Baldwin vs. Donaldson

[JAC43]

Gentleman,

I plan on using the synthetic media filters from Baldwin (B2-HPG) or Donaldson (P169071) on my next OC, and I would like some feedback from those who have used any of the above filters. Would you recommend one over the other? Why? Does the Donaldson filter last twice as long to justify twice the price?
Thanks

 

[Gary Allan]

I haven't used either ..but I imagine that the price end of it is surely impacted by the limited distribution of both Baldwin and Donalson ..probably more so with the Donaldson.

I don't know about the Donaldson lasting twice as long (although it may indeed do so) ..it may just do a better job over the same duration.

The P169071 is the high efficiency verson, using the SYNTEQ media ..I believe Donaldson's finest.

The B2-HPG appears to also be Baldwin's finest offering in its microglass media.

Wix doesn't offer a like product of distinction. The x-ref sends you to a racing version.

Maybe Mel will chime in on the inside scope on SYNTEQ vs. Baldwin's microglass media.

 

[Filter guy]

Just call both and ask for the specs.....what is the beta ratio and what is the dirt holding capacity.

Then make your own choice.

 

[tj5450]

I was curious about this a while ago myself and called both Baldwin & Donaldson about these particular filters. The following is the skinny on these flters:

Baldwin B2-HPG
About $8.25 at Fleetpride Truckcenter.
Synthetic media, 395 sq in
Beta 6 micron = 2 or 50% efficiency
Beta 22 micron = 75 or 98.67% efficiency
200 psi burst rating
19 gram dirt holding capacity
Flow rate = 2gpm @ 3psi, 3gpm @ 5psi, 6gpm @ 15psi, 9gpm @ 25psi.

Donaldson P169071
$14.70 at the local Caterpillar dealer
Synthetic media
Beta 7 micron = 2 or 50% efficiency
Beta 22 micron = 75 or 98.67% efficiency
200 psi burst rating
38 gram dirt holding capacity
Flow rates not available

I also checked on several other Ford compatible brands. These two filters seemed to be the best to me. The Donaldson holds twice as much dirt as anything ellse I coud get info on and I wonder if this might be related to the new offer Amsoil will have as a 25,000 mile/one year filter. I also like Purolator Pure One, but "feel" these two have much higher flow.

I am currently running the B2-HPG on my 1996 Ranger 4.0l as the full flow on an AMsoil Dual Remote Bypass and as an inline tranny filter using a Permacool fullflow adapter. The Donaldson may be somewhere in the future, but I still have a few Baldwins on the shelf.

 

[Gary Allan]

Well, it sure looks like the Donaldson does have exactly twice the holding capacity as the Baldwin and is almost identical on the beta numbers.

The only issue would be how long is "twice as long" in the OP's service. If you don't take the Baldwin to half capacity ..then a Donaldson is over twice the waste

 

[theguru]

It is doubtful that you will reach the capacity of even the Baldwin so either would do. Of course if you had sludge or doing a ARX clean then this may change, but then any filter would need changing.

I've just put a Baldwin on my car and like the fairly solid contruction. From looking at Greases study on this thread something like the Pure One may have better filtration. The Premium Plus a little less, but better flow.

From what I've read here the Baldwin & Donaldson in the main are built for heavier vehicles where reliability and dirt holding capaicity are forefront. Filtration may be a little less. Having said that the filters you have mentioned may be a different.

The Baldwin is almost half the price, so maybe that may be the decider.

 

[tj5450]

I did study the Grease spreadsheet and as as matter of fact, it is what made me start asking the questions of the manufacturers. While it would be hard to rate these filters in the same manner, I did make some assumptions.

1) The standard for the study was a Parker filter with Beta 10 micron = 2 or 50% efficiency. Any filter above that line (and in the yellow) in the study was not significantly different from each other , but was different from those below the Parker standard. Both of these filters have manufacturer claims of better than Beta 10.

2) The second assumption I made is on flow, also based on the Grease study. If what Baldwin claims is true, then the B2-HPG has somewhwat better flow than the PureOne. (The Baldwin that was included in the study was their standard mixed cellulose/synthetic media. Baldwin claims similar characteristics for both filters, although slightly more flow at low pressure and slightly less at high pressure for HPG.)

 

[Filter guy]

Interesting specs on the two filters.

What would effect the results of 19 grams v 38 grams is at what pressure drop rating did each manufacturer terminate the test.

One could terminate the test at 20 psid or 30 or 40. Or one could terminate the test at the by-pass valve setting. Or one can use the termination point as specified by the OEM. Or one could terminate the test when the filter element is totally plugged. All would give you different grams of capacity for the same element by the same filter manufacturer let alone two different manufacturers.

 

[JIM361]

I believe that DAN 4510 and a few others like the Fleetguard LF 3487 ( synthetic media ) same as Donaldson P169071 and available for around
$ 10.50

 

[JAC43]

Thanks very much for the replies. You guys consistently provide useful information.

 

[Dan4510]

Donaldson p169071 and fleetguard lf3487 have exactly the same filter element. I cut two open and they were exactly alike down to number of pleats and the "401" stamped on the end of the filter and its location on the metal.

both are 50% efficient @ 7 microns. 98% @ 20 microns and flow 12gpm with very little pressure drop across the filter. I have a tech sheet put up somewhere for the fleetguard, I will try to find it. If you look up the old ultraguard filter its the same type element and flows like crazy.

Baldwins are great filters too. B2hp especially.

Dan