FRAM explains why they use cardboard...

[T-Keith]

I actually agree with his point that some people make to big of deal out of the cardboard end caps. But he didn't discuss what I think the real issue is. I don't think that under normal conditions they will disintigrate of fail to seal against the filter. The problem I see is that the cardboard holds the filter in place, and it's used to seal against the spring at one end and the ADBV at the other. This is obviously a much poor design compared to other filter manufactorers. And once again they don't address any of the filter's other issues. The thin ADBV is prone to failure the way they are using it.

I don't think e-mailing fram accompishes anything, other than a good laugh. Their obviously going to defend their product, and not waste alot of time or thought in the process.

-T

 

[outrun]

Did not Honda-Canada sack Fram 2year ago when they came abreast of this disturbing knowledge?

What's up with meets OEM specification?

That's the biggest bunch of corporate pre-packaged propoganda ever.

If that was the case GM OE fits like

AC Delco
Motorcraft

and there "brothers"

Purolator Premium Plus/PowerFlo/Proline
SuperTech/K&N Gold/Mobil 1/Bosch/STP/Castrol

WOULD ALL BE CARDBOARD ENDCAPPED.

This is a case of Fram resorting to the lowest quality part possible and then by using 30yo brand name loyalty to sock the customer into thinking they have a high quality product.

 

[kctom]

GSV

I asked for a better filter recomendation from you guys. I gave you reasonable criteria. I never got one. PUT UP or SHUT UP.

KCTOM

 

[turbochem]

quote:

---

And I want a filter that doesn't fail

---

So, you a website has a picture of one Fram failing?? Is that what you're resting your arguement on??

Oh yeah, don't forget the little asterisk at the bottom of the page:

quote:

---

*Note: I am unaware of the vehicle that this filter came off of, or how long it was used.

---

Tell me your fave filter...I'll run it on my old Volvo for ~20,000 miles.....

 

[Grease is the word]

quote:

---

Originally posted by kctom:
GSV

I asked for a better filter recomendation from you guys. I gave you reasonable criteria. I never got one. PUT UP or SHUT UP.

KCTOM

---

KCTOM, Welcome back, KC! Since you last posted we have put filter media to the test in the Grease / Merc study (soon to be renamed Grease 1218 study). Sorry, but your Frammies didn't do so well. The EG media was in the middle of the pack regarding pore size (filter capability). Since the EG's have the lowest filter area in this study, they also don't flow well (worst actually).

So, based on just pore size and flow, I would recommend that you use an AC Delco for the same $3 that you are spending on Fram EG. The AC is in the 27-28um range for pore size and the Fram EG is 31-34um range. The AC also flows almost twice as much because (drum roll) it has almost twice as much media as the Fram.

That's it for the $3 filters. If you want to spend an additional $2 every 3 to 5000 miles, I would suggest the Baldwin and the PureOne filters. Both filter and flow better than the Fram EG. You could use the Fram TG for the $5, but it is not going to flow as well as the AC or Baldwin.

I just sent off media to lab test additional filters. In a couple of weeks I can make additional recommendations. These filters are:

-regular Purolator
-Amsoil
-Donaldson
-Fleetguard
-Mobil 1
-Motorcraft
-Fram X2

http://home.earthlink.net/~memphis3/mercfilters/merc.htm

[ February 24, 2004, 01:23 PM: Message edited by: Grease is the word ]

 

[tom slick]

quote:

---

They are phonies in my opinion. I don't like phonies

---

i agree. why should i spend more for a product that is designed in the cheapest way possible, even if it does perform ok in lab tests? why should i pay into their higher profits?
if cardboard is just as good and reliable as other designs, then how come ALL other filter manufacters use metal. even the king of cheapo filters, champion, uses formed metal. they surely would use cardboard to save $.05 on a supertech/stp filter.

 

[labman]

quote:

---

Originally posted by kctom:
Oil filter study

Frams are junk. All they do is remove hamful contaminants from my oil. I want a filter with metal end caps and lots of fancy pleated filtering material. And most of all a high price. This money is getting old and soiled in my pocket. Clean oil be dam*ed!

---

I tend to agree that the Jeep study (seen it before) shows Fram does virtually as well as the more expensive filters at least for 500 miles. Fram's well documented lack of filter area might make a difference in a longer test. That concern is not going to drive me to the more expensive filters. I know of 5 other brands of filters that have 2-3 times as much media for the same price or less. I still await hard data showing Fram is as good as the cheaper ST.

I think we do need to admire your guts and persistance.

 

[T-Keith]

quote:

---

Originally posted by turbochem:

quote:

---

And I want a filter that doesn't fail

---

So, you a website has a picture of one Fram failing?? Is that what you're resting your arguement on??

Oh yeah, don't forget the little asterisk at the bottom of the page:

quote:

---

*Note: I am unaware of the vehicle that this filter came off of, or how long it was used.

---

Tell me your fave filter...I'll run it on my old Volvo for ~20,000 miles.....

---

So you change your filter every 500 miles? That seems to be all the link you posted shows.

-T

 

[Propflux01]

KCTom....I am still Puttin Up....

 

[kctom]

Labman

The test actually confirms Fram's ability to reomove dirt over a 3000 mile test interval. The "dirty" oil is just oil that has been in his engine for 3000 mile with a Fram filter. He removes the Fram filter and installs a new Fram which cleans the oil by a negligable amount. Then he removes the Fram and installs a NAPA Gold and gets a very slight decrease in oil contamination levels. He then installs a Purolator Pure One and gets increased contamination levels. This tells me that the old Fram with 3000 miles on it was doing as well as the NAPA and better then the Porolator. What more proof do you want.

BTW these figures are documented on page two of his thread.

Mr Grease,

I never contended that Fram's were the best, only that they were not junk. Thanks for confirming that.

BTW: you will really impress me when you can show a direct correlation betwen pore size and filtering ability.

KCTOM

 

[kctom]

T-Kieth

I quote from the WEB site that you named. Concerning the Fram filter that was examined "Note: I am unaware of the vehicle that this filter came off of, or how long it was used." In other words, he has no idea of the history of this filter.

Am I supposed to be impressed?

 

[Amkeer]

Fram does = overpriced garbage! I used Frams for years and I agree they suck! I made a mistake by buying them because I didn't know anything. Now that I know I will never use them or recommend them. Cheap materials in an expensive filter. If I pay $3.00 for a Purolator the Fram should be $1.25. The savings for Fram should be passed on to the consumer.

 

[Grease is the word]

quote:

---

Originally posted by kctom:
Mr Grease, I never contended that Fram's were the best, only that they were not junk. Thanks for confirming that.KCTOM

---

I hope I didn't imply

that Fram's were not junk

. I have personally taken apart 20 filters over the last few months and sent them to a lab for analysis and then interpreted that analysis. The Fram EG scored the worst on: filter area, construction, metal thickness (can, tube, endcap), flow, and inlet port size. The only redeeming quality of the Fram EG was it rated middle of the pack for pore size. This, combined with the lowest media area, gave it the worst flow. So, yes, I will agree with you

, after looking at 20 filters the Fram EG is "not the best." Last, is actually a more accurate term

. Is it junk? I'll let the reader decide.

quote:

---

Originally posted by kctom:
Mr Grease, BTW: you will really impress me when you can show a direct correlation betwen pore size and filtering ability.KCTOM

---

I'll let you do your own homework on that one

.

[ February 24, 2004, 08:13 PM: Message edited by: Grease is the word ]

 

[ZR2RANDO]

Just to say the obvious here. Fram is taking advantage of very good marketing techniques, long term name brand familiarity, and general (not most of US HERE though) customer lack of knowledge about product construction. Back in the 70's they were front page news. They are making a product that is built well enough to do a sufficient (barely) job and no better. They charge a price that obviously generates quite a profit for them. If someone wants to use Fram filters it probably won't "kill the car", but these days there are better alternatives for the $$.
The more we contact the company and ask questions about the product, the more likely they will get the message that the internet is alive and well and that we understand the product and can now compare (in depth!!) with the > competition...
For the time being though, Fram advocates are more than welcome to use them.

 

[greasezerk]

I remember the old fram sales line. "Pay a little now or a whole lot later." I thought hey they must be the best filter. I would actually feel bad if i didnt buy a fram over a wix. That was years ago. I never lost an engine due to a fram oil filter and it sounds like no one on this forum has either. I can say that a fram on a souped up engine will show goofey oil pressure on the gauge and they will collapse if to much oil volume and pressure go through them. For your average driver getting a wal mart oil change they probably will be ok. For a well informed oil filter guru they are a poster child for a disfunctional oil filter. Use fram if you like them or use something else. We have beat this horse to death.

 

[doc540]

Based on what I've read on this site I removed a Fram PH16 after only 300 miles of use on our 89,000 mile, '97 Chrsyler LHS.

I installed a WIX 51085 and added enough fresh oil to adequately fill the engine.

Thanks for the information available here. Fram will not be my purchase choice in the future.

 

[kctom]

Grease,

Do you realize that you crossed the wrong Fram filter for your Merc Cruiser? Did you pay as much attention to details in the rest of you study?

KCTOM

 

[Thomas Pyrek]

I know of someone who lost 2 engines due to a faulty fram on their daily driver. They replaced both.

Another person had a filter fail on a daily driven engine and fram didn't replace their engine and kept the filter so it couldn't be analyzed by another "expert"

 

[nthach]

i like places like Pep Boys and Autozone that sell Purolators and Champion Labs offspring for cheaper.

 

[kctom]

Oil filter study

Frams are junk. All they do is remove hamful contaminants from my oil. I want a filter with metal end caps and lots of fancy pleated filtering material. And most of all a high price. This money is getting old and soiled in my pocket. Clean oil be dam*ed!