PF52 or equivalent without an internal bypass?

[mopar400]

I own a gm with a 3.1L engine. From what i understand these you a bypass valve in the engine block. I know it probably doesnt make a difference but im paranoid.

Thanks

 

[ZR2RANDO]

You are correct, the bypass is built-in at the filter mount, so the filter does not need one internally.
You're good to go.

 

[mopar400]

actualy i was wondering which brand of filters dont have the internal bypass. I was reading some thread on here last night that said the supertech pf52 has an internal one.

I dont know......it probably doesnt matter anyway.

 

[ZR2RANDO]

When that Supertech brand first started using the "ecore" version (made by Champ) for that filter (and others as well), the filter had an
additional bypass built-in to the filter. They were using a design that allowed fewer parts that crossed over for more filters. It was a mistake that has now been corrected. The earlier ones had the redundant bypass, the newer ones do not.
In general it is only a redundant feature, it just brings with it the possibility for bypass when it is not needed.
What you read about, has now been corrected, at least the ones I have seen lately have been correct...there could still be some older ones in some stores.....

 

[T-Keith]

The only PF52 equivalent with a bypass that I know of is some of the early Champ E-core filter. These are sold under the Supertech, STP, and other names.

They are easily identifiable by a second set of holes.

-T

 

[Filter guy]

Champ DID have extra holes in the GM applications at first in the AC product. Those holes were irrelivant and the by-pass irrelivant. It made no difference in GM engines. Some may claim there was a difference but they do not stand on solid ground and have no facts, testing, or information to prove otherwise. Do they think GM would allow a filter by-pass to interfere with their block designed one?

Subsequently, Champ removed those holes. They did not change the by-pass antidrain combo piece.

The truth was General Motors was testing on engines WITHOUT BUILT IN BY-PASSES the Ecore design. That is why AC went initially with that design. ( wait for the future..). They wanted field testing on existing engines in the marketplace along with testing done on future engines, not only in the lab but test mules as well. Guess what? The E-core didn't fail their test. Which is why AC continues to market the E-core design with no "extra holes" in the backplate assembly.

But what do I know....lol

 

[Bill Plock]

quote:

---

Originally posted by mopar400:
I own a gm with a 3.1L engine... bypass valve in the engine block.

---

mopar400,

FYI.. See the last post in the bypass filter forum topic Where to tap bypass feed for GM 3.4L V6? for a diagram of the bypass valve ZR2RANDO pointed out. (GM 3.4L & 3.1L use the same basic block)

I run UPF52's on my 04 Impala's 3.4L V6 ... (had an 01 Malibu with a 3.1 before that). The "U" in UPF designates the Ultraguard Gold AC Delco filter which has very good specs.. Last I knew these were still available in the PF52 size (I bought 3 cases from GMpartsdirect.com about a year ago) ... IIRC most other sizes were discontinued..

 

[T-Keith]

Filter Guy, your statements contradict themselves. You say they didn't make a difference, then why did they take them out?

-T

 

[Filter guy]

I would guess because it confuses some people to have a by-pass in a filter and in the engine block.

Technically, GM did the testing and there were no problems. But there are always BITOG types who question everything..

So as to not confuse people GM and AC opted for a different design after they had what they needed testing wise..lab and field.

That's not to say you won't see something different shortly in GM engine filtration...