have to say it all worked out well. Not my style at all, but different strokes. A crate engine is sometimes a good option. One of my sons bought a used late '80's Chevy Caprice estate wagon with the factory Old's
307. He got it cheap, about $3000, but didn't realize it was a smoker. Cat was eating the smoke. Very clean otherwise. Big yacht. Coming home from college one weekend it was dying on him, and a savvy mech punched some holes in the cat so he could get home. My mech - does primarily GM work - had seen these 307's before. A batch from the factory with soft cylinder walls. Gone in 60-80k miles, and this one was right at 80k. If you sat in this car you wouldn't want to throw it away, so my mech said he could put a 60k GM warranteed 307 crate engine in it for $3500. Said the soft wall problem was gone. Think it was $2400 for the engine. We had him do it. Sometimes it makes sense, and since the car was otherwise almost perfect, we figured this was one of those times. Very nice. About 6 months later my son was out of college and teaching elementary school in the city - Chicago. Came out of school one day, and the car was gone. Never recovered. Of course it wasn't insured for theft.
My bother had 2. AXOD trannies. Had to have both fixed. Some plastic part cracking if I recall correctly. Big money for little plastic. He still loved the cars though. Go figure.
AXOD. The tranny that was so bad they had to rename it. If your brother likes the Taurus, he should look for one with the AX4N tranny. Much better than the AX4S (which is the old AXOD).
Well guess what I don't disagree with that statement although it is possible GM modified the oil pressure regulator. I know that fram oil filters don't blow up for all the people who install them on cars where the owner hasn't modified the lubricating system and it is working properly. So what conclusions does one draw from those facts put together?
That may be true but I suspect that a Fram filter never once blew up when used on any of those.
That's demonstrably not true for *all* people. 80's aircooled VWs for example, would develop very high pressures on cold startup (I've seen them peg 100 PSI gauges) and they could and did occasionally pop Frams.
Of course, as always, don't let facts get in the way of your ranting. It's kind of amusing watching you proudly demonstrate your ignorance and prejudices on a worldwide forum for all to admire!
Yeah right. And of course you can point to complaints from VW that document this?
All Fram filters conform to manufacturers burst pressure specs. I've never seen a car makers burst pressure specification that is below 200 PSI and some of them are a lot higher.
You mean like facts that some engines have malfunctioning components like pressure regulators?
Are you talking to yourself again?
Why don't you take your complaints to the FTC if you have shred of proof to support them? I'll tell you why you don't because your stories are fabricated from thin air. If you have even a scintilla of evidence to back up your complaint the FTC will take you very seriously.
They burst for the same reason other filters burst. The engine develops considerably more oil pressure than the manufacture's oil filter pressure specification calls for. If you have any proof at all that Fram filters do not meet manufacturers specifications and burst at a lower pressure that would be one thing. But you don't have any proof. You just have a stream of bullshit.
Your talking bullshit.
I have no problem with that, But when you repeatedly and insistently attempt to spread unsubstantiated rumors don't be surprised that that someone calls you full of shit.
But if I have a product, any product, and it fails, and a second one fails or I hear of someone else who has the same problem I'm not going to go out and blindly buy another just because the manufacturer claims they are all made to the design specifications. It failed.
And I'm going to tell everyone who asks, or will listen. It's human nature.
There are other products out there that do the same/better/worse job but they haven't failed on me.
The tranny showed no sign of being overheated, and the engine overheat was due to a rapid loss of coolant on level highway without any extra load. Some hamfisted "mechanic" broke the plastic water bypass fitting off the intake when replacing the alternator (which was not defective). It belonged to the husband of one of the gals at the insurance office where I work a few hours. He was sick of it and sold it to me at scrap price.
No mods at all to the regulator and there WAS an AC-Delco supplied spin-on filter adapter available through GM Parts.
It was a Fram that blew off my '69 Dart slant six - but to be fair, it WAS -45 F with 20 weight oil. That was about the last Fram filter I've used. - back in 1972.
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.