Any Accord owners (gen 6) 4 cyl using an oversize oil filter? The stock filter is soooo small! Could you post a part number? Wix preferred, but I could cross most anything.
Oversize filter for '02 Accord 4 cyl
- Thread starter slapshot111
- Start date
- Status
The filter for the s2000 -PCX004. Or the Wix 57356. S2000 is best and im using on my Nissan Rogue which is super tiny and problematic. I don't think the wix is bigger than the fram/Honda blue part though - but the Wix has a base-end bypass which may bypass less captured junk than a bypass that might wash the dirty-side can contents into the engine .
Last edited:
I forgot to add that on Ebay I did find an oversize filter for this car. I never heard of it, it's a "Hamp" p/n H1540-RTA-505. Any thoughts?
What other part#'s are available? My Nissan also has a small filter(same # as the Accord).
Fram, Puro, Denso etc.
Fram, Puro, Denso etc.
Last edited:
Arco, I appreciate your response. It seems the 57356 is only .3" bigger that the stock 51334. It's -10F outside now and when it warms up a little, I'm going to have to crawl under the car to see exactly how much extra clearance there might be. I was hoping for an inch or two.
I posted this question on the driveaccord.com gen 6 forum and have not received ONE response in 3 full days, (weekend included). I don't know if those people are ignorant or arrogant. Almost 50 people looked at the question, but no response. Over on the saturnfans.com website I got great help almost immediately after posting a question, those guys are the best. You guys are great too.
You might find this of interest.
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/1083917/1
Some older Honda products use a larger diameter filter, my Acura specified it but newer products often do not have clearance for it, I'm not sure if that is the case or not for your Accord.
To be honest, I just don't see the point. Ive cut open quite a few filters from Hondas and never seen any indication that the size of the filter was in anyway a handicap.
I'm curious what you hope to gain by installing a larger filter? If you're just worried about filtration, throw an Ultra, D+ or PSL on it and if you exceed the capacity of one of those IMO the you got bigger trouble than the filter.
Apologies in advance that I didn't really answer your question.
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/1083917/1
Some older Honda products use a larger diameter filter, my Acura specified it but newer products often do not have clearance for it, I'm not sure if that is the case or not for your Accord.
To be honest, I just don't see the point. Ive cut open quite a few filters from Hondas and never seen any indication that the size of the filter was in anyway a handicap.
I'm curious what you hope to gain by installing a larger filter? If you're just worried about filtration, throw an Ultra, D+ or PSL on it and if you exceed the capacity of one of those IMO the you got bigger trouble than the filter.
Apologies in advance that I didn't really answer your question.
Last edited:
WIX. 51344 ... about an inch taller.
But not sure it makes any difference... many a Honda has gone 200 000 miles + on factory size filters..
But not sure it makes any difference... many a Honda has gone 200 000 miles + on factory size filters..
Me neither, I just can't understand the hype about larger filters. I mean, the one on my ECHO is small enough to fit in the palm of your hand (it's actually the same one on my generator), but look at the miles on this car in my sig. Not only that, I've generally always used either the Toyota OEM or Denso equivalent, and everyone knows about the supposed low filtration efficiency of those. I also tend to use OEM Honda (A01) on my Accord, and none of my cars have any sort of excessive consumption even at their current miles.
Every time this subject comes up you get a bunch of people extolling the benefits of 3-5 ounces of more oil, or the greater surface area, or.... I think if there is any benefit its down in the noise of statistical error.
Originally Posted By: DuckRyder
To be honest, I just don't see the point. Ive cut open quite a few filters from Hondas and never seen any indication that the size of the filter was in anyway a handicap.
I'm curious what you hope to gain by installing a larger filter? If you're just worried about filtration, throw an Ultra, D+ or PSL on it and if you exceed the capacity of one of those IMO the you got bigger trouble than the filter.
Every time this subject comes up you get a bunch of people extolling the benefits of 3-5 ounces of more oil, or the greater surface area, or.... I think if there is any benefit its down in the noise of statistical error.
Originally Posted By: DuckRyder
To be honest, I just don't see the point. Ive cut open quite a few filters from Hondas and never seen any indication that the size of the filter was in anyway a handicap.
I'm curious what you hope to gain by installing a larger filter? If you're just worried about filtration, throw an Ultra, D+ or PSL on it and if you exceed the capacity of one of those IMO the you got bigger trouble than the filter.
Lost one nice running new 1.6L Nissan engine to (I speculate) the junk Nissan China filter a couple months ago. The filter have near ZERO clearance around the paper endcaps for cold oil to flow - I mean maybe 10 -15 thousandths radial clearance.
Nissan car filters are now Mexico OE with Si adbv but still way undersized - the engines sound like garbage when cold. NO PROBLEMS after going to a quality FILTECH Honda pcx-004. Funny the DENSO JDM B-series that factory came on the rogue was fine but not available for purchase stateside.
No more OIL filters the size of fuel filters on my cars!
Nissan car filters are now Mexico OE with Si adbv but still way undersized - the engines sound like garbage when cold. NO PROBLEMS after going to a quality FILTECH Honda pcx-004. Funny the DENSO JDM B-series that factory came on the rogue was fine but not available for purchase stateside.
No more OIL filters the size of fuel filters on my cars!
Last edited:
dnewton3
Staff member
There are a few things to gain from a larger filter:
1) consolidation of filter stock
2) more capacity for cooling
3) more capacity for holding contamination
4) greater efficiency from slower volumetric flow
I can see some context of hope for the first issue; it may make things easier. But just how many filters does one really have, and is one so limited for space that a few "correct" filters would make the seams of your garage or storage shed literally burst open? The convenience of a few less filters is minor, when you really look at reality.
As for cooling, I would agree it helps. It helps to such an infitessimally small degree that you could NEVER, EVER hope to prove it in reality. I don't care about your theory; SHOW ME the PROOF that this actually happens. Remember, most always we're talking about liquid cooled, thermostatically controlled engine temps here ... And by the way, that "extra" cooling in summer is actually working against your warm up in winter, however super-duper tiny small it really is. So someone please post up the actual temp data from several successive trials, along with your averages and standard deviation norms, so that we can actually believe a can that hold perhaps 10% more is really that efficient in cooling down your entire lube system. And make sure to discuss your ANOVA points and show conclusively that you can manipulate the temp of the system to a level larger than all the other inputs such as thermostat, ambient temps, dirt cake, etc ...
As for holding capacity, I'll ask to see anyone's proof that the current state (OEM properly spec'd filter) is actually going into bypass with regularity, indicating that the OEM filter design is maxed at capacity for your FCI duration. SHOW ME the DATA that you can conclusively indicate that the OEM filter is overwhelmed to a point where the media is blinding off, or even close to doing so at the end of your FCI. Please post up your dP tracking observations where the bypass is clearly going into relief. To the best of my knowledge, the only member here that ever had real-world data to this effect is Jim Allen, and he's shown filters essentially NEVER go into bypass but under uber-cold, high rpm bursts and once the oil warms up, the media dP is only a few psi. Additionally, if capacity is your concern, how is it that top-tier products (high-capacity cellulose/syn blend and full syn media) don't offer enough capacity in the RARE event that you actually could blind off the media of a "regular" filter. Somehow, a "bigger" filter would hold the extra dirt, but the added capacity of the properly sized FU won't???? You would have to essentially double the size of the filter, because the FU holds 2x more than typical filter application. I have run "normal" filters to 10k and 15k miles, and the media was still in excellent shape and not coated to a bypass condition. So I ask, just how far are you pushing the OEM spec'd filter, really and can you PROVE what you claim?
As for efficiency, you will likely gain some by slowing the lube flow through the media. Probably roughly on par with the %shift in flow? So perhaps at 2,000 rpm, you might be able to slow the surface flow from 3.0000000 gpm to 2.99999999 gpm for each square inch of media????? I have no idea what the actual figures are, but I'm confident that they are really paltry. Really, really stupidly low, in terms of efficiency shift. It's more likely to see a dE %shift from product to product than that of flow variance.
And don't forget this ...
the downside is that no filter maker I'm aware of will warrant your home-grown choice of "non-stock" application. First, you have to understand how the FTC limited warranty provisions work. Then, you'd understand that the burden of proof shifts from the filter maker to YOU, and you have a LONG, HARD, EXPENSIVE road ahead of you to prove that your selection was "better" against all their data, engineers and lawyers in the arbitration hearing or small claims court. It is correct to say that the OEM cannot deny warranty, should their product be proven to be the root cause of failure. But it is also correct to say that once you stray off the reservation, they have the right to defer any payout until YOU can PROVE that YOUR SELECTION was sound. You and your hunch against their reams of data and team of experts. Good luck with that.
So, by all means, go ahead. You'll sleep better knowing a bigger filter is on there, despite there is no credible evidence that such small changes actually amount to any tangible gain, and that you are able to slay the corporate dragon with complete assurance, should the unthinkable happen.
But if you want to convince me, I'm a data driven person.
I'll bow to your concern for garage stock; I cannot hope to assuage you of the concern for too many filters on your shelf.
But when it comes to cooling, capacity and efficiency, puh-leeeeezeeee show me the data that any of this actually manifests into reality. Show me your temp data tracking, your UOA evidence and your PC analysis that clearly indicates the logic to the quest. I don't what to hear theory; I've got that covered. Shoe me PROOF it makes a difference.
Show me that the risks, however remote, are usurped by the rewards.
Please, show me, anyone.
.
1) consolidation of filter stock
2) more capacity for cooling
3) more capacity for holding contamination
4) greater efficiency from slower volumetric flow
I can see some context of hope for the first issue; it may make things easier. But just how many filters does one really have, and is one so limited for space that a few "correct" filters would make the seams of your garage or storage shed literally burst open? The convenience of a few less filters is minor, when you really look at reality.
As for cooling, I would agree it helps. It helps to such an infitessimally small degree that you could NEVER, EVER hope to prove it in reality. I don't care about your theory; SHOW ME the PROOF that this actually happens. Remember, most always we're talking about liquid cooled, thermostatically controlled engine temps here ... And by the way, that "extra" cooling in summer is actually working against your warm up in winter, however super-duper tiny small it really is. So someone please post up the actual temp data from several successive trials, along with your averages and standard deviation norms, so that we can actually believe a can that hold perhaps 10% more is really that efficient in cooling down your entire lube system. And make sure to discuss your ANOVA points and show conclusively that you can manipulate the temp of the system to a level larger than all the other inputs such as thermostat, ambient temps, dirt cake, etc ...
As for holding capacity, I'll ask to see anyone's proof that the current state (OEM properly spec'd filter) is actually going into bypass with regularity, indicating that the OEM filter design is maxed at capacity for your FCI duration. SHOW ME the DATA that you can conclusively indicate that the OEM filter is overwhelmed to a point where the media is blinding off, or even close to doing so at the end of your FCI. Please post up your dP tracking observations where the bypass is clearly going into relief. To the best of my knowledge, the only member here that ever had real-world data to this effect is Jim Allen, and he's shown filters essentially NEVER go into bypass but under uber-cold, high rpm bursts and once the oil warms up, the media dP is only a few psi. Additionally, if capacity is your concern, how is it that top-tier products (high-capacity cellulose/syn blend and full syn media) don't offer enough capacity in the RARE event that you actually could blind off the media of a "regular" filter. Somehow, a "bigger" filter would hold the extra dirt, but the added capacity of the properly sized FU won't???? You would have to essentially double the size of the filter, because the FU holds 2x more than typical filter application. I have run "normal" filters to 10k and 15k miles, and the media was still in excellent shape and not coated to a bypass condition. So I ask, just how far are you pushing the OEM spec'd filter, really and can you PROVE what you claim?
As for efficiency, you will likely gain some by slowing the lube flow through the media. Probably roughly on par with the %shift in flow? So perhaps at 2,000 rpm, you might be able to slow the surface flow from 3.0000000 gpm to 2.99999999 gpm for each square inch of media????? I have no idea what the actual figures are, but I'm confident that they are really paltry. Really, really stupidly low, in terms of efficiency shift. It's more likely to see a dE %shift from product to product than that of flow variance.
And don't forget this ...
the downside is that no filter maker I'm aware of will warrant your home-grown choice of "non-stock" application. First, you have to understand how the FTC limited warranty provisions work. Then, you'd understand that the burden of proof shifts from the filter maker to YOU, and you have a LONG, HARD, EXPENSIVE road ahead of you to prove that your selection was "better" against all their data, engineers and lawyers in the arbitration hearing or small claims court. It is correct to say that the OEM cannot deny warranty, should their product be proven to be the root cause of failure. But it is also correct to say that once you stray off the reservation, they have the right to defer any payout until YOU can PROVE that YOUR SELECTION was sound. You and your hunch against their reams of data and team of experts. Good luck with that.
So, by all means, go ahead. You'll sleep better knowing a bigger filter is on there, despite there is no credible evidence that such small changes actually amount to any tangible gain, and that you are able to slay the corporate dragon with complete assurance, should the unthinkable happen.
But if you want to convince me, I'm a data driven person.
I'll bow to your concern for garage stock; I cannot hope to assuage you of the concern for too many filters on your shelf.
But when it comes to cooling, capacity and efficiency, puh-leeeeezeeee show me the data that any of this actually manifests into reality. Show me your temp data tracking, your UOA evidence and your PC analysis that clearly indicates the logic to the quest. I don't what to hear theory; I've got that covered. Shoe me PROOF it makes a difference.
Show me that the risks, however remote, are usurped by the rewards.
Please, show me, anyone.
.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2013
- Messages
- 3,082
Try a Purolator PL24458...
Same base, same bypass pressure...
Same base, same bypass pressure...
Last edited:
You can go onto the Baldwin web site and look up larger filters. I run the Baldwin B202 on my Honda S2000 for better filtration and flow. You have to decide what will fit(size wise) then give Baldwin a call to see what the filtration specs are for any giving filter. I use to have a catalog that gave me all the filter specs but it was 8 to 10 years old so I call them now just to see if the specs have changed over the years.
ROD
ROD
Originally Posted By: mattwithcats
Try a Purolator PL24458...
Same base, same bypass pressure...
Purolator discontinued this filter long ago! Maybe you can find one now & again(I've seen'em at SEARS) but, it's rare at best. My old Accord's use this larger 24458 and I carried over my leftover stash ot the Altima in my signature. The #24458 was a really nice size filter and I'd like to find another brand in same/similar size just to try it and see it I still get the startup rattle as I did with the Puro# 24458
The 24458 size caused lots of startup rattle on the Altima so, I didn't buy'em any more...then, they were discontinued anyway! I have never tried another brand in this size to see if the startup rattle persisted.
Besides the Puro# 14610 standard size for my Altima, I'll often buy the Puro# 14457 when I can't get the 14610. The #14457 is only marginally larger on the outside but, may not have as much internal media as the smaller(looking) #14610...from what I've read/searched!
Try a Purolator PL24458...
Same base, same bypass pressure...
Purolator discontinued this filter long ago! Maybe you can find one now & again(I've seen'em at SEARS) but, it's rare at best. My old Accord's use this larger 24458 and I carried over my leftover stash ot the Altima in my signature. The #24458 was a really nice size filter and I'd like to find another brand in same/similar size just to try it and see it I still get the startup rattle as I did with the Puro# 24458
The 24458 size caused lots of startup rattle on the Altima so, I didn't buy'em any more...then, they were discontinued anyway! I have never tried another brand in this size to see if the startup rattle persisted.
Besides the Puro# 14610 standard size for my Altima, I'll often buy the Puro# 14457 when I can't get the 14610. The #14457 is only marginally larger on the outside but, may not have as much internal media as the smaller(looking) #14610...from what I've read/searched!
OOPS, I was mistaken with the Puro# 14457. It's actually #14459, sorry!
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: Char Baby
OOPS, I was mistaken with the Puro# 14457. It's actually #14459, sorry!
Yep, the 14459 has about 20% less media than the 14610.
I would like to find a larger filter than either filter above^^^.
Only for trial & error as I like adding 5 qts of oil at an OCI instead of the 4.5 qts and, the possibility of extra filtration/longevity.
Originally Posted By: Char Baby
OOPS, I was mistaken with the Puro# 14457. It's actually #14459, sorry!
Yep, the 14459 has about 20% less media than the 14610.
I would like to find a larger filter than either filter above^^^.
Only for trial & error as I like adding 5 qts of oil at an OCI instead of the 4.5 qts and, the possibility of extra filtration/longevity.
Char Baby,
Have you looked at the Baldwin B199(3" X 5 1/8")? If you have the room for a good size filter, look at the B202(3 11/16" X 5 3/8").
ROD
Have you looked at the Baldwin B199(3" X 5 1/8")? If you have the room for a good size filter, look at the B202(3 11/16" X 5 3/8").
ROD
Originally Posted By: rrounds
Char Baby,
Have you looked at the Baldwin B199(3" X 5 1/8")? If you have the room for a good size filter, look at the B202(3 11/16" X 5 3/8").
ROD
I easily have the room for that size.
Char Baby,
Have you looked at the Baldwin B199(3" X 5 1/8")? If you have the room for a good size filter, look at the B202(3 11/16" X 5 3/8").
ROD
I easily have the room for that size.
Here are some pic's of a Baldwin B7042(same size as the B202). I now use the B202 on my Honda S2000 and have ran these filters for 90k miles on the S2000.
http://s949.photobucket.com/user/rrounds/library/Oil Filters?sort=2&page=1
ROD
http://s949.photobucket.com/user/rrounds/library/Oil Filters?sort=2&page=1
ROD
- Status
