Suzuki SV650 Oil Filter

[BillWilson]

I am thinking about using a Wix 51359 to replace my Suzuki 16510-03G00-X07 oil filter (Made in China). The thread size appears to be the same, 20X1 MM. After looking at the following motorcycle crossover link, in section (2) they do not recommend WIX as a high performance filter for this application.
http://www.calsci.com/motorcycleinfo/FilterXRef.html

I wanted to find a good replacement filter that could be purchased at the local parts store, if possible. Advice on which filter to use will be appreciated.

Thanks,

 

[LC]

STP SMO-18 Made by Champion Labs I believe.
I know people who use this filter on Suzuki's.
They buy them at AutoZone.

 

[BillWilson]

Originally Posted By: LC
STP SMO-18 Made by Champion Labs I believe.
I know people who use this filter on Suzuki's.
They buy them at AutoZone.


I will check out the SMO-18 at AutoZone. With Champion being a Mfg, I will check if there is a cross over from Champion #, to Super Tech #. I use Super Tech on three vehicles & one industrial mower currently.

Thanks,

 

[RWEST]

That link/table you referenced doesn't recommend ANY filters, even the OEM, which kinda' leaves us Suzuki guys in the lurch, y'know?

Since we have to use SOMETHING, I've always been a fan of the WIX 51359/NAPA 1359 on my 1200 Bandit, old SV 1000 and 600 Katana, and new 1000 V-Strom. The new ones, at least the NAPA Gold's, are black too, which is nice; the ones from a few years ago were white, which looked a little tacky down amongst the chrome headers/black frame pieces.

We've used WIX/NAPA's for years on our expensive John-Deere diesel stuff, too - no problemo.

WIX has a pretty strong reputation for quality - those WIX decals on the front fenders of all those NASCAR race cars must mean something.

 

[dnewton3]

I like the Wix/Napa (good quality; very cost effective if you buy through fleetfilter.com). I also like the Purolators, but in my area, they're a little harder to come by (not on the shelf, like the Napa.)

I don't understand why, according to the link in the original post, they call this "proprietary" in thread dimension. 20x1mm isn't owned by Suzuki. In fact, that Wix filter also fits Artic Cat and Yamaha products; how proprietary can that be? Do you think Yamaha and Artic Cat are paying Suzuki to use that thread pitch?

Any manaufacturer that lists an application specific to a vehicle, will almost without reservation, stand behind their product when used per it's intent. If you use the Wix, and it fails to protect your SV650 (doubtful!) then they'll warranty the repairs. Same can be said for any other filter manufacturer that has a specific application for your SV650. I'm sure Suzuki would like us all to believe that only their filter can do the job, but I just don't fall for it. Unless they'd like to provide it for free, inclusive with their warranty per the MM act! But you're probably out of warranty by now anyway, so use what you want and don't worry about it.

 

[The_Champ]

Originally Posted By: BillWilson
Originally Posted By: LC
STP SMO-18 Made by Champion Labs I believe.
I know people who use this filter on Suzuki's.
They buy them at AutoZone.


I will check out the SMO-18 at AutoZone. With Champion being a Mfg, I will check if there is a cross over from Champion #, to Super Tech #. I use Super Tech on three vehicles & one industrial mower currently.

Thanks,


This filter for the Suzuki is not available in Supertech. The cross from the WIX 51359 is no longer the SMO-18 but now the PH7016. There was a change and this is the filter to look for now at Autozone.

 

[BillWilson]

RWEST:I used Wix/NAPA for many industrial applications without problems. Good filters!

DNEWTON3: The term "proprietary" thread term had me puzzled also.
I agree, Wix would stand behind warranty issues caused by their recommended filter for an application.

Champ: I visited a WalMart trying to match a SuperTec and could not find a match. Then I went to AutoZone and they did not have the SMO-18. If I understand you correctly, the Champion number is the STP number, PH7016?

You guys are very helpful!

Thanks,

 

[dwendt44]

"The term "proprietary" thread term had me puzzled also."
I doubt it's proprietary in the usual sense.
It's pretty rare though and that makes filter choice a difficult matter to be sure.

 

[BillWilson]

Champion & Wix manufactured filters can be purchased locally, so I will go with one of their filters and Rotella (Dino) 15W40.
Thanks,

 

[Gary Allan]

If this is a typical "screamer" that's capable of very rapid transitions in oil flow, that may explain the article's assertion that some filters are less favorable than others ..or that no high performance filter is available. My daughter's Kawasaki has a 12,900 rpm redline, IIRC. To idle with adequate oil flow ..the volume would have to be substantial at redline, relatively speaking.

Generically speaking ..in the absence of anything peculiar ..one should be pretty much as good as another from a fundamental view.

 

[BillWilson]

Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
If this is a typical "screamer" that's capable of very rapid transitions in oil flow, that may explain the article's assertion that some filters are less favorable than others ..or that no high performance filter is available. My daughter's Kawasaki has a 12,900 rpm redline, IIRC. To idle with adequate oil flow ..the volume would have to be substantial at redline, relatively speaking.

Generically speaking ..in the absence of anything peculiar ..one should be pretty much as good as another from a fundamental view.


Gary,
The SV650 is a 90 degree V-Twin with a 11,000 RPM redline and six speed gearbox. Good observation about rapid oil flow changes with this type of engine. My plan is to change oil/filter every 2000 miles verses 3500 as recommended by the OEM for oil changes.
Thanks,

 

[The_Champ]

Originally Posted By: BillWilson



Champ: I visited a WalMart trying to match a SuperTec and could not find a match. Then I went to AutoZone and they did not have the SMO-18. If I understand you correctly, the Champion number is the STP number, PH7016?

You guys are very helpful!

Thanks,







Yes the STP number is now PH7016. If Autozone doesnt have it out on the shelf, they can get it. It is available to them.

 

[BillWilson]

[/quote]

Yes the STP number is now PH7016. If Autozone doesnt have it out on the shelf, they can get it. It is available to them. [/quote]

Champ,

Thanks,

 

[dnewton3]

BillWilson. Make sure you consider doing UOA's when changing oil. I think you'll find that an OCI based upon 2k miles is excessive changing. Changing oil too often could be detrimental, just as not changing oil soon enough.

Google the SAE website. There are many technical papers there. You have to pay to view them. They are copyright protected, and I tried to get permission to use one once and they denied me initially, and then would only allow me to quote large portions of the paper if I fulfilled a large punch list of legal criteria. It wasn't worth the grief.

Bottom line is this: you can acutally change oil too often. The wear patterns are higher right after an oil/filter change, then drop over time, before growning again. There is also an unofficial oil study done by some guys to see how Mobil 1 and Amsoil stacked up in extended drain intervals. Check out this site and read all the related sub-pages. In there, you'll see they documented engine wear would go up after OCI, only to drop off there after. They also referenced the SAE/Ford-Connoco article. Here's the links: http://neptune.spacebears.com/cars/stories/oil-life.html and this one too: http://neptune.spacebears.com/cars/stories/mobil1.html

They aren't SAE engineers, sure, but their reading is not objectionable, and they didn't do a 1/2 bad job from an analytical point. They made statistical errors, but overall, it's a good read. Here's a quote from that study: "Engine wear actually decreases as oil ages. This has also been substantiated in testing conducted by Ford Motor Co. and ConocoPhillips, and reported in SAE Technical Paper 2003-01-3119. What this means is that compulsive oil changers are actually causing more engine wear than the people who let their engine's oil get some age on it."

Bottom line is this: you're definitely wasting money with a 2k O/FCI, and while not likely, are you are possibly doing harm.

Stick with your OEM OCI, and use a quality brand name application specific filter, and you won't have to worry about the bike. Wix specifically recommends a filter for your mount. If the motor/trans fails due to the filter, they'll cover you.

I don't care if you use Wix, my point is to your initial post. I don't believe for a moment that the Suzuki filter is, by design, proprietary. And Wix is one of many brands that actually recommend a particular filter. Use them with confidence.

 

[BillWilson]

dnewton3,

In the past, I was involved with rebuilding industrial railroad track equipment. The best way to get the job done was with hydraulics. When rebuilding and manufacturing hydraulic operated machinery, we would run the 100 to 400 gallon hydraulic circuits from 40 to 80 hours to get the particle levels to an acceptable level, since we introduced contaminates during the rebuild process. Even new hydraulic oil should be filtered. The machines had 3 micron pressure and return filtration systems.

The introduction of contaminates to the system during oil/filter change is a real consideration.

Your comments are appreciated. Since the bike is new, 1500 miles, I have only had the OEM recommended 600 mile oil/filter change to date. Good advice. Thats why I like this site!

Thanks for the links,

 

[Gary Allan]

Quote:
Here's a quote from that study: "Engine wear actually decreases as oil ages. This has also been substantiated in testing conducted by Ford Motor Co. and ConocoPhillips, and reported in SAE Technical Paper 2003-01-3119. What this means is that compulsive oil changers are actually causing more engine wear than the people who let their engine's oil get some age on it."


Much debate on this topic and many conclusions formed because of it. Apparent results, without bona fide verification, should not be assigned any extended properties of merit. While the elevation of wear indicators can lead someone to conclude that "wear" increases soon after the oil change process, this is an assumption. It's more likely some oil seating process where established films are disrupted ..and in the formation of those films (AW adds and whatnot) elements were entrained in the process. The "liberation process" is probably what's being viewed. There's also highly probable that no oil is considered shot when it starts dropping particles ..nor can any oil suspend 100% of the particles introduced into it. That is, for various potential reasons that we could pull out of our behinds, particles are probably dropping out all the time ...but are, for the most part, hardly worth factoring compared to what are either filtered or maintained in suspension. As new oil is introduced, these leftovers and entrained elements get swept up ...and the process starts all over again. YMMV in this spiking oddity depending on which oil is in the study. If they used something like RedLine, with its aggressive add pack ..and did it on certain engines, the notion that changing your oil at all would cause some visceral response. You would never change it due to the havoc that it caused. Yes, this is an exceptional example ..but merely proves that apparent and actual can be a bit different and one can assign the wrong "why" to the results.

Also keep in mind that there was never an SAE paper that didn't start out with an agenda. Not that the conclusions or methodology were flawed ...but they started out with a desired goal and that goal usually conforms to whatever is en vogue in lubrication evolutions. Right now, better utilization of resources via extended drains (by old standards) and the use of lighter oils are "en vogue" ...hence you see many papers that support such notions. They end up being, essentially, promotions in schools of thought with evidence.

 

[BillWilson]

Gary & dnewton3,


Excellent discussion! This thread is good education about engine oil/filters for me!

Thanks,

 

[GeorgeCLS]

The extended oil drain papers were relative to autmotive application and certainly not relative to a motorcycle engine oil with its common transmission sump. Iron and steel wear byproducts are continuously generated and their increased concentration causes accelerated engine wear rates. In a motorcycle engine/transmission and sometimes wet clutch application, there simply is no subsitution for frequent oil changes. Add to the equation very high performance engine application with corresponding high oil stress.. Bingo.. Change the oil often..
George Morrison, STLE CLS

 

[dnewton3]

Gary makes excellent points.

I would counter with this: SAE papers, while driven to prove a point that is likely to fill an agenda, have two resources that most of us BITOG members don't have excess of; time and money.

These papers are submitted by people in their respective industries, and by companies that are constantly moving forward to find answers to questions that many, some, few, or none of us ever have to answer. They control their experiments well, and track the variables meticously. It's not at all like some of our bitog memebers that try one motor oil for 5k miles, then another, then another, then another, over a period of 2 years, and make some kind of conclusion when they don't control the fuel quality, atmospheric, environmental, and other effecting conditions. My point is this, even though engine and oil manufacturers have more of an agenda to fulfill, they also have the resources to better control the criteria of the tests, thereby giving a better result.

The specific SAE paper I linked was regarding the effect of ZDDP reduction in oils to safisfy EPA requirements regarding that additive's effects on exhaust treatment equipment. Ford/Connoco were looking to see if they could find alternatives to ZDDP reduction that would provide equal or better wear performance when compared to the existing levels of ZDDP. The conclusion of decreased wear as oil aged was not the main goal of trials; it was an unexpected result. The expected result was that wear could be adequately mittigated by alternative means rather than ZDDP.

All this in mind, I still concur with some of Gary's points.

And to add some comments on the end result: after skulking around BITOG for 2 years now, and reading on other sites about oils, filtration, and general lubrication, I've come to a few conclusions. Manufacturers have already done most of the research that superceedes my level of time and money input; any product that meets a manufacturer's minimum criteria is acceptable, but they do balance cost with profit; while you can get better performance for spending more money, it isn't always necessary; you can extend the life of product "x" by enhancing it's environment; you must define your personal goals, then choose your equipment and complimentary supplies accordingly.

My comment was gear towards this: don't change your oil because you "think" it will be better for your SV650; do several UOA's at 2k, then several at 3.5k, and let the data fall where it may. Control as many inputs as you can, and let the output be what it is. I think you'll find that a 2K OCI gains little if any better wear pattern when standardized for mileage, compared to 3k OCI's. It's likely that the bike will last you far longer than you intend to keep it, just following Suzuki's OCI and using decent brand name oil and filters that you can find anywhere, as long as then meet tghe criteria.

 

[BillWilson]

George, dnewton3, and Gary,

I easily ride over 12,000 miles per year and plan to put most of my miles on the SV650 for 2008. As suggested, I will use good a quality oil/filter per OCI and will post results in the UOA Motorcycle section.

Thanks for the advice!