Oil will travel through the least restrictive areas first. Oil will travel through the tightest packed media with ease. Think how the oil passes through the main and rod bearings.
My E-core filter report, with pics
- Thread starter Filter guy
- Start date
- Status
True, maybe calling media between the holes "essentially useless" is a bit harsh.
But, if these "clean stripes" are indeed where the cage walls are, then it suggests that a significantly lower volume of oil is flowing through these areas than the unblocked areas.
And it would suggest that the flow restriction on an E-core will be much less than on a design with a traditional center tube where there is much more blocking between the holes. (All else being equal)
A little surprising to me: Notice the stripes extend all the way out to the far edge of the pleat. I would have expected that there wouldn't have been any extra restriction from the cage at the far end of the pleat because the oil would be able to flow easily through the inside pleat channel to an open area. Interesting.
"clean stripes"
Aren't we looking at the actual plastic supporting grid, not stripes on the bare media ?
Aren't we looking at the actual plastic supporting grid, not stripes on the bare media ?
A few things:
Steve S: There are at least 2 different E-core medias. Don't expect me to trump the marketing departments of the various brand names Champ private labels for by spilling the beans..
Second a correction:
I said my filter was the old gasket. True. But the "new" gasket isn't wider, as I stated, it is a "softer" compound.
Third...at work today I was looking for some technical information from a different filter company and came across the definition of "Bubble Point test" in their literature, so i'll share that ( which is a lot easier than me explaining it..lol):
"This test is used to determine conformance to the filtration rating of the filter element. The test is non-destructive and consists of immersing the filter element in a liquid ( usually Isopropyl-alchol --Note that's what Champ uses) and applying air pressure to the outlet of the element while rotating the element horizontally in the liquid. The air pressure is gradually increased until a steady stream of bubbles emits from the outside of the filter medium."
As I stated this tests the "integrity" of the element to show no holes, leaks, etc in the media/filter element. If there is a problem, it leaks like a sieve and bubble appear early at the leak point.....lol
---------------------------------------------
Fourth: With those people who take notice and place importance on the area of filter media, with the E-core design there is no wasted filter area. When you use metal endcaps, the media must go into the glue. Which means you reduce the effective filtration area.. That is that area of the filter medium which is exposed to flow.
That is why you can do a side by side comparison of a metal endcapped element to an E-core and the E-core will be smaller. Which also means a smaller can is needed. So a smaller filter in catalog height that is of E-core construction is likely to actually have more effective surface area.
Hope that makes sense..
Lastly,
Also, it was my fault Gary didn't get the pics as I thought he did. I put a . at the end of his email address and that messed up the sending and receiving of the pics to him.
PS: I was correct..that should have been PSID, not PSI, in the second column of the flow restriction test. I chastized the engineer...lol
Steve S: There are at least 2 different E-core medias. Don't expect me to trump the marketing departments of the various brand names Champ private labels for by spilling the beans..
Second a correction:
I said my filter was the old gasket. True. But the "new" gasket isn't wider, as I stated, it is a "softer" compound.
Third...at work today I was looking for some technical information from a different filter company and came across the definition of "Bubble Point test" in their literature, so i'll share that ( which is a lot easier than me explaining it..lol):
"This test is used to determine conformance to the filtration rating of the filter element. The test is non-destructive and consists of immersing the filter element in a liquid ( usually Isopropyl-alchol --Note that's what Champ uses) and applying air pressure to the outlet of the element while rotating the element horizontally in the liquid. The air pressure is gradually increased until a steady stream of bubbles emits from the outside of the filter medium."
As I stated this tests the "integrity" of the element to show no holes, leaks, etc in the media/filter element. If there is a problem, it leaks like a sieve and bubble appear early at the leak point.....lol
---------------------------------------------
Fourth: With those people who take notice and place importance on the area of filter media, with the E-core design there is no wasted filter area. When you use metal endcaps, the media must go into the glue. Which means you reduce the effective filtration area.. That is that area of the filter medium which is exposed to flow.
That is why you can do a side by side comparison of a metal endcapped element to an E-core and the E-core will be smaller. Which also means a smaller can is needed. So a smaller filter in catalog height that is of E-core construction is likely to actually have more effective surface area.
Hope that makes sense..
Lastly,
Also, it was my fault Gary didn't get the pics as I thought he did. I put a . at the end of his email address and that messed up the sending and receiving of the pics to him.
PS: I was correct..that should have been PSID, not PSI, in the second column of the flow restriction test. I chastized the engineer...lol
You're right. The grid inside the center area of the element is the nylon "cage".
But it also shows how much "open" area there is.
Filter Guy: Actually, the "clean stripes" I am talking about are the faint outlines on the outside of the media. (See your first photo or Gary's second)
Are these areas where less dirt is embedded in the media or is it purely a lighting effect where the cage structure is visible through the media?
How did the ADB/Bypass hold up by the way? Any pictures there?
Are these areas where less dirt is embedded in the media or is it purely a lighting effect where the cage structure is visible through the media?
How did the ADB/Bypass hold up by the way? Any pictures there?
Yea, I think I got the numbers right, here is the initial post:quote:
Originally posted by Gary Allan:
Err...you sure about them numbers there, Ugly3?? They're below virgin numbers ..and I seem to recall a couple of members that had worse numbers (still great) with bypass filters on their rigs
ELPolk
The "stripes" are a bit lighting effect but still there as far as the actually element is concerned.
Basically this is a function of the curing process of the resins in the media itself. Is my opinion.
The ADB/by-pass was flexible and not "hardend" at all.
I would use an e-core with no hesitation whatsoever. I think Champion has always made good oil filters. I think MADMIKE said it perfectly.
I used Lee Maxifilters back in the 70's and I believe they were Champions top-of-the line filters.
I used Lee Maxifilters back in the 70's and I believe they were Champions top-of-the line filters.
I hope people read the whole report.
But I have yet to be taken up on my offer of someone from this forum sending back their Champ made filter for testing.
I didn't think people in here were that shy...
But I have yet to be taken up on my offer of someone from this forum sending back their Champ made filter for testing.
I didn't think people in here were that shy...
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,799
Well ..I'd do it ..but I don't count
In truth, probably no one has a documented filter to give you ..at this time. I imagine that there will be a few available in the future ..after seeing this thread. Also ...not many may have an ecore in use. I have an ST-16 that I didn't pitch yet ..figuring to cut it open for the ST/Champ flamers ..but I've got no accurate mileage data on it
..and it's not an ecore
In truth, probably no one has a documented filter to give you ..at this time. I imagine that there will be a few available in the future ..after seeing this thread. Also ...not many may have an ecore in use. I have an ST-16 that I didn't pitch yet ..figuring to cut it open for the ST/Champ flamers ..but I've got no accurate mileage data on it
Cut open about 100 more of those E-cores and you will get a better sample pool. One filter is not really a good "test". Then you will see the end seam pleat flopping loose from the endcaps or pushed up flat against the center cage. Sure they probably last 3K miles, but not much more, believe me, so it is doubtful anyone here will see a failure. THESE FILTERS WILL NOT LAST CONSISTENTLY WITH THE LONGER DRAIN INTERVALS OF MANY AUTO MANUFACTURERS. I have cut enough open before we switched away from them to know.
BTW, My letter to the editor of Lubes N' Greases magazine, concerning oil filter quality and lack of required specs. will be published in their October issue. If I have time I will scan a copy of Tom Glenn's article concerning oil filters from last months issue and post it up here.
For those interested we are still using the Napa (Wix built) filters at the shop, and have seen no problems with them. About the only thing we have come across is a few that the threads are mis-cut on but we have run into this with all the different filters we have used over the years. We go through over 12,000 a year, so are bound to see a few flaws. We mostly use the ProSelect line, but use the Golds for certain apps. that are only available in Napa Gold. Many of the ProSelects have threaded end bypasses and all have a great media content, and high quality gasket. We have seen none with media ruptures, and the ADBV's work great.
I have seen several of the early release e-cores with the harder gaskets coming into the shop with leaks around the filter gasket, some have been pretty substantial.
BTW, My letter to the editor of Lubes N' Greases magazine, concerning oil filter quality and lack of required specs. will be published in their October issue. If I have time I will scan a copy of Tom Glenn's article concerning oil filters from last months issue and post it up here.
For those interested we are still using the Napa (Wix built) filters at the shop, and have seen no problems with them. About the only thing we have come across is a few that the threads are mis-cut on but we have run into this with all the different filters we have used over the years. We go through over 12,000 a year, so are bound to see a few flaws. We mostly use the ProSelect line, but use the Golds for certain apps. that are only available in Napa Gold. Many of the ProSelects have threaded end bypasses and all have a great media content, and high quality gasket. We have seen none with media ruptures, and the ADBV's work great.
I have seen several of the early release e-cores with the harder gaskets coming into the shop with leaks around the filter gasket, some have been pretty substantial.
Now I need to find the filter number to replace my Purolator PureOne # PL 14460
The point of this thread was to show actual testing on a used element. Have you seen that before?quote:
Originally posted by Ugly3:
What is the point we are trying to demonstrate with this thread?
The title is "My E-core filter report, with pics" so I figured that you wanted to share your E-core experience. However, it looks like it is a defend Champ thread.
And as an aside, I am offering someone the chance to have their filter tested as well.
I don't need to defend Champ.
Champ wouldn't be the size company they are if they had shoddy product or poor business practices.
Nor would they be awarded the numerous Quality awards from various OEM's and private label accounts.
Someone like Valvoline could switch to Fram, Purolator, Wix, or any offshore filter company at any time. They have a few lube operations as well.
The point was with the testing of my element, it shows that my element could have lasted 25,000 miles or so on my Ford. Even though the recommended change interval is 3,000 or 6,000 miles.
The point also was to offer the same testing to someone in here that is not available to consumers. So that there would be a second version.
You really are a sad case.
You state that the E-core filter won't last the longer drain intervals, based on what testing? The testing on my engine showed my filter would last 25,000 miles or so. I think that's longer than some of the long drain intervals.
Further, my filter is designed for an engine that is supposed to be changed at 3,000 or 6,000 miles. Wouldn't you say 3-4-5 times the capacity is "long" enough? Because that's what my filter tested.
What about a filter cataloged for an engine that is to be changed at 10,000 miles. My filter is a different animal to that one. why don't you compare apples to apples and look at that filter? Not one that is designed for a shorter drain interval.
I realize you have a burr under your saddle.
I also realize that given the opportunity to shut me up, you have yet to take advantage of it. I will be in Oregon in 3 weeks. So let's cut open filters and see what you have. I'll bring my digital camera. We'll cut open every brand of filter you come across. I don't care the brand.
You on? Or are you a keyboard warrior?
But back to E-core....
If it's such a crappy filter, explain why AC Filter Company now has it in their product line?
I take it you think their lab and testing must have fooled them as well.
Or why various other brands/companies from STP, Valvoline, Mighty, etc...also use E-core... I take it you think you're the only one in the USA who cuts open filters...
And I can't really wait until you see an OEM use it as first fit on their engine out of the factory....stay tuned...
Boy, How could I have guessed the personal insults would start coming from FG. The reason I have not been on the board in awhile and the reason I am not around in September is because I am out in the ocean running my commercial fish boat. But honestly I don't really care to meet you, and further care even less about your childish replies to my posts. Back to the ingore list. BTW, for the 1,000th time, THE FILTERS MADE FOR THE OEM'S ARE NOT THE SAME AS THE ONES ON THE SHELVES OR SOLD TO QUICK LUBES. I would think you understood this. They are built to the OEM's specs. not to a spec. of saving money and making larger profits. Why are the editors of Lubes N' Greases, the nations largest lubricants publication questioning the quality of non-OEM filters? So actually FG you are in fact the sad case. Don't bother a reply directed at me. I am heading out fishing tomorrow and will be away from the board for awhile again, not that I really care about yur reply.
From Lubeowner: BTW, My letter to the editor of Lubes N' Greases magazine, concerning oil filter quality and lack of required specs. will be published in their October issue. If I have time I will scan a copy of Tom Glenn's article concerning oil filters from last months issue and post it up here.
I think it would be interesting to get another opinion on the subject. Well maybe not opinion so much because we're certainly read enough of those the last few months, but rather some more documentation.
Thanks to Lubeowner we've seen several filter failures. What caused those filters to fail? Since the only oil filter I've personally seen that failed came off of a high mileage engine who's oil was sludgy I'd have to conclude that the condition of the oil had a lot if not everything to do with it.
Lubeowner is right, a sample size of 100 is much better than a sample size of one.
Because my opinion on oil filter failures is based on but one filter I'm not going to conclude I'm an expert on the subject.
The filter that failed by the way was a Purolator premium plus.
I think it would be interesting to get another opinion on the subject. Well maybe not opinion so much because we're certainly read enough of those the last few months, but rather some more documentation.
Thanks to Lubeowner we've seen several filter failures. What caused those filters to fail? Since the only oil filter I've personally seen that failed came off of a high mileage engine who's oil was sludgy I'd have to conclude that the condition of the oil had a lot if not everything to do with it.
Lubeowner is right, a sample size of 100 is much better than a sample size of one.
Because my opinion on oil filter failures is based on but one filter I'm not going to conclude I'm an expert on the subject.
The filter that failed by the way was a Purolator premium plus.
FG,
I've got a used Mobil 1 M1-205 sitting in my garage. It was used for 7250 miles on my '00 VW GTI 1.8T. I would be happy to send it in for testing. How do I go about doing it?
Thanks in advance,
WW
I've got a used Mobil 1 M1-205 sitting in my garage. It was used for 7250 miles on my '00 VW GTI 1.8T. I would be happy to send it in for testing. How do I go about doing it?
Thanks in advance,
WW
- Status
Similar threads
