Different size filters??

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jan 3, 2014
Messages
321
Location
orlando fl
I just took advantage of an AAP deal and walked away with 10 qts of Mobil 1 5w-30 HM and 2 Mobil M1-108 oil filters (for my wifes 08 Sportage v6) for only $62! My question is this, the M1 looked kind of small so I had the guy pull a Fram, a PureOne and a K&N for comparison. The M1 and K&N were the same size, approx. 1/2" shorter in height and smaller in diameter than the P1 and Fram. The gaskets did line up with each other. The guy behind the counter said they are smaller because they are more efficient?? Mobil's website calls for the M1-108 but the obvious size difference is unnerving! I appreciate any input!
 
Last edited:
That used to happen to me with my wife's 01 tracker. I can't remember which brand was smaller, (car gone for five years now), but the Fram was slightly bigger, (my filter wrench would fit it but would slip on the other filter).
 
The oil filters will be fine.
The current trend is toward ever smaller oil filters.
One reason is likely cost.
OTOH, there isn't much to filter out in a healthy engine after break-in.
Cut open an oil filter after a typical interval and see whether you can observe any debris.
There won't be any.
 
I have noticed some smaller than standard filter lengths lately. Each of these filters is for the same application (modular ford v8)
opu6c5.jpg
 
I wonder why the different sizes ? And if the size effects filter performance . I always run Motorcraft on this modular ,would prefer the longer case but always fine the med length ones.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: 65f100
I have noticed some smaller than standard filter lengths lately. Each of these filters is for the same application (modular ford v8)
opu6c5.jpg


Are the can diameters the same?
 
If the Microgard is one of the ecore versions the ecores are always a little shorter.

No idea's on the Baldwin though they use coil springs like Wix does so it wouldn't be coil spring vs leaf spring.
 
Originally Posted By: 65f100
Yes, the diameters are the same.

See, that's what's throwing me off. With mine, not only is the length smaller, so is the diameter.
 
Originally Posted By: tojo1968
The guy behind the counter said they are smaller because they are more efficient??


lol.gif
... so if a filter was 100% efficient it would be the size of a thimble?
grin.gif


Filters are getting smaller because the filter designers/manufacturers have realized that engines are cleaner today and larger filters are "overkill" for the OCI when a smaller sized filter can still do the job just fine.

So they slowly cut the size back ("boil the frog slowly") to save costs and make more profit to boot. Plus, if they media is efficient and can still flow well without much more delta-p across the element then the smaller size is not hindering flow performance to any notable degree.
 
Using the Fram look up as cross reference, while the M1-108 will likely work if the gasket sizes are the same, the longer/larger M1-104 is the spec, and the equivalent of the larger/longer 9688. In this case,the downsize is two sizes, using Purolator as the example, it went from the 14459 spec size, to the shorty 14612 size, even skipping the the 14610 size. Thus there is a difference not only in length, but in diameter too. I would be less than pleased, especially for using a premium filter and the two size downsize differential. If one specifically enters the M1-104 in the O'R lookup and then clicks the compatibility tab, 08 Sportage is listed. Other than trying to downsize customers, ie., save money, no idea why the M1 look up lists the thimble size M1-108.

Originally Posted By: 65f100
I have noticed some smaller than standard filter lengths lately. Each of these filters is for the same application (modular ford v8)
opu6c5.jpg


As the MGL has had so many makers can't speak to the difference in length. But as typical for Wix, it's external to centertube/media element thread end bypass takes up a significant amount of space in the can. So, the Baldwin and the Wix may have similar media area, or the Baldwin 'could' even have more media. Especially in the smaller filter applications, the Wix thread end bypass displaces a significant amount space that is used for media in dome end bypass filters or mostly internal centertube thread end bypass filters like Motorcraft and M1.

Originally Posted By: tojo1968
... The guy behind the counter said they are smaller because they are more efficient??

As ZO alluded to, pearls from the counter jocks.
 
Quote:
Using the Fram look up as cross reference, while the M1-108 will likely work if the gasket sizes are the same, the longer/larger M1-104 is the spec, and the equivalent of the larger/longer 9688.

Thanks! I'm going by the store to exchange them today.
Quote:

The guy behind the counter said they are smaller because they are more efficient??

As ZO alluded to, pearls from the counter jocks

I have done enough OC's in the last 25 yrs to know this guy was not a fountain of knowledge! Hopefully his advice wont damage someone's engine.
 
*UPDATE*
Exchanged the 108 for the 104. The 104 is the same size as the Fram on the wife's Kia.
Thanks all for your input!!
Different guy at the parts counter today said he has had a few people come in this month to exchange filters because of size difference.
 
To be fair, I wouldn't be upset with the first O'R counter guy. If you input your vehicle year and model the M1-108 does show up as the M1 option, along with a shorty Bosch, shorty Royal Purple and ACDelco. The other options are the larger Fram 9688 and equivalents. So he likely just read it off the computer screen. But as previously noted, if the M1-104 is entered in the O'R parts search, the M1-104 does list the 08 Sportage on the compatible application listing. All that said, though not my preference the smaller the M1-108 would have worked satisfactorily.

As for the 'the M1-108 is smaller because it's more efficient', he could have left that opinion out.
 
I doubt the guy behind the counter probably can spell efficiency, let along accurately describe it's meaning relative to filters; next time, ask him about Beta ratios and what ISO standards he's referring to and see how the blank look comes across his face.

I have no doubt that there are some filters more efficient than others. But I have yet to see true real-world tangible proof that expensive high-eff filters actually pay for themselves in the typical OCI. No SAE papers, no UOA data, etc. Nothing shows the "normal" application benefiting from the use of premium filter products. Once a reasonable level of filtration is effected, anything past that is unused capability.


But, I contend none of this matters. Why? Because the OP is likely going to dump the oil and swap the filter WAY, WAY before the end to their useful life is even remotely approached.
 
Last edited:
Quote:
Because the OP is likely going to dump the oil and swap the filter WAY, WAY before the end to their useful life is even remotely approached.

Heck of an ASSumption you have there! FYI, I plan on keeping the oil in there for a min. of 9 months seeing how my wife only drives 10k a year. 9 months should be around 7.5k miles which, according to her manual and a lot of research on BITOG, is the useful life for M1. I wont lose sleep if I don't use every last drop of the add pack. I have no ill will for the counter guy because its my responsibility to educate myself about my vehicle, not his. That's why I like forums like this.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top