Nissan's small filters

[rrounds]

I don't know how much room you have for a larger oil filter but Baldwin makes over 1/2 dozen filters that are larger than the small Nissan filter. My Honda S2000 could use the same size as your's but I have the room for a B202 filter that is 3 11/16" X 5 3/8" which is about three times as large as your filter. Take a look at the B1402, B1431, B199, B168, B202 and the B7042 filters.

ROD

 

[sHERM]

Originally Posted By: sayjac
And I think the point the OP is trying to make, is that one shouldn't have to feel intimidated into not asking a question and/or seek opinions, in this specific case about the use of a larger filter application. And that rather than a valued member or contributor here, if one asks for opinions they are a 'point of contention.'

While as stated by many here, the smaller filter will work fine, a larger filter application can have advantages. Here the OP has found acceptable larger size alternatives with the help of many posters. Very unfortunate imo, to have those answers/responses condescendingly labeled "unsubstantiated opinions".

If every post on Bitog requires scientific data to answer, then few if any would be allowed to post any response on Bitog.


AMEN, Well said

 

[dnewton3]

I would agree, and apologize if I have offended.

However, are there not HUNDREDS of threads already on this site, in this filter section, with nearly endless opinions already? And we need more? Using the search button, or just browsing, could have found more than enough info to glean what he asked.


Rather, my suggestion is to put up data from reasonably controlled trials.

Frankly - we're already full of people who post up opinions with little to no proof of concpet. We have members who, honestly, know little to nothing about lubes or fitlers, and then post because they believe (and regurgitate) marketing hype and rhetoric.

Let me draw a very clear distinction. It was not my intent to anger the OP. It was my very specific intent to suggest that he ignore all the advice offered (most of which is often not well founded) and do his own experiments. Again - rather than ask questions, why not provide answers?


If he came here to "seek opinions", then he certainly came to the right place; we're full of them. Just be careful which ones you pay heed to. Anyone (myself included) is entitled to opinions. We all have them and use them. Nothing wrong with that. But just be cautious of those that don't have logic and data to back them up.


As for the filter selection itself for this thread topic, I'll say this:
Have you researched and clearly defined what you "need" to sustain the OCI desired?
What measuables are you going to track?
What methods are you going to use to track the measurables?
What particle count is desirable and sustainable?
What UOA ranges and trends do you have established?
What UOA condemnation levels have you set?
Will you expect a ROI equal or greater than the cost?
What tolerance do you have for filter selection, availability, cost, ease of installation, etc?

Selecting a filter akin to selecting a lube. There are those who choose willy-nilly, and often seek out similar opinions, so that they feel validated in their unsubstantiated choice. Then there are those who clearly define the situation, and make informed choices based upon personal experiences, or those from others they trust to do likewise, using data and logic, to come to a "better" conclusion.

So - since the OP is open to opinions from the membership at large, here is mine:
Be cautious of any topic when one does not clearly define the issues, and cannot validate the answers.

The OP wants a bigger filter; he has no idea if he needs a bigger filter. And even if he does need one, he has yet to define any reasonable method for selecting one.

I will acknowledge and offer my sincere apology for being terse, but if he REALLY wants a filter that will help him, then he'll ignore opinions and seek out methods and data that truly define what "better" means to his specific situation. And that can ONLY come from experimentation on his own, or data from people that are in very similar situations, and have applied logic in their selection process. So far, I've seen zero proof of any of that.

 

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted By: sHERM
I have a 2008 Nissan Altima. I am planning on using M1 EP on a 12k OCI. The only thing that concerns me is the filter is very small. I bought a M1 EP filter thinking that would be adequate for the OCI, But man my filter on my Suzuki is larger than this filter.

Should I be concerned ? Do you think I could find an oversize filter ?


Why? You'll never be able to prove any benefit, other than to your own mind.

You should see the filter on our 3500 Savanas.

 

[Jim Allen]

The only way you can learn if a filter is "too small" is to measure DP (Differential Pressure) against the factory specs, especially when that filter is near the end of an OCI. There are some other lab tests that can do it too but I think the DP test is the only one potentially within reach of the home tinkerer.

There is a recent statistic I am trying to verify which states the "average" filter when changed at a "full" interval (which I presume to mean a 7.5K OCI) is only at around 50% capacity. If true, that puts paid to the notion, in most cases at least, that a larger filter is "needed" from that standpoint. There may be other reasons a larger filter is desirable but if you are worried the filter is going to plug because it's too small, I believe those are unfounded fears for the vast, vast majority of us.

I see an oversized filter being potentially valuable in two ways, see if you agree, more capacity and more flow. I mentioned capacity above but what are the likely places where more capacity might be needed (feel free to add to the list)?

-a very long OCI
-a tired engine that is generating a lot of combustion byproducts & carbon
-an engine breaking in, or in a place where it's shedding a lot of metal (though a larger filter is just hospice care in that case)
-an engine operating in a dirty environment
-an engine with air filtration problems or in a very dirty environment
-a short hopper that is generating a lot of oxidation byproducts
-a soot monster diesel
-an OE screwup where its demonstrated by tests that there is not enough media for the service interval

Those are what popped into my head in a moment's thought. Most of them are related to countering a problem, with break-in and a longer OCI being the only two that could be considered "normal" problems to consider.


Flow?? More media has more potential flow but how would that be of any value? To answer that question, we'd need to know the flow rates of two filters, one with more media, but otherwise identical. My thinking is that, in most cases, the practical differences are small.... i.e. the "larger" filter that will fit the Nissan in question might only have 10-15% more media than the smaller. Whether that is worth expending much effort and expense over is he question? So here is my stream of consciousness over the flow/more media question (again, feel free to add).

-it might stall off filter bypass in the various "normal" situations where it occurs
-it might stall off filter bypass for those people running a heavier oil than spec'ed
-it might stall off filter bypass at high rpms

Since system flow is controlled by the restrictions in the lube system downstream of the filter, more media/potential flow is not going to give you more oil flow to the engine vitals but it could stall off bypass ... which would be valuable in a small way if you can demonstrate how often it happens. That's difficult without being able to read DP all the time and knowing the bypass setting of the filter.

I had it confirmed this past week in a face to face discussion with two real, live oil filter engineers that bypass events are fairly rare in the course of normal operation and mostly occur in the cold-start/warmup phase. They also confirmed that bypass events are usually short duration, that the amount of "dirt" bypassed is miniscule and the dirt doesn't "wash off" the filter media (it's held there by differential pressure and by being embedded in the media).


Efficiency? That's controlled by the media. It won't change with more or less of the same type of media. If you were to change the media to a type that's more efficient, and would therefore capture and have to hold more dirt, you might have to consider increasing the amount of media. As an oil filter engineer, the easy answer is one of the depth-type synthetic media (which is of a graduated density and carried more dirt inside the media) versus a standard celluose media that relies more on surface filtration and capacity. You can make highly efficient cellulose but you need more of it for capacity. Obviously, as an OEM, whatever filter you use needs to fit the package and you want a filter that fits more than one application. That filter might be as big as it can be in one app, but another might have room for something bigger.

So, to my way of thinking, you can spend a lot of time agonizing over whether you "need" a larger filter but it's gonna be pretty hard to justify it scientifically with the meagre tools most of us have at hand to do so. If a larger filter relieves the agony, go for it (matching rated bypass pressure, of course). If knowing you most likely don't "need" a larger filter, that pain relief as well.

 

[dnewton3]

I'll agree to all Jim's points, and add this:

Most nearly any application of a filter will have the media's capacity for flow WAY over-rated for the use. Typically we see filters perhaps rated around 7-9gpm or 8-10gpm. Most typical engines don't flow anywhere near that much volume. I see this parallel to Jim's comments about particulate load capacity.

I see logic in Jim's concept, and it plays right along with my understanding and experiences with filtration experiemnts I did with industrial equipment.

As a filter loads, the efficiency goes up, and the flow slows. Most any filter today has well more than enough capaicty to live with the average OCI. And, the respone curve to this phenomenon is parabolic, and not linear. It get's "dangerous" near the end, because the potential to blind off the media and go into constant bypass increases dramatically. Hence, the mass over capacitization by the OEMs. If you blow past an OCI by 1k miles, they don't want you into bypass all the time. I would suspect the safety margin to be around 2:1 or so. To be specific, I've seen reports (and even logged data myself) that show the loading to at times work to the square of the interval. Example 2 becomes 4, 4 becomes 16, 16 becomes 256; you get the idea - it's parabolic nearly to a function of being squared. In no way am I saying all filters will follow this exact formula; it's a generalization. But the point to understand is that you have to stay at the front end of the curve, because once you start deep into the parabolic rise, it gets ugly quickly.

In this particular application, for the 2008 Altima 2.5L, if the OP uses M1EP oil and a M1 filter, I would think that 12k miles is certainly doable. Why would Mobil offer a 15k mile oil, but make their premium filter for a shorter duration? It makes no sense. I'm sure they have tested and logged many hours, resulting in lube/filter combinations that will support the ability for Mobil to honor it's warranty provisions. There is likely no need whatsoever for a larger fitler for the match up as stated.

Today's engines are much more efficient; they don't soot up the oil like they used to. They incur less fuel (except for some DI examples). The lubes are also much more capable than our daddy's oils of yesteryear. Hence, the need for gi-normous filters is moot for a normal OCI. Even gently extending an OCI isn't cause for concern.

For this application being discussed, adding a larger filter probably won't percievably shift any tracable data one way or another. The change won't manifest into some statistically significant "ah-ha!" moment. The data I've seen just does not support it.

I'll conceed that "better" filtration (more efficiency and longer life-cycle) are a good thing. But they are only important if they actually shift the lifecycle of the equipment, which is not likely for the type applications we're speaking of. One would have to drastically alter the filtration efficiency to shift equipment lifecycle. Going to an "oversized" filter filter that might be 20% larger and flow 2gpm more doesn't mean much, when the stock filter is already probably WAY over capacitized to begin with.

Gary Allan and I discussed this in depth a long time ago. One could decide to run one of those "double" filter set-up's where you twin together a pair of flow filters, and that would give you a LOT more capacity, and longer efficiency cycle. It would be cheaper than a true dedicated bypass filter system, because of the inexpensive cost of decent full-flow filters (contrasted to the proprietary elements used in Amsoil, Gulf-Coast, FS2500, Oil-Guard, etc, etc). But, what would you gain? A MUCH longer OCI, plus the cost of the added equipment, plus the decision (grief) of where to mount it ...

Get the point?

 

[Jim Allen]

Nice add-on, Dave.

 

[Sayjac]

Originally Posted By: sHERM
Originally Posted By: sayjac
And I think the point the OP is trying to make, is that one shouldn't have to feel intimidated into not asking a question and/or seek opinions, in this specific case about the use of a larger filter application. And that rather than a valued member or contributor here, if one asks for opinions they are a 'point of contention.'

While as stated by many here, the smaller filter will work fine, a larger filter application can have advantages. Here the OP has found acceptable larger size alternatives with the help of many posters. Very unfortunate imo, to have those answers/responses condescendingly labeled "unsubstantiated opinions".

If every post on Bitog requires scientific data to answer, then few if any would be allowed to post any response on Bitog.


AMEN, Well said

No problem, I see it the same way you do. And to the repeat the answer to your last question the 14610/7317/M1-110/Bosch 3323 are all acceptable longer alternatives to the thimble sized spec'd 14612. Similar bypass setting, and used by many members instead of the 14612 size.

As for the now off topic discussion, there's many reptitious posted questions that I'd prefer not to see either. But I don't take it as my job to give the third degree to every OP. If the mods don't want opinions given and contributions from all members, then a separate board like 'ask the expert only' should be started. Based on my judgement until now, answer validity seems to have been policed pretty well by the members. And since Garry Allan (rip) has now been referenced on the oversized topic, in GA's opinion 'there's more reasons to do it than not.' Says all I need to know.

As for the bypass conjecture that a bypass event rarely occurs, that directly disputes a Fram Challenge video which has the bypass opening quite often. Not saying Fram is correct, saying that is a point that is still in dispute.

Until the posting rules or format for questions and answers is changed I will continue to contribute to answers, just as I have done in this thread.

 

[Jim Allen]

Originally Posted By: sayjac


As for the bypass conjecture that a bypass event rarely occurs, that directly disputes a Fram Challenge video which has the bypass opening quite often.


Conjecture? No. At least not from me. I'm only relating what I heard from the lips of three engineers. Some of the people I talked to are some of the same ones you will be talking to soon. If they offered me conjecture, which is doubtful, at least it's, "educated conjecture."

The video you reference says up to 25,000 cycles and they test to a million cycles at 275F oil temp. Bypass events are often a flutter of the valve so a bypass "event" could be a large number of valve cycles, or partial cycles. Figure one to four cold or cool oil starts per day over a year or years... the cycles add up and 25,000 doesn't seem like very many viewed in that context. I guess the word "rare" has to be viewed in context.

 

[dnewton3]

I concur again.

For any relief valve to open, there must be a delta P greater than the set point. We'd all agree on that. We'd probably also agree that two conditions will activate the filter bypass valve; cold starts and nearly-blinded media (not sure how "blinded" as it would depend upon the bp psi differential, but it surely would be "mostly" blinded).

The engine clearances (journals, pushrods if any, squirter ports if any, etc) are what create the majority of delta P from the high of pump pressure to the low of atmospheric pressure. At start up, there might be perhaps 60psi cold pressure at the pressure sending unit at idle (obviously depending upon each engine and each lube specifically). There certainly isn't a 50psi drop across the media! The bulk of the resistance is in the engine, not the filter. And when cold, the pump will relieve via it's valve WAY MORE OFTEN and for longer periods, than would the filter valve. The filter is but one part of the total resistance seen by the pump. The bulk of the delta P will be from the whole system, not the filter.

As long as the ADBV is working approprately, there is little if any reason to believe the traditional bypass valve in the filter will open for any significant time. It will probably "burp" (for a lack of a better term) a time or two upon cold start, but that will only result in full pressure sooner to the oil pathways. That fractional period of time (less than a second if the ADBV is working well) means nothing to the lifecycle of the equipment, because very little if any "dirt" will wash past the media through the open bypass valve in that short time. That fractional second isn't going to wash all the dirt off the media and back into the system; that's preposterous.

Once the engine and oil are warm, there is precious little delta P across the media; perhaps a few psi on average? Why would the filter bp open for any significant period of time? The oil pump should be keeping a consistent pressure upon the system as a whole. Why would the filter decide to be intermittent in it's resistence, causing the filter bp valve to open? The total lube system (while not static in resistance), does operate as a cumulative entity, not separate pieces. Hydraulic resistance is very similar in concept to electrical resistance. Resistance components operate either in parallel or series, or both, depending upon system design and component location and plumbing. A hydraulic filter is not a "variable" resistor; it cannot vary it's loading significantly except under some unique conditions. Cold start or near-total loading are those conditions. Once those are eliminated, the resistance of the filter is small (relative to the whole) and fairly constant. Just as you can vary the inputs (volts for electricity or pump pressure to a lube system), it is the RATIO of resistance relative to the inputs that stays reasonably constant. More pressure in = greater resistance. But that is true to the whole system. Each resistant component stays reasonably constant in relation (ratio) to the other components of resistance, until something drastically alters any component's designed operational characteristics (a bypass valve or electrical shunt).

Now, in the total lifecycle of a piece of equipment (engines in this discussion) it is quite possible that they will see a reasonably large amount of "burps" of the bp valve. But to what measureable detriment? How many engines do we see dead at the side of the road from this phenomenon? To the contrary, I have two vehicles (one at 197k and one at 220k) with "normal" oil and filter changes, that still run strong, with no over-sized filters. They are both Japanese products, with "smaller" filters.

My points are this:
- relative to the total operational time fram of equipment, bp valves in filters are rarely open
- concern over the filter bp valve opening (and subsequently it's relative position in the filter can) is GROSSLY over-rated.
- the "need" for upsizing a filter is grossly over-played.
- the OEM filters have such a huge over-capacitizaion factor that nearly all of us would never get into a state that would jeopardize our equipment. Especially given the BITOG anal-retentive tendencies to use premium products (syns and filters) in normal applications.

 

[Sayjac]

Originally Posted By: Jim Allen
Originally Posted By: sayjac


As for the bypass conjecture that a bypass event rarely occurs, that directly disputes a Fram Challenge video which has the bypass opening quite often.

Conjecture? No. At least not from me. I'm only relating what I heard from the lips of three engineers. Some of the people I talked to are some of the same ones you will be talking to soon. If they offered me conjecture, which is doubtful, at least it's, "educated conjecture."

Semantics aside, that video clearly elucidated a high number of bypass events over an oci period. Actually the most I've ever seen stated. Now what their definition of an 'event' is, is open to debate I suppose. But the video left the impression that bypass opened much more often than most would realize and why it's important they function properly. Perhaps Fram should change the video and reference it to real world driving applications if it isn't a fair representation of those conditions.

Again, didn't say I agree with their findings, but the implication was that filters in bypass happens more often than previously thought.

 

[LeakySeals]

Maybe a comparison to other Japanese manufacturers would set your mind at ease (a little).

2008 Nissan Altima
2.63 in. height, 2.69 in. OD, 2.27 in. gasket ID, 2.53 in.
2002 toyota camry
3.47 in. height, 2.69 in. OD, 2.25 in. gasket ID, 2.5 in.
2000 toyota corolla
2.92 in. height, 2.69 in. OD, 2.19 in. gasket ID, 2.44 in.

 

[Jim Allen]

Originally Posted By: sayjac

Semantics aside, that video clearly elucidated a high number of bypass events over an oci period. Actually the most I've ever seen stated. Now what their definition of an 'event' is, is open to debate I suppose. But the video left the impression that bypass opened much more often than most would realize and why it's important they function properly. Perhaps Fram should change the video and reference it to real world driving applications if it isn't a fair representation of those conditions.

Again, didn't say I agree with their findings, but the implication was that filters in bypass happens more often than previously thought.


Well, the engineers I have spoken with thus far are united in saying, directly to me in response to my direct question, that bypass events are "rare" and largely confined to cold/cool starts. In the absence of any info to the contrary, I think I'll give that more weight than the more advertising oriented material in the video. But again, the only implication in the video I see is the 25,000 number tossed out there. That's the only number I've EVER seen stated anywhere so my natural is to raise an eyebrow, even though I can crunch number a little and come up with a hypothesis on how that number might have been reached. Even the people I talk to directly won't really drop a number, saying it's "highly variable." I wonder if there have even been studies done.

 

[Sayjac]

Originally Posted By: Jim Allen
Originally Posted By: sayjac

Semantics aside, that video clearly elucidated a high number of bypass events over an oci period. Actually the most I've ever seen stated. Now what their definition of an 'event' is, is open to debate I suppose. But the video left the impression that bypass opened much more often than most would realize and why it's important they function properly. Perhaps Fram should change the video and reference it to real world driving applications if it isn't a fair representation of those conditions.

Again, didn't say I agree with their findings, but the implication was that filters in bypass happens more often than previously thought.


Well, the engineers I have spoken with thus far are united in saying, directly to me in response to my direct question, that bypass events are "rare" and largely confined to cold/cool starts.......

If these engineers represent and/or work for Fram, which I don't know if they do but seems implied, then imo they need to delete that video and the information contained there in. Distributing false or questionable information for the purposes of advertising, I'd find that unethical. I'm not sure where or which Fram video it is now, but the gist of what I've said several times, was the implied information

I too happen to believe, based what ZO6' posting information and opinion, that bypass event are relatively rare. Just saying there is another thought out there that muddies the water.

 

[zerosoma]

I looked up your filter on the Purolator website. The L14612 isn't THAT small by any means...in fact I prefer using THAT one versus the 14559 on my Hyundai because of the hole that i have to stick my hand into. The filter is thinner so it goes up and comes out easier. I don't always have that option with other filter brands though.

 

[zerosoma]

Originally Posted By: boosted
12k is crazy! I would hate to be the Guy who buys your car after you are done with it.



Uncalled for, dude.

 

[Jim Allen]

Originally Posted By: sayjac

If these engineers represent and/or work for Fram, which I don't know if they do but seems implied, then imo they need to delete that video and the information contained there in. Distributing false or questionable information for the purposes of advertising, I'd find that unethical. I'm not sure where or which Fram video it is now, but the gist of what I've said several times, was the implied information

I too happen to believe, based what ZO6' posting information and opinion, that bypass event are relatively rare. Just saying there is another thought out there that muddies the water.


Some of my sources are Fram some are not. I have more info coming too, so we'll get more info into the mix soon.

Yeah, I agree overall. I interpret the video a little less strictly than you do but the fact that it can be interpreted is enough reason to raise the eyebrow. Be interesting to get some other eyeballs on the video to see what other minds see.

Fram Video

 

[LeakySeals]

Originally Posted By: sayjac
Originally Posted By: Jim Allen
Originally Posted By: sayjac

Semantics aside, that video clearly elucidated a high number of bypass events over an oci period. Actually the most I've ever seen stated. Now what their definition of an 'event' is, is open to debate I suppose. But the video left the impression that bypass opened much more often than most would realize and why it's important they function properly. Perhaps Fram should change the video and reference it to real world driving applications if it isn't a fair representation of those conditions.

Again, didn't say I agree with their findings, but the implication was that filters in bypass happens more often than previously thought.


Well, the engineers I have spoken with thus far are united in saying, directly to me in response to my direct question, that bypass events are "rare" and largely confined to cold/cool starts.......

If these engineers represent and/or work for Fram, which I don't know if they do but seems implied, then imo they need to delete that video and the information contained there in. Distributing false or questionable information for the purposes of advertising, I'd find that unethical. I'm not sure where or which Fram video it is now, but the gist of what I've said several times, was the implied information

I too happen to believe, based what ZO6' posting information and opinion, that bypass event are relatively rare. Just saying there is another thought out there that muddies the water.

To better understand your position, are you a Fram lover or hater? Do you use Fram oil filters?

 

[Sayjac]

Quote:
To better understand your position, are you a Fram lover or hater?...

Neither. Clearly you are not informed on the context of my last comment? My response is specifically based on a reference made in a previous post regarding some specific engineers. If you don't understand the previous post, you wouldn't understand the response. Also, one would have to view the referenced video to understand the discussion, which the poster addressed has also seen.

 

[dnewton3]

I see sayjac's position, and tend to agree with his "on the fence" attitude. The video has some abiguity in the way some of the statements are made; the interpreation is a bit open to what they mean.

I'm neither a lover or hater of Fram. I do like many of Fram's upper end products; well made and very efficient. As for the OCOD, I don't care for the cardboard, but then I must remind myself that BITOGers are very skeptical by nature, and yet the VAST majority of the world goes around using millions of these filters every day, with very little consequence.