Fram Racing Oil Filter Performance Data?

[URG8RB8]

Z06:

I am a mechanical engineer and can tell that you are also well educated, or at least know what you are talking about. Sometimes we can over analyze things. I am not certain that 10 gpm is sufficient, but I am certain that it is way more than the original Mahle filter can flow and it has worked fine for 30 years. I am also certain that this is a far superior filter than most others (non 100% synthetic) available for my application. I have made calls to Wix and Napa as well. It appears manufacturers are very tight with their data. They don't seem to want to share anything and throw out the proprietary information claim. I have made up my mind on which filter I will use at times. I am not going to use the FU for break-in. I have a flat tappet solid lifter cam that must be broken in for 20-30 minutes at 2-2.5K. I want the most amount of flow during this period. I will run the higher flowing HP10 for this period. Then switch over to the FU. I will also pay close attention to warmup periods using the FU without the bypass along with doing frequent filter inspections until I can verify the performance of the FU on extended installations. I am going to install a differential oil pressure gauge as well. I guess only time will tell, but I am convinced that I have made a pretty good choice.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: URG8RB8
Z06:

In case you don't believe me, feel free to call and ask for yourself:

CONTACT US

U.S. Product Assistance
Call 1.800.890.2075


I believe you ... just don't believe that FRAM would make any filter and not test it's flow rate. How would they know it's flowing enough oil without a bench test?

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: URG8RB8
I have made up my mind on which filter I will use at times. I am not going to use the FU for break-in. I have a flat tappet solid lifter cam that must be broken in for 20-30 minutes at 2-2.5K. I want the most amount of flow during this period. I will run the higher flowing HP10 for this period. Then switch over to the FU.


I think either one of those filters will basically flow the same in this engine - the difference in delta-P will be negligible and not make any real difference to the engine. To me, I'd rather have the more efficient FU for the fact that it would catch more break-in material and prevent possible bearing damage in other parts of the engine since it runs such tight clearances.

I doubt that engine is putting out anything close to 10 GPM at 2500 RPM. I think the high oil pressure at low RPM is caused more by the tight bearings (ie, a somewhat restrictive oiling system) than it is due to high pump volume output.

Originally Posted By: URG8RB8
I will also pay close attention to warmup periods using the FU without the bypass along with doing frequent filter inspections until I can verify the performance of the FU on extended installations. I am going to install a differential oil pressure gauge as well. I guess only time will tell, but I am convinced that I have made a pretty good choice.


Don't they make the FU for your car with a bypass valve? I'm not familiar with that engine, but you made it sound like the bypass valve is in the block (like on most GM V8s)? If it is in the block, have you disabled it? (kind of dangerous, as Jay said, if that's the case).

It would be interesting to hear what filter delta-P you are seeing on this engine with the two different filters. My guess is they will be withing a couple PSI of each other. Jim Allen has a delta-P setup on his truck, and it's interesting to see what the real world delta-P is ... very much along the lines of what SuperBusa saw from Purolator's bench test.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: URG8RB8
I am not going to use the FU for break-in. I have a flat tappet solid lifter cam that must be broken in for 20-30 minutes at 2-2.5K. I want the most amount of flow during this period.


Forgot to say that anytime the oil pump is not in pressure relief, then by definition of a positive displacement oil pump, all the oil coming out of the pump must go through the filter and the engine.

Therefore, the only time the engine would see a difference in oil flow due to one filter flowing better than the other is when the oil pump in in pressure relief at its max output pressure. And besides, as I mentioned above, I'd bet the delta-P difference between those two filters in very small under the condition when the pump is in relief mode. That's why I'd chose the FU due to it's higher filtering efficiency and probably higher holding capacity too.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: URG8RB8
Z06:

Honestly, our oil pump is too good, see post below:

So the solution? Reduce how much the oil pump flows per revolution. What we don't want to do is restrict flow - reduce is not synonymous with restrict... The ideal solution would be to change the gerotor gear to one that simply flows less. In this case, at idle instead of having ~2bar oil pressure, we might only have 1bar. But, the oil pump will not have to bypass oil until a higher RPM, meaning it requires less inlet oil flow, and therefore not cavitating until a higher RPM than the stock pump.


So I'm curious how he knows the oil is "cavitating" due to a large volume being diverted back to the pump inlet? What are the indicators that the oil is cavitating?

If the oil pump is modified to reduce the volumetric output per engine rev, then that will be reducing the flow to the engine at the same RPM, which would essentially be like restricting the flow. The engine designers might have had a good reason to have relatively high pressure and flow at lower RPM to help protect those bearings that are running pretty tight clearances.

Also, the HP required to pump the oil isn't that much. Look here at the equation.

http://www.engineershandbook.com/Tables/fluidpowerformulas.htm

Pump Input Horsepower = HP

HP = GPM × Pressure (psi) / 1714 × Efficiency

HP = (Q ×P) / 1714 × E

If say Q = 12 GPM, P = 100 PSI and E = 100% (1.0), then

HP = (12 x 100)/1714 x 1.0 = 0.70 HP

If the flow was cut in half to 6 GPM, then

HP = (6 x 100)/1714 x 1.0 = 0.35 HP

 

[URG8RB8]

Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix

I think either one of those filters will basically flow the same in this engine - the difference in delta-P will be negligible and not make any real difference to the engine. To me, I'd rather have the more efficient FU for the fact that it would catch more break-in material and prevent possible bearing damage in other parts of the engine since it runs such tight clearances.

I too was leaning in this direction until after speaking with Jay. There are parts of the conversation I promised not to post to a forum somewhere, his words exactly. I will honor that promise. Yes, most FU's have bypass valves. The one I want to use doesn't have one. I will check to see if there is one that fits with a bypass valve. Please remember on the HP10, it is considerably taller (1-1/4") which adds a considerable amount of surface area. It also has a newer filter media and metal end caps now. I like the bypass mesh screen as well. Almost everyone I have discussed this with warned me about revving the engine prior to warmup with a no bypass filter, when breaking in the cam you can't let the engine idle for 5-10 minutes to warm up. If the oil is too thick to flow efficiently through the filter and is even 50% going through the bypass, it is not going where I want it to. Please take a look at oil flow schematic link posted below. You will notice that the bypassed oil is NOT circulated through the engine, but caught in a reticulating loop at the pump. I don't like this design. This is not what happens on a GM block bypass. On the GM, the unfiltered bypassed oil is still circulated through the block, thus no oil starvation. This is a much better design in my opinion. Again, I would love to know exactly how much pressure it would take to flow 100% of the oil at say 75 degrees F. I don't know this, and it appears to be quite difficult to find out. If I were at home and not here in Asia, I would build up a test jig with a remote filter mount and test it. However, that is impossible right now. All of this being said, Fram in their infinite wisdom (Ha) decided to make their recommended filter for our stock unmodified car a non-bypass filter. So it is quite possible, I am simply thinking too much! This same filter is also used on several much more expensive 911's.

I doubt that engine is putting out anything close to 10 GPM at 2500 RPM. I think the high oil pressure at low RPM is caused more by the tight bearings (ie, a somewhat restrictive oiling system) than it is due to high pump volume output.

I am not sure at 2500 rpm, so I will not comment. I have since learned that the theoretical output of the pump before bypass opens is 36 gpm at 6,800 rpm's.That is alot of flow.


Don't they make the FU for your car with a bypass valve? I'm not familiar with that engine, but you made it sound like the bypass valve is in the block (like on most GM V8s)? If it is in the block, have you disabled it? (kind of dangerous, as Jay said, if that's the case).

No, not directly, but I can adapt one. Yes, has a bypass and does not bypass to the sump, bypasses to the oil pump inlet.

It would be interesting to hear what filter delta-P you are seeing on this engine with the two different filters. My guess is they will be withing a couple PSI of each other. Jim Allen has a delta-P setup on his truck, and it's interesting to see what the real world delta-P is ... very much along the lines of what SuperBusa saw from Purolator's bench test.

I will add a differential pressure gauge.

944 Turbo Oil Flow Schematic

 

[URG8RB8]

Well, that posted kind of funny, but guess it is all there.

 

[URG8RB8]

Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix

Did you ever see this thread? Purolator actually put the PureOne filter asked about on their flow bench and tested it. 5 PSID across the media at 12 GPM is pretty low restriction IMO. I'm betting the FRAM Ultra in the same sized filter would flow even better than that PureOne did, which was very good IMO.

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubb...451#Post1619451

Bottom line: Almost any higher tier, good name brand filter will flow way more oil than the engine can flow ... Unless, the engine is super loose and the oil pump is putting out insane pressure (ie, has the pressure relief set very high) and has a huge positive displacement per engine revolution.


No, I had not seen this thread, but wish I had and happily reading it now! Thanks! This makes me feel much better, also like the cold flow chart, just wish it was thicker viscosity oil they tested. 5W-30 is pretty thin compared to what I will be running. My pressure relief valve is set "insanely" high at 72.5 psi, and then makes matters worse by sending the bypassed oil back to the pump to be recirculated. Even Jay said you must be mistaken, that can't be correct. At least that is the way I am interpreting the oil flow schematic. By the chart listed in the thread, I seriously doubt if the stock Mahle oc-142 or oc-75 would ever go into bypass with the 36-39 psi bypass valve.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: URG8RB8
944 Turbo Oil Flow Schematic


Looking at that oiling system schematic, it does not show a filter bypass valve built into the engine like GM V8s have. So I'm wondering why filters specified for your engine do not have a bypass valve in the filter (?).

All the schematic shows is that the oil pump has a pressure relief valve that feeds excess oil volume back to the pump inlet instead of the sump. I think a lot of oil pumps these days just feed excess oil back to the pump inlet instead of dumping it into the sump.

Originally Posted By: URG8RB8
I am not sure at 2500 rpm, so I will not comment. I have since learned that the theoretical output of the pump before bypass opens is 36 gpm at 6,800 rpm's.That is alot of flow.


If that is true, that IS an insane amount of oil flow from the pump. The guys with turbo Subarus said their pumps put out around 12~14 GPM which is pretty high too ... but 36 GPM is nuts.

Originally Posted By: URG8RB8
My pressure relief valve is set "insanely" high at 72.5 psi, and then makes matters worse by sending the bypassed oil back to the pump to be recirculated


72.5 PSI for a pump pressure relief setting isn't that much. Most high performance engines seem to pressure regulate between 75 to 100 PSI.

I still don't see why recirculating the excess oil when in pressure relief/bypass mode would hurt anything. Like I said before, where's the proof it's bad or that the oil is "cavitating".