Wix = Nominal (50%) at 21 microns? (Corvette LT1 Filter Options)

Fram is certainly going to keep the oil clean. It’s a little more restrictive than other filters but that’s probably fine

The Ultra is not any more restrictive than the others. This test data if from an official ISO 4548-12 test procedure.

 
Last edited:
When Lingenfelter built the engine in February 1997 they used a Quaker State oil filter and 10w40 Quaker State oil. Here’s one of the pages from the original invoice.
Judging by the part number QS3980 it was likely a the same as a Fram filter since they’re the only other filter maker that uses 3980 for their LT1 filters (PH3980, TG3980, XG3980, etc.).
View attachment 163081
Back in 1997, who knows who was building Quaker State oil filters. Lots of off brand filters use the same basic model numbering as Fram even though Fram had no involvement in making the filter.
 
Re the AC Delco filters - RockAuto says 98% at 20-30 microns.

Summit says “Smallest Particle Filtered:
30 microns”
https://www.summitracing.com/parts/ado-upf52r

It’s such a pain when the manufacturers don’t have clear info on their website.
This is why I only trust the efficiency info that is on the manufacture's website. Who knows where these 3rd party sellers get their information. Like I mentioned earlier, if the manufacturer is willing to give that kind of info to the 3rd party sellers, why don't they also just put the same info on their own website. Wix doesn't do that ... you can't find any reference on Wix's website saying to what efficiency test spec they use to rate their filter efficiency.
 
It does matter based on the filter size, even if they all use the same exact media. Why do you think Purolator and others state different efficiencies for the same filter model line (like a PureOne) for their giant sized efficiency reference filter vs their smaller filters ... all using the same exact PureOne media. Or why do you think Fram references 3 different sized filters in their efficiency statement and says it's the average efficiency of those 3 filters. The overall resulting efficiency has a lot to do with how a filter sloughs off already captured debris caught in the media as the filter loads up and the delta-P across the media starts increasing. It's been mentioned in many threads, and is actually shown in the Ascent testing data too.

Then that means changing your filter too soon matters aswell, which nearly everyone does. So what are we getting worked up about?
 
Then that means changing your filter too soon matters aswell, which nearly everyone does. So what are we getting worked up about?
Some oil filters become less efficient faster with use and dP loading than others. It all depends on the media design and the size of the filter, and how the dP increases as it loads up. Most oil filters are typically more efficient when new, than slowly lose efficiency as they load up. Some are worse than others - again, depends on media design and area. A filter with a lower ISO 4548-12 efficiency is most likely sloughing off more already captured debris than a higher efficiency filter. It's hard to distinguish the difference between actual capturing efficiency and retention of already captured efficiency. But the bottom line is a filter with a much higher ISO 4548-12 efficiency is doing a better job at both.

This phenomena was even seen in all the filters that Ascent tested. Link below jumps to the part where this is discussed.


1687632244302.png
 
It does matter based on the filter size, even if they all use the same exact media. Why do you think Purolator and others state different efficiencies for the same filter model line (like a PureOne) for their giant sized efficiency reference filter vs their smaller filters ... all using the same exact PureOne media. Or why do you think Fram references 3 different sized filters in their efficiency statement and says it's the average efficiency of those 3 filters. The overall resulting efficiency has a lot to do with how a filter sloughs off already captured debris caught in the media as the filter loads up and the delta-P across the media starts increasing. It's been mentioned in many threads, and is actually shown in the Ascent testing data too.
Where can you find the specific filter data on the Purolator site? I’m trying to find info on Pure One Filter PL24011 and I’m not seeing it. Thanks for your help.
 
Where can you find the specific filter data on the Purolator site? I’m trying to find info on Pure One Filter PL24011 and I’m not seeing it. Thanks for your help.
Purolator only references their huge 30001 filter model for ISO 4548-12 efficiency. It's a footnote at the very bottom of their pages. There have been some threads were people contacted Purolator and got some specific filter p/n efficiency. But not all PureOne filters are 99% at 20 microns.
 
Purolator only references their huge 30001 filter model for ISO 4548-12 efficiency. It's a footnote at the very bottom of their pages. There have been some threads were people contacted Purolator and got some specific filter p/n efficiency. But not all PureOne filters are 99% at 20 microns.
I sometimes feel there should be some simple regulation on oil filter industry so we can get more consistent and accurate performance claims. For me, Fram is the only company that tries to provide a reasonable number by testing three filters within a family.

Or perhaps for the vast majority of consumers it's not important.
 
I've been reviewing the oil filter options for my 1992 Lingenfelter Corvette, I know a lot of people swear by Wix filters, but I was surprised that the Wix was listed as Nominal at 21um. It seems like this drops Wix to the bottom the options - unless I'm missing something?

Corvette LT1 Engine:

FRAM 3980 99%@20um​
Bosch 3430 99%@20um​
Mobil 1 M1-201A 99%@30um​
Wix 51036 50%@21um
AC-Delco PF52E 98%@20-30um (hard to find, this was on one retailer site - is it correct?)​
K&N HP-2001 ? (seems impossible to find current info)​
Purolator Boss PBL24011 99%@25um​

View attachment 162689
Checkout the AC Delco Gold version UPF52R specs, much better than regular Delco. Base plate, canister heavier, improved filtration. Amanzon $9.57, Rock Auto $7.78
I use the Delco Gold on my resto mod.
 
I sometimes feel there should be some simple regulation on oil filter industry so we can get more consistent and accurate performance claims. For me, Fram is the only company that tries to provide a reasonable number by testing three filters within a family.
If it was like what Fram does, that would give a good ISO 4548-12 comparison. Test 3 filter sizes in each line (small, medium and large), and report the average efficiency of those three for particles 20μ and greater (basically at 20μ).
 
My only reservations w using Fram on my Lingenfelter are 1) it doesn’t flow as well as the Mobil 1. Since the LT1 made 300hp stock, and the Lingenfelter package brings it up to 440hp, and I’m using 18 V@100c oil (M1 Supercar 5w50) I’m hesitant to go with a more restrictive filter. The oil is changed at least annually too - which is rarely even 2000 miles, but there are track and autocross days in there too.

2) and this is a smaller concern, on the capacity test the Mobil 1 captured the particulates in the filter media (as designed) and with the Fram loads of particulates are caught under the ant-drainback valve.

 
Last edited:
My only reservations w using Fram on my Lingenfelter are 1) it doesn’t flow as well as the Mobil 1. Since the LT1 made 300hp stock, and the Lingenfelter package brings it up to 440hp, and I’m using 18 V@100c oil (M1 Supercar 5w50) I’m hesitant to go with a more restrictive filter. The oil is changed at least annually too - which is rarely even 2000 miles, but there are track and autocross days in there too.

2) and this is a smaller concern, on the capacity test the Mobil 1 captured the particulates in the filter media (as designed) and with the Fram loads of particulates are caught under the ant-drainback valve.


This is a real test per official ISO 4548-12 procedures. That YouTube video isn't.


Who says the Mobil 1 "flows better"? ... with real ISO 4548-12 test data to support the claim. Does your Vette oil pump hit pressure relief when the oil is fully hot? That's the only time any flow difference going to the engine will occur based on a filter's flow performance (meaning its delta-p vs flow curve).
 
Last edited:
This is a real test per official ISO 4548-12 procedures. That YouTube video isn't.


Who says the Mobil 1 "flows better"? ... with real ISO 4548-12 test data to support the claim. Does your Vette oil pump hit pressure relief when the oil is fully hot? That's the only time any flow difference going to the engine will occur based on a filter's flow performance (meaning its delta-p vs flow curve).
Absolutely correct.

The “Flow Phantom” strikes again.
 
Back
Top