Just some observations on this thread. Again confirmed with the posted Fleetguard paper that UOA's do NOT prove the efficacy/efficiency of an oil filter. Plus Blackstone has said in an email posted here, they see no difference in results between high end/efficient and low end filters. Yet, I see 'some' of those referenced here as filters not being a critical factor using UOA's to prove/defend their position. Fact is there is no correlation between UOA results and oil filter efficiency. Thst said, I'm sure the same folks, some who post as authoritative, will continue to point to UOA's as evidence of oil filter's insignificance. Add to that the cost of regular UOA trending makes the ROI very dubious, imo.
Also noticed that while some claim the benefits of an efficient oil filter vs one relatively inefficient to be insignificant and/or unmeasureable, they themselves tend use and prefer efficient and/or high end filters. I've read many posts about using this filter or that because of it's high end efficiency. And in some cases that means using the newest synthetic filters. Why is that? Because what is there to lose? Nothing. What is to be gained, well without multiple teardowns under very controlled conditions, difficult to say. But, intuitively there must something gained or why not just go with the cheapest oil filtration for the cheapest price.
Lastly, while synthetic filters use less media area to accomplish high end filtration and capacity, those factors are not limited to synthetic filters. The Bosch Distance Plus uses a synthetic cellulose blend and has a rated holding capacity of ~29 grams. I have run the D3323 two oci's on a 3.0L Honda and wouldn't hesitate to do so again. The BD+ rated capacity matches or exceeds the highest end synthetic filters with a 99.9% rated efficency, but as is Bosch practice no micron level is listed.
Also noticed that while some claim the benefits of an efficient oil filter vs one relatively inefficient to be insignificant and/or unmeasureable, they themselves tend use and prefer efficient and/or high end filters. I've read many posts about using this filter or that because of it's high end efficiency. And in some cases that means using the newest synthetic filters. Why is that? Because what is there to lose? Nothing. What is to be gained, well without multiple teardowns under very controlled conditions, difficult to say. But, intuitively there must something gained or why not just go with the cheapest oil filtration for the cheapest price.
Lastly, while synthetic filters use less media area to accomplish high end filtration and capacity, those factors are not limited to synthetic filters. The Bosch Distance Plus uses a synthetic cellulose blend and has a rated holding capacity of ~29 grams. I have run the D3323 two oci's on a 3.0L Honda and wouldn't hesitate to do so again. The BD+ rated capacity matches or exceeds the highest end synthetic filters with a 99.9% rated efficency, but as is Bosch practice no micron level is listed.