Fram air filters

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jul 19, 2004
Messages
503
Location
Long Island/New York
I've read great reviews of Fram air filter but I would like know what is their efficiency and at what micron level?Right now I'm using a Mann Hummel air filter.Thanks Joe
 
Hi,
I work for FRAM. Our air filters are tested with particle sizes of 5-20 microns and rated at 98.7% efficiency@20 microns. This efficiency actually gets better as the "dirt cake" develops on the pleats.
 
Originally Posted By: Motorking
Hi,
I work for FRAM. Our air filters are tested with particle sizes of 5-20 microns and rated at 98.7% efficiency@20 microns. This efficiency actually gets better as the "dirt cake" develops on the pleats.


+2 I use Fram air filters exclusively in all of my cars. I change the air filter every 20,000 miles in all of my cars and usually only need one light throttle body cleaning when I change plugs at 100-120,000 miles. My latest Lexus 2GR-FE is at 197,000 and the intake is still clean. Works for me.
 
I really like Fram air filters as well. But it's really application specific. In my wife's Pilot, they fit fine. In my Frontier, it's really hard to get the box closed, same with Purolator and STP. If I run OEM or Wix, the box closes fine??? The OEM and Wix both have orange rubber while all the ones that don't fit right have black. I'm sure it's just a coincidence that the OEM and Wix are orange, but weird none the less!
 
Originally Posted By: SF0059
I just said this in another thread, but I love Mann air filters. Nothing against Fram, but the build quality difference is night and day.


I bought 2 Mann air filters for my Rainier with 5.3L V8. They look like they were assembled by blind people. The quality of the rubber "trim" on the Mann is terrible. It's not uniform in appearance (thickness) and the cut is not straight. If they can't get some black rubber trim applied correctly, in what other areas have they skimped? It was also labeled "made in China."

The AC Delco, NAPA, and Fram filters I have used in that same application looked much, much better.
 
Originally Posted By: strat81
Originally Posted By: SF0059
I just said this in another thread, but I love Mann air filters. Nothing against Fram, but the build quality difference is night and day.


I bought 2 Mann air filters for my Rainier with 5.3L V8. They look like they were assembled by blind people. The quality of the rubber "trim" on the Mann is terrible. It's not uniform in appearance (thickness) and the cut is not straight. If they can't get some black rubber trim applied correctly, in what other areas have they skimped? It was also labeled "made in China."

The AC Delco, NAPA, and Fram filters I have used in that same application looked much, much better.


Well that is a bummer. I will say that all the Mann filters I have used have been made in Germany and have been top notch. Good to know to stay away from the Chinese ones.
 
For European vehicles German brands air filters such as Mann, Hengst, Mahle ... made in Germany or USA are very high quality. The rubber seal surround the filter is very pliable even after 3-4 years.

For Asian and American vehicles Fram air filter, especially Tough Guard, is very good and usually costs less than competitors.
 
Originally Posted By: Motorking
Hi,
I work for FRAM. Our air filters are tested with particle sizes of 5-20 microns and rated at 98.7% efficiency@20 microns. This efficiency actually gets better as the "dirt cake" develops on the pleats.


Jay - I assume that efficiency rating is for both the EG and TG air filters?

Is the TG difference over the EG being that it just holds more dirt? Or is the TG actually more efficient at 20 microns?
 
Originally Posted By: Motorking
Hi,
I work for FRAM. Our air filters are tested with particle sizes of 5-20 microns and rated at 98.7% efficiency@20 microns. This efficiency actually gets better as the "dirt cake" develops on the pleats.


Hi Jay

For the ISO test, do you have a figure for efficiency across all the dust used ie at all micron sizes?

Also, I thought efficiency was measured at the end of the test so that 98.7% figure is the overall efficiency not an initial efficiency.

Thanks
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top