Originally Posted By: crazyoildude
if you read my posts you would see not only do i have an oil gauge that does not lie i also have ears that are trained in listening to engines for something like 35 years because that is all i do and my expertise is well regarded in engine land and also in the courts of not only New Jersey but other courts as well. If i say i feel it is restricted by the way an engine operates or sounds then i believe it to be so if you have any thoughts otherwise then so be it no shirt off my back. I also have a number of other things at my disposal but i don't need those things. I am installing the ultra on my vehicle and i will determine if i will use it again. I don't know what "myth" you are referring to and if you believe that restrictive filters don't exist and every filter is created the exact same flow wise then all the power to you. I post my beliefs as i see them i don't usually argue on an internet forum because sometimes it just gets old fast.
Sir - most of us here have some form of engine/auto/equipment experience. This is a lube site and by extension, most here consider themselves to be well versed in "experience". Yours is no more or less important than mine, or Zee's, or anyone else. What NJ courts have to do with this I have no idea ... I don't even know how to decipher your implication here, whatever it may be.
Your "gage" statement does not lend credibility because you've not well defined what you use and how it's calibrated, etc. Vehicle dash "gages" are NOT a good source for oil pressure readings; they are often manipulated in terms of response curve.
You are correct in one statement; you "
feel" that a filter is "
restricted". However, your emotional state is belied by real data from credible sources like the filter makers. You are completely entitled to your opinion; no one here is going to take that away from you. But your "opinion" can be challenged by we who believe differently. We can put up facts and data to counter your emotions and subjective (and as yet unstated) criteria.
The "myth" I refer to is that PureOne filters are "too restrictive".
If you'd bother to review Zee's data,
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubb...451#Post1619451
you'll see that even in an extreme application (full WOT rpm conditions for his 'Vette), the PureOne filter would flow approximately 2x more oil than would be required to lift the BP from it's seat. And in a "normal" application (typical engine with day-to-day ops) there is NEVER going to be a case where the filter is too restrictive, regardless of brand or tier purchased. Even Jim Allen's data showed that with cold starts and high-rpm blips, the BP valve will typically only open for a fraction of a second, and then the system will "balance" across the media. That is the most extreme case and it is RARE to happen; he had to purposely cause a condition that would otherwise make a BITOGer's head explode by going WOT upon cold start, just to get the BP to lift off the seat!
I don't want to hear your rhetoric as to how you "feel" about the PureOne; I already get where you're coming from. What I am asking for is real hard data that would lend credibility to your claim. If you want me to believe your position is correct, then please show us data from credible sources that would establish a solid foundation for your claims. There is nothing wrong with you stating an opinion; that's OK here. But we, too, have opinions. Mine (and others) are based upon solid data from filter manufacturers and other industry sources. We use real factual information to come to an objective conclusion only after reviewing all available data. I see very credible info in both Jim and Zee's data. I see nothing you've put forth other than opinions and some attempt to sway me into the land of NJ courts, for whatever that may be worth ...
I never claimed that all filters are made the same or respond identically. What I state is that the performance parameters for most any commercially available filter used in the correct application will afford a WIDE margin of safety when it comes to flow and filtration efficiency. THAT is what I claim to be true, and is backed up with credible data from multiple sources. Therefore, the debate about which filter is "best", or conversely too "restrictive", is pure hogwash and meaningless. I wholeheartedly agree that there will always be a filter at the top of some flow rating, and also one at the bottom. But what you don't seem to understand is that they ALL typically possess WAY MORE than enough capacity for flow that the entire topic is moot!
AS for the variable displacement pumps, I'll say this. They are fairly new to the market, and they are typically seen in very efficient applications where fuel economy is king. But they are conceptually engineered to provide a drop in flow as the rpm reaches some predetermined limit. Once there is "enough" flow, then "more" is not needed. Because they can tailor the pump pressure curve, they can reduce parasitic draw. This was done with P/S pumps for a while, and then they are now going electric. It would not surprise me if, in the future, the engine lube pump goes electric so that it, too, can provide only what is "needed", rather than just be a positive parasitic draw at all times as rpm increases.
