Mobil 1 0w40 - 7000 miles / 160 hours

Status
Not open for further replies.
Are the insolubles big enough for a filter to catch? A bypass maybe, but the regular cartridge?

BTW any noticeable difference from 0w-40 to the ESP? I've been running ESP 5w-30 for about 10 months and liking it.
 
Originally Posted By: AlienBug
Are the insolubles big enough for a filter to catch? A bypass maybe, but the regular cartridge?

BTW any noticeable difference from 0w-40 to the ESP? I've been running ESP 5w-30 for about 10 months and liking it.


I think a bad filter would show higher numbers. Otherwise, why even have a filter?

Can't really tell much difference other than slightly longer crank times below 20*F. May go back to 0w40.
 
The insolubles don't seem to change much in UOAs regardless of brand of full-flow filter and/or oil brand. They will range from a low of perhaps .2 to a high of .7 in most typical UOAs, and will average around .4. In fact, you can see the insoluble level just about the same in many oil systems that also have bypass filter systems.

While Blackstone seems to equate the insolubles directly to filtration levels, I don't see a true corelation in my data study.
 
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
The insolubles don't seem to change much in UOAs regardless of brand of full-flow filter and/or oil brand. They will range from a low of perhaps .2 to a high of .7 in most typical UOAs, and will average around .4. In fact, you can see the insoluble level just about the same in many oil systems that also have bypass filter systems.

While Blackstone seems to equate the insolubles directly to filtration levels, I don't see a true corelation in my data study.


What *does* an oil filter catch then?
 
Filters catch particulate that is large enough to be caught. It can be metals and combustion byproducts. Insolubles are typically soot and other related byproducts. Most full flow filters are reasonably effective at 15um and larger. The bigger the particulate, obviously the easier to catch. Some "insolubles" may be caught, some may not.

But I cannot find any clear reference between what Blackstone calls "insolubles" and what I'd accept as reliable data. I've seen UOAs with really high wear metals such as Fe and Cu, and yet have the insolubles at less than .5. These's no direct reference to show that wear metal ppm and insolubles go hand in hand. What really made me start to pay little heed to the "insolubles" rating is how UOAs with and without bypass filtration often have very similar insoluble levels. I completely agree that it's good to have low insolubles. I just have seen so many UOAs with different filter brands (full flow and also bypass) show insolubles all in the same range. Look over a bunch of UOA data, and you'll start to see what I mean.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
Filters catch particulate that is large enough to be caught. It can be metals and combustion byproducts. Insolubles are typically soot and other related byproducts. Most full flow filters are reasonably effective at 15um and larger. The bigger the particulate, obviously the easier to catch. Some "insolubles" may be caught, some may not.

But I cannot find any clear reference between what Blackstone calls "insolubles" and what I'd accept as reliable data. I've seen UOAs with really high wear metals such as Fe and Cu, and yet have the insolubles at less than .5. These's no direct reference to show that wear metal ppm and insolubles go hand in hand. What really made me start to pay little heed to the "insolubles" rating is how UOAs with and without bypass filtration often have very similar insoluble levels. I completely agree that it's good to have low insolubles. I just have seen so many UOAs with different filter brands (full flow and also bypass) show insolubles all in the same range. Look over a bunch of UOA data, and you'll start to see what I mean.


What do you think about bypass centrifuges vs. bypass filters?

Charlie
 
Hi,
Charlie - I used centrifuge cleaners on my Detroit Series 60s for many millions of kms. I finally used 40micron SS cleanable FF inserts instead of Donaldson's excellent Synteq filters

This was the very best setup for me to average 90kkm OCIs using Delvac 1 5W-40. Tear down inspections confirmed their viability in my application
 
Originally Posted By: Doug Hillary
Hi,
Charlie - I used centrifuge cleaners on my Detroit Series 60s for many millions of kms. I finally used 40micron SS cleanable FF inserts instead of Donaldson's excellent Synteq filters

This was the very best setup for me to average 90kkm OCIs using Delvac 1 5W-40. Tear down inspections confirmed their viability in my application


Doug

Aside note any damage from cyclone Yasi as it was a Category 5 winds upto 300km/hr.
Looking at constantly at 24hr coverage on TV, thinking of you at Airlie Beach, I hope all is well.

VG
 
Last edited:
Hi,
VG - OT - Thanks for your concern. Yes it was a very scary situation indeed as my Villa is at ground level and about 40 metres from the sea!!

We were very well prepared and cleared all cars from the Complex. Five Owners remained on site and I stayed in an upstairs Villa where we could monitor the stormwater outflow (or inflow) near the sea. My cars and bike were housed high up in another Complex above Airlie Beach and "valuable" items stored correctly

We have had no damage at all (except for some Palm fronds) over the last week's two Cyclones. A couple of weeks ago it was the Rockhampton/Brisbane Floods and that required a lot of sheer high speed outback driving (on the Fitzroy Development road Charlie - it's a good one) to get from here to Brissie for pre-arranged situations. Nearly 1600kms to cover 1200!

I'll have a few Paulaner Beers tonight!!! Well if the very high winds go down a notch or so......
 
Originally Posted By: Doug Hillary
Hi,
VG - OT - Thanks for your concern. Yes it was a very scary situation indeed as my Villa is at ground level and about 40 metres from the sea!!

We were very well prepared and cleared all cars from the Complex. Five Owners remained on site and I stayed in an upstairs Villa where we could monitor the stormwater outflow (or inflow) near the sea. My cars and bike were housed high up in another Complex above Airlie Beach and "valuable" items stored correctly

We have had no damage at all (except for some Palm fronds) over the last week's two Cyclones. A couple of weeks ago it was the Rockhampton/Brisbane Floods and that required a lot of sheer high speed outback driving (on the Fitzroy Development road Charlie - it's a good one) to get from here to Brissie for pre-arranged situations. Nearly 1600kms to cover 1200!

I'll have a few Paulaner Beers tonight!!! Well if the very high winds go down a notch or so......


Good hear all is well.
 
Originally Posted By: m37charlie
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
Filters catch particulate that is large enough to be caught. It can be metals and combustion byproducts. Insolubles are typically soot and other related byproducts. Most full flow filters are reasonably effective at 15um and larger. The bigger the particulate, obviously the easier to catch. Some "insolubles" may be caught, some may not.

But I cannot find any clear reference between what Blackstone calls "insolubles" and what I'd accept as reliable data. I've seen UOAs with really high wear metals such as Fe and Cu, and yet have the insolubles at less than .5. These's no direct reference to show that wear metal ppm and insolubles go hand in hand. What really made me start to pay little heed to the "insolubles" rating is how UOAs with and without bypass filtration often have very similar insoluble levels. I completely agree that it's good to have low insolubles. I just have seen so many UOAs with different filter brands (full flow and also bypass) show insolubles all in the same range. Look over a bunch of UOA data, and you'll start to see what I mean.


What do you think about bypass centrifuges vs. bypass filters?

Charlie


Centrifuge filters do a much better job of pulling out ever smaller stuff, for sure. But they also perform best when at a steady state of fluid velocity.

There are times in an engine where the rpm will fluctuate greatly with the application. For a street driven delivery vehicle or daily driver, I don't see centrifuge filters being ideal. For OTR or stationary applications, I think they are probably unbeatable for their performance/cost ratio.

I would like to caution that is SUPPOSITION on my part; not facts I can prove. I don't have enough data in my study from centrifuge applications to make a fair "for sure" statement. Further, because few people ever get a PC with their UOA, it makes corelation of the two almost impossible. Still - I think my logic is good, but I'll be the first to admit I cannot prove it at this point; too little data collected.

However, the thing to keep in mind is that ANY bypass filter is likely to clean the fluid to a level down to where the discussion of performance differences between designs and brands is moot because they ALL filter well enough to more than complete the job. I've seen and participated in discussions where people argue the merits of one brand over another. Oil Guard vs Amsoil vs Filtration Solutions vs Gulf Cost vs centrifuge ... etc on and on. Franky, it simply does not matter because the all do such a good job that you oil will be so clean it does not make any practical difference as to which one you choose.
 
Last edited:
I agree.
There might be a "winner" if all types and brands were tested but it would be microscopic nit picking, for sure. To me, that leaves the decisions very much controlled by price, serviceability, etc, rather than a micron or two on either side of a range. Everything I've seen however, shows the centrifuges do a better job than filter media but the ones we had years ago on the marine engines I worked on were a PITA to service vs simply changing a filter element. Haven't researched the current "state of the art."
 
Hi,
this Thread has lost the plot!

OT - There is a lot of data on the effectiveness of centrifuge oil cleaners. My considerable experience overe millions of kms and 50 years with both cartridge by-pass filters and centrifuge cleaners influenced my own choice of course. In any case it is a case of economic advantage - and I put my money where I knew the best results were
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top