Toilet paper oil filter

[Oceanmariner]

I'm no oil expert, but have experimented with extra filtration all my life. I get many more hours/miles out of machinery than is common. I ran these Franz TP filters in the 60s and 70s on cars, pu trucks and small marine diesels. I also used one on a 2000 Jeep. The paper doesn't come apart. Flow is down the core and up thru the paper. Paper fits tight in the outside container. The return side has a screen and I never had paper come apart. In automotive gas engines, the oil would stay transparent. When it started to cloud you changed the paper. The cheapest paper worked the best. 10 rolls for a dollar stuff. Diesel needed more changes and got dark soon. I changed oil in gas engines at 50,000 miles. Cut open stock filter and they would be like new. On Detroit marine engines I changed the oil at 2-500 hours. Big marine diesels used a centrifuge.
When smog requirements changed the engines, more soot was made. I assume it was the dished pistons. Paper may have changed. The oil no longer stayed transparent but still made a good oil test. With a paper change the oil would become semi transparent but soot up in about 5000 miles. I had a Chevy 3/4t, 4x4, truck I used for towing with one TP filter on both the engine and trans. 350,000 hard miles on it when I sold it. Had the trans serviced before the sale and was told it looked like new, internal filter was clean. Engine had a valve job about 150,000.
Since then I went to other larger bypass filters. As probably been discussed here, the slower oil goes thru a filter, the more dirt can be captured. Something that seems to help cars, look up a longer stock filter of the same size or go to a remote filter of a larger size.
I live on a 83' boat with Detroit naturals. Engines had above 20,000 hours before cylinders & pistons were changed. I run at 1800 rpm. Now I use a large centrifuge.

 

[SpencerHSS]

Hey everyone.
I'm with Hot Shot's Secret, we purchased Frantz Filters back in 2014, originally developed by John Frantz in 1953. Since then we have designed two new kinds of filter media, improved the design of the base plate and developed aluminum caps for returning the oil to keep you from having to drill and tap into your engine.

A fear for many is deterioration of the filter, and the thought of toilet paper flowing through your engine is enough to give most guys nightmares. While in the past our filters used toilet paper, and we have never had the toilet paper deteriorate in any cases we observed, we do not recommend the toilet paper as it does not provide the quality filtration that our media does today. In fact, most OEM filters to this day are nothing more than thin cardboard or colored coffee filter material. With our new cellulose and synthetic media, there is no need for concern of deterioration. It works great in diesel and gasoline engines; whether for cars, trucks, planes, generators, agricultural and industrial applications.

In response to this thread, we have some test results from Blackstone Laboratories that I think you guys would like to take a look at. Blackstone Laboratories took a 6.0L Powerstroke F-350 with over 210,000 miles. They ran oil without a Frantz Filter for 4,711 miles. Without changing the oil, they added a Frantz Filter and drove roughly 200 miles. Just to prove a Frantz Filter provides maximum protection, a final sample taken was from brand new Shell Rotella Motor Oil. In the results below you can see for yourself that Frantz Filters will keep your oil cleaner than brand new oil.

Here is a graphic depicting the results:

The definitions of particles and microns in the analysis below for your convenience:
Particles are the small wear metals, dirt, and other solid contamination pieces in your engine that cause wear, form sludge and break down your engine over time.
Micron is a common term used in measuring extremely small particles. 75 microns is the average diameter of a human hair.

For those of you who would rather see a document directly from Blackstone Laboratories, below is a PDF of the oil with a Frantz Filter VS new, on the shelf oil. Keep in mind that the used oil was 4,700 miles old, and the Frantz Filter was only installed for just 218 miles for a total of 4,929 miles on the oil.
http://frantzfilters.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/frantz-vs-new_oil.pdf

If you guys would like to browse more information, our site is www.frantzfilters.com/ and our phone number is 1-800-341-6516. Mike is the Frantz Brand Manager and our ASE Master Diesel Tech is Bo. Thanks everyone.

 

[kschachn]

So you're saying that I would get more longevity out of my engines had I been using a Frantz filter instead of the OEM? Please note that the OEM in this case are either Toyota or Honda, both of which are reputed to have low filtering efficiency.

Reducing that 2-15 micron material would make a difference?

 

[CarbonSteel]

Originally Posted By: SpencerHSS
In response to this thread, we have some test results from Blackstone Laboratories that I think you guys would like to take a look at. Blackstone Laboratories took a 6.0L Powerstroke F-350 with over 210,000 miles. They ran oil without a Frantz Filter for 4,711 miles. Without changing the oil, they added a Frantz Filter and drove roughly 200 miles. Just to prove a Frantz Filter provides maximum protection, a final sample taken was from brand new Shell Rotella Motor Oil. In the results below you can see for yourself that Frantz Filters will keep your oil cleaner than brand new oil.
While I have no doubt the filter did improve the oil, the problem here is that Blackstone uses the pore blockage method versus optical counting for its particle testing. A former member and I collaborated on particle count testing and we saw there was a vast difference in the particle count with pore blockage versus optical counting. You would make a better "sell" by having optical particle count results which would be much more accurate.

 

[SpencerHSS]

kschachn - here's a pdf of an OEM filter with 4,711 miles on the oil change before the Frantz was installed. You'll see the antifreeze content went from a harmful 1.92% down to .54% which Blackstone calls "an acceptable level for engine oil."

To help explain the damage different sizes of micron cause, this Amsoil paragraph puts it into perspective:
"The level of damage particles cause to an engine is directly related to the size of the particles. The oil stream within the engine flows between wear-sensitive surfaces that usually have clearances between 2 and 22 microns. It is contaminants in this size range that pose the greatest threat as they can slip between moving components, causing a great deal of wear. To appreciate how small these particles are, one must first understand the measurements involved in their classification. A micron, or micrometer, is a very small unit of linear measurement.

Large particles are particles measuring 1/2” or larger. They pose little threat to engines because they are easily removed by the air filter.

Medium particles are particles measuring 25; to 1/2”. While they are of greater concern than large particles because they are more difficult to re-move, the threat they pose is diminished since they are still larger than many of the clearances within an engine. Their size will not allow them to enter the contact areas between many components to promote accelerated wear.

Small particles are particles measuring between 5 and 25. Small particles are of greatest concern because they can penetrate the clearances between wear-sensitive components and promote accelerated wear. And, because they are so small, they are difficult to remove from the oil stream."


Frantz Filters remove carbon soot, gum residues, water, abrasives, and small metal pieces without degrading the detergents and additives in the oil.
The media filters oil more than 10 times finer than an original equipment manufacturers filter can – down to two microns. Those size 2 microns sound like they arent doing much harm, but 41,182 of them can. That brand new oil we tested would cause more wear to your engine than the 5,000 mile old oil. Overtime oil does break down, additives are depleted and lubricating properties are lost. Hot Shot's Secret produces a TBN Booster to raise the total base number of the oil, which replenishes detergents and dispersive additives, and helps oil keep being effective in neutralizing acids and breaking down dirt. Hope that answered some of your questions bud, let me know if it didnt.

To be honest, calling the Frantz Filter a bypass filter is slightly misleading. It takes a small percentage of oil, and sends it through the Frantz and then back into the engine. Your OEM style filter is still being used, not bypassed, and will not need changed near as often.
http://frantzfilters.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Used-oil-before-frantz.pdf

Thanks 2015_PSD, I'll verify with Kevin the Chemical Engineer which test was used or if he has any other results handy from other tests. He's the gentleman at the top of the page on the PDFs. It's nice getting feedback from other guys in the field who care about their vehicles, answering questions and hearing suggestions. We could write a new post in the oil filter side of the forum, since the Frantz line has been re-engineered and gone through such drastic changes in the past few year.

I appreciate everyone's time.

 

[kschachn]

Well, I don't have coolant leakage into the oil so that really isn't relevant to my situation. And now you say I need a TBN booster in addition to your filter setup? How did I make it all these miles without it? It's a wonder (look at the vehicles in my sig). None use excessive oil between changes and yet it has all been with OEM filters.

I really just don't see the benefit for a typical person like myself and nothing you have posted indicates that there would be. You do realize that a filter even with a low efficiency rating will filter out small particles, right? It just takes more time, and not all the oil goes through the bearings on each pass so I 'm not one to fear that a particle that does not get trapped in one pass is automatically a danger. That last range you quote is quite a spread, are you saying that a 5 micron particle is equivalent to a 25 micron one in terms of danger to a bearing?

And I'm not your "bud", and I do care about my vehicles despite not having one of your filters.

 

[AlaskaMike]

Wow, who took a whiz in your wheaties this morning Kschachn?

 

[SpencerHSS]

I never meant to ask you to purchase one, that would not be in accordance to the forum rules. Sorry for any confusion. Most people on this forum are willing to take the time to find out how to prolong and protect their vehicles, which is great to see both as someone who is employed by a company that creates vehicle-life extending solutions and as a car enthusiast. I myself have a few Mazda Miatas that I enjoy taking out to the track and autocross courses every weekend. None are equipped with a Frantz Filter. My favorite one of mine has just over 210k on the original drivetrain, no rebuilds. Engine is coming out this winter for a rebuild, and will go back in with a m45 supercharger to keep up with those pesky Corvettes, but I would definitely like to add a Frantz Filter to protect my investment.

The synthetic filter media is made to last longer but doesn't have the antifreeze catching capabilities. Almost all engine oil is contaminated with small traces of water during normal operation. The heat and cool cycles allow moisture to form in the crankcase. In the winter, condensation is more prevalent, startups and short drive times are the main culprits. Extended drive times can help evaporate almost all of this moisture but it's something all of our engines face.

TBN booster is not needed, most dont use it, but if you'd like to keep your oil inside your engine as long as possible thats what it was made for. Each time you change the media, you add a quart of new oil, this also helps replenish the detergents and additives in the oil, which is what most owners choose to do.

The longer OEM filters are used and the more particles they catch, the less they filter. Most pressurized lubrication systems incorporate an overpressure relief valve built into the filter to allow oil to bypass the filter altogether if its flow restriction is excessive (either filter is clogged or cold weather is thickening oil), to protect the engine from oil starvation. The spring inside allows more and more oil to pass through until it does not filter at all. OEM spin on and cartridge filters are really only made to catch microns above 20. There is a big difference between size 25 and 5 microns, some of those engine internal clearances won't allow the larger microns in, but with the OEM style allowing 41,182 size >=2, and the Frantz letting just 1,641 by (which was less than the new oil we tested), that's a lot of prevented wear.

Benefits would include oil running at slightly cooler temperatures than the OEM filter set up which has multiple benefits in itself, we have had cars run 250,000 miles without needing to drain the oil once, with the inferior toilet paper as filter media. Reduction in maintenance costs, increased engine life and knowing the oil in your engine is cleaner than new oil on the shelf is a perk to me. While it works great in gasoline cars, there are really big perks for diesel owners who have much dirtier oil, higher oil change costs, more expensive engines if they ever need to replace them, engines who haul, tow and push more weight than the truck itself weighs and undergo much more load and use than commuter cars. We make specific kits for the popular diesel engine sizes, and those are the best selling.

2015_PSD here's a few articles that the chemical guy pointed me towards:

On the topic of pore blockage versus optical counting,
"Nevertheless, [pore blockage] accurately reports the aggregate concentration of particulates in the oil, and in certain situations, particularly dark fluids such as diesel engine oils and other heavily contaminated oils, pore block particle counting does offer advantages."
http://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/353/particle-counting-oil-analysis
http://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/2018/mesh-blockage

Not sure why they would do all tests with the pore blockage method, but the thick, dark, heavily contaminated diesel oil with soot and wear debris seems to be better suited for the pore blockage. Maybe the Frantz guys will trade me some sticky tires in exchange for oil samples to do optical count testing with! A guy can dream can't he LOL

 

[SpencerHSS]

2015_PSD, from Kevin himself. Thought you'd be interested in this

 

[Transamfan454]

After using a Frantz filter I can honestly say I will keep on using one. All the benefits u get from using one is well worth it.

 

[CarbonSteel]

Originally Posted By: SpencerHSS
2015_PSD here's a few articles that the chemical guy pointed me towards:

On the topic of pore blockage versus optical counting,
"Nevertheless, [pore blockage] accurately reports the aggregate concentration of particulates in the oil, and in certain situations, particularly dark fluids such as diesel engine oils and other heavily contaminated oils, pore block particle counting does offer advantages."
http://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/353/particle-counting-oil-analysis
http://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/2018/mesh-blockage

Not sure why they would do all tests with the pore blockage method, but the thick, dark, heavily contaminated diesel oil with soot and wear debris seems to be better suited for the pore blockage. Maybe the Frantz guys will trade me some sticky tires in exchange for oil samples to do optical count testing with! A guy can dream can't he LOL
Spencer - thanks for the links. I am fairly certain the issue with using pore blockage units versus optical is found in the first article (quoted here--especially note the red text):
Originally Posted By: Particle-Counting-Oil-Analysis
They do not have the same dynamic range as an optical particle counter, and because the particle size distribution is roughly estimated, are dependent on the accuracy of the algorithm to accurately report ISO fluid cleanliness codes according to ISO 4406:99.

This is why it is being said that optical counters are more accurate than pore blockage. With that said, it is nice to see Blackstone upgrading some of their equipment to be on par with most of the other UOA companies.

 

[jacobs]

I've been using Frantz toilet paper filters for almost 50 years. They work as advertised.
BTW The Frantz filter was approved for aircraft use by the FAA around 1980.

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted By: jacobs
I've been using Frantz toilet paper filters for almost 50 years. They work as advertised.
BTW The Frantz filter was approved for aircraft use by the FAA around 1980.


Yes, there is an STC for certain airframes (SA695CE).

But what does it mean for me? I work in the aviation industry, there are many things used on aircraft that would be either inferior or inappropriate for automobiles. Are you implying that just because there is an STC for something that gives it a gee-whiz factor for a car? General aviation is one of the most backwards industries I know.

And by the way, there are other bypass filter kits for airplanes, not just this one. Do you know why they aren't widely used?

 

[CT8]

Probably because there is no benefit from using them. The engine has a regulated life.

 

[Inspecktor]

Originally Posted By: jacobs
I've been using Frantz toilet paper filters for almost 50 years. They work as advertised.
BTW The Frantz filter was approved for aircraft use by the FAA around 1980.
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: jacobs
I've been using Frantz toilet paper filters for almost 50 years. They work as advertised.
BTW The Frantz filter was approved for aircraft use by the FAA around 1980.


Yes, there is an STC for certain airframes (SA695CE).

But what does it mean for me? I work in the aviation industry, there are many things used on aircraft that would be either inferior or inappropriate for automobiles. Are you implying that just because there is an STC for something that gives it a gee-whiz factor for a car? General aviation is one of the most backwards industries I know.

And by the way, there are other bypass filter kits for airplanes, not just this one. Do you know why they aren't widely used?
An STC may not be proof of effectiveness, but does mean the FAA is satisfied no problems will result from proper installation.

 

[jacobs]

I remember when Frantz first got their approval from the FAA for aircraft use. They advertised that approval heavily. I doubt they expected to recoup their expenses by selling filters for aircraft use but only to shut up the naysayers and it worked!

And as can be found by searching Frantz or Motor Guard and oil analysts, toilet paper does work and very effectively.

As I've said elsewhere, I've been using Frantz oil filters for just shy of 50 years now and have never had a problem with them. No paper plugging up oil lines & etc. I did have a problem with an installation using a sandwich adapter and the screws coming loose on the back of a Subaru 2.5 oil pump. It was the combination of the loose screws and the sandwich adapter and lack of an oil pressure gauge (Idiot light don't tell you much) that caused me to lose the bottom end but the toilet paper did not contribute to the problem. I doubt I'll ever use a sandwich adapter again on a Frantz installation.

 

[kschachn]

Well, you're still stuck on the notion that if something is used on an aircraft it is somehow special or validated/proven both in a general sense and by proxy to automobile use. The airline I work for has a bunch of STCs and we buy all kinds of components that that do, none of which means anything in regards to use on my car. You still haven't answered my question about why this type of filter isn't widely used in general aviation. Do you know why?

Your last paragraph about having used it for nearly 50 years really means nothing, right? I could just as easily say that I haven't used it for 50 years (and I haven't), and neither have I had any problems. That's the issue, lack of problems does not equate to a measurable and illustrative efficacy. Look at the vehicles in my sig and look at the miles. Are you somehow going to claim I would get a measurable longevity increase with this filter?

Originally Posted By: jacobs
I remember when Frantz first got their approval from the FAA for aircraft use. They advertised that approval heavily. I doubt they expected to recoup their expenses by selling filters for aircraft use but only to shut up the naysayers and it worked!

And as can be found by searching Frantz or Motor Guard and oil analysts, toilet paper does work and very effectively.

As I've said elsewhere, I've been using Frantz oil filters for just shy of 50 years now and have never had a problem with them. No paper plugging up oil lines & etc. I did have a problem with an installation using a sandwich adapter and the screws coming loose on the back of a Subaru 2.5 oil pump. It was the combination of the loose screws and the sandwich adapter and lack of an oil pressure gauge (Idiot light don't tell you much) that caused me to lose the bottom end but the toilet paper did not contribute to the problem. I doubt I'll ever use a sandwich adapter again on a Frantz installation.

 

[jacobs]

Oil analysis has proven the efficiency of TP not once or twice but hundreds if not thousands of times. If you don't want to use a TP filter, then don't but you really should research the facts before you knock them.

Yes you will get reduced wear in an engine using a TP filter. Many over the road trucking companies use them or similar products and have gone over a million miles having NEVER changed the engine oil nor had an engine malfunction due to lack of lubrication. They've even gone so far as to tear an engine down at 1 million miles, measure all clearances, which were still factory specs, reassemble the engine, using all the old parts, and refill it with the old used oil that was previously drained out. The last I heard several years ago, they were working on 2 million miles. And BTW, the engine was extremely clean inside. No sludge.

The Subaru I just rebuilt at 250,000 miles didn't have any sludge either. It was essentially spotless and you could still see the factory hone marks on the cylinder walls. I couldn't believe my eyes when I first saw that.

 

[jacobs]

For anyone interested in engine longevity,I recommend a booklet published by the Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc titled "Ingested Dust, Filters, and Diesel Engine Ring Wear" by Gary E. Thomas and Robert M. Culbert. Publication #680536, available from SAE through their website. This was a real eye opener for me when I first read it and has radically changed the way I view all filtration - not just engine oil.

 

[Greasymechtech]

Its good to see that a company stepped up and bought the Frantz Filter to allow the TP bypass legacy to continue.

I do hope that the 'double-stacker' and 'triple-stacker' Frantz filter are put back into production. The single TP Frantz filters are great for a typical gasser. The longer 2 or 3 stacker would give the diesel owner a little more time between TP change intervals.

http://www.frantzfilters.com/
http://www.frantzoil.com/home.html