Best filter for extended oci

[Graham Piccinini]

Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Originally Posted By: RusskiBoSS
How about getting a low efficiency filter (Supertech, Driveworks, etc.) for cheap and running it for that interval? I'm 100% positive it will make it. AND as filter does it's job - its efficiency improves. SOOO they longer you run it - the better it filters TO A CERTAIN EXTENT. I would easily run it for 20k in a clean engine. Makes sense?
*puts on a flamesuit*


Doesn't make sense to me.

Extended OCI's aren't just about the filtering -its equally about the filters integrity at the far reaches of the OCI.

Extended OCI's stress the filter media and the cheap filters aren't usually wire backed.

A non wire backed filter becomes more susceptible to tearing and compressing/ opening up the pleats as it becomes loaded and aged , more efficient from a filtering perspective - sure as long as it maintains its integrity.

Looking at some of the wavy pleats in cut open cheapies even at at moderate intervals I wouldnt do it.

With the diff between cheap and expensing being a few bucks - I wont risk my engines on extended intervals with cheap filters.

It seems penny wise and pound foolish.

As always your engines - your money- your choice.

UD




Idk about Supertech, but I did see a few Driveworks here cut open after extended OCIs and have yet to find a one that had a torn media... But I will only test out my theory after I got through all the Mobil 1, Fram Ultras, Bosh Distance Pluses, and Purolator Bosses that I got in stash.

 

[UncleDave]

How many did you see at 20K?

UD

 

[Pontual]

Originally Posted By: Triton_330
Originally Posted By: Pontual
Originally Posted By: Triton_330
Originally Posted By: kschachn
Thanks, I didn't know that oil filters removed fuel and reversed "detergent depletion".

Pretty sure that isn't what Pontual said.

~ Triton



Isn't it?

Wait... What?

How does an oil filter remove gasoline from the oil?

And unless you're using Fram high mileage filters, an oil filter cannot do squat about depletion of additives. Oil filters remove dirt, sludge, and impurities, and that's it.

(Now, if you were just kidding by saying "isn't it?" then my bad.)

~ Triton


I was kidding. I Never said a filter would remove fuel, but inefficient engines from the 70 makes a lot of dirt, especially from fuel contamination that causes oil oxidation. Chilled enough? Now dirt engines ... you fill the blank

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: jk_636
Sometimes the cheapest filter is a fine option (beater car, lawn mower and the like) and I am in no way advocating wasteful use of one's monetary resources, but if you want the best, you better be ready to dish out some extra coin!!

Well, perhaps I should be driving a Bentley or something, then. But, it won't pick up groceries and better or get me to work any faster, just like a Royal Purple or Fram Ultra filter won't get me more service life out of my G37 than a Wix.

I'm still waiting for the percentage of 2 micron particles filtered by the Microgreen filter and the testing method....

 

[JerryBob]

Not sure you stated anywhere what your OCI is. I do 2x7.5k OCIs with a M1 filter on the wife's minivan.

Not a Fram fan boy. I always find dirt and grit on their faceplates, right out of the box.

 

[Ihatetochangeoil]

Originally Posted By: kschachn
So are you claiming that there were no bypass filtration systems in the 1970s, or that they were grossly inferior to the ones you link? It doesn't really matter I guess since there is really no demonstrable benefit for such a system for a typical gasoline engine passenger car.

If you're so sure about what you say (and claim I need forgiveness), how about this - you run your car on whatever filter you want - bypass or single-pass. But you have to use API SE Valvoline 10W-40 out to the manufacturer's recommended OCI. This is what I used regularly in my 1974 Buick Regal. You think the filter - whichever one you pick is going to make any difference?

Originally Posted By: Ihatetochangeoil
Originally Posted By: kschachn
There is a much larger differential between the quality of motor oil in the 1970s and today than there is between oil filters.

Really?

http://www.bhagyashreeaccessories.com/company-profile.html

https://www.puradyn.com/2-1-company-history/ https://www.puradyn.com/filter-elements/

http://www.ntzfilter.com/popup/slide26.asp

Of course, 99.97% effective filters at 2 microns were common in the 70s; along with patented bypass filtration that replenishes the TBN. (Sarcasm).

Father, forgive this man; he know not what he speak.


No, I don't think you are aware of what I'm talking about, but neither did I join BITOG to be unpleasant. Please forgive my attitude if I came across earlier as insulting or abrasive. Both motor oils and filtration have come a long way since the 70s; and no, the filters I mention were not available back then, and neither was API SN motor oil. I have been somewhat reluctant to answer here because I consider my answers a little off topic being bypass filtration, but bypass filters are obviously the choice if one wants the best filter for an extended OCI. I don't think you read anything I posted, and I'm not going to repeat myself ad nauseum; but filtration DOES EXIST to replenish depletion of additives. Go look around on the Puradyn website.
And when you state that "there is really no demonstrable benefit for such a system for a typical gasoline engine passenger car." What you really mean is either "I have no use for such a system" or "insufficient data exists," because what you have stated is simply your opinion, which you are entitled to. I disagree. I'm going to run both bypass filtration and a centrifuge; and my goal is to eliminate oil changes altogether.
The best method of purification would be to use a combination of both purifiers and bypass filtration, since each has its limitations. Centrifugal purifiers are good at removing larger particles and water but not for removing the smaller organo-metallic particles, which a filter will remove. If you already have purifiers, keep them and add bypass filtration. http://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/29426/purifying-engine-oil
I will not delude myself into thinking I'm going to change anyone's mind since I can do a 2 minute google search and find Ralph Wood posting in 2003 that "Studies at the Cummins Technical Center indicate that wear can be reduced up to 91% by using a bypass filter in combination with a full-flow filter." http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=319728 This thread in 2016 certainly isn't going to settle anything. I guess I'm new enough to BITOG and stubborn enough to try.
Is there any hope whatsoever of convincing the Fram worshippers of anything other than that which they are already convinced of? If someone were to give me a case of Fram Ultra synthetic filters (or Royal Purple, Baldwin or Wix) or any other such rock catchers, I would either throw them away or donate them to charity. Any one who is convinced how "great" these filters are, I wish they could explain how big of micron size particles they want between their piston rings/cylinder walls, cam/lifters. valves/valve guides, etc. Discredit the Noria board if you can: http://forums.noria.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/938604995/m/334102788 I'm currently running a Microgreen filter, but I have no brand loyalty and I am as disgruntled as anyone else about their lack of posting an efficiency rating; and I'm running it WITH an NTZ bypass, so I could probably eliminate the Microgreen from the circuit without harming my engine.
It has been boasted here that Fram Ultras are "99% efficient > 20 microns; well, my filtration is 99.97% at 2 microns., which means they are 95% better than Fram at 20 microns, and good luck with asking Fram how efficient their filters are a 2 microns? I think it may be reasonable to say my filtration is 1000 times more effective.
Will a combination of centrifugal oil filtration coupled with additive replenishment eliminate the need for oil changes on a typical gasoline powered automobile?
There are some BITOG posters who are a lot more knowledgeable than I, but I doubt anyone can answer that question with a reasonable degree of certainty. Perhaps another good question might be: Who DOESN'T want to see that happen?

 

[Nate1979]

^^^ To clarify the Fram Ultra is 99.9% @ 20 micron and 80% @ 5 micron (this 99.9% is apparently the new to be soon updated % on the box). (Note: not trying to claim it is better than your bypass, just stating what Motorking has posted on here. And yes, I'm sure a troll will come along and say it is not to believed blah blah blah)

As far as the Microgreen filter goes there is no specs so hard to understand at all it's performance.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: Ihatetochangeoil
It has been boasted here that Fram Ultras are "99% efficient > 20 microns; well, my filtration is 99.97% at 2 microns., which means they are 95% better than Fram at 20 microns, and good luck with asking Fram how efficient their filters are a 2 microns? I think it may be reasonable to say my filtration is 1000 times more effective.


Motorking has said a few times that the Ultra is 80% @ 5 microns. Not as good as a real bypass filter, but pretty darn good for a spin-on filter.

Many people here don't even seem to care much about efficiency and will say all day long they don't mind using filters from companies like Honda and Toyota, etc have OEM filters that are around the 50% @ 20 microns efficiency level. You're taking it a magnitude above a filter like an Ultra, so obviously someone taking filtration to the extreme ... which is fine.

IMO, something like the Ultra (or any other filter that is 99% @ 20 microns or better) will give adequate filtration efficiency, even for those concerned with efficiency.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: Ihatetochangeoil
The best method of purification would be to use a combination of both purifiers and bypass filtration, since each has its limitations. Centrifugal purifiers are good at removing larger particles and water but not for removing the smaller organo-metallic particles, which a filter will remove. If you already have purifiers, keep them and add bypass filtration. http://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/29426/purifying-engine-oil


Did you see this Machinery Lubrication article too?
http://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/29359/oil-over-filtered

"Some filters can actually filter at a sub-micron level. As they become more aggressive, filters can begin to strip out some additives, affecting lubricant health. For example, defoamants are among the most common additives to be filtered out, as they are quite large. Depending on the filter media, other additives may be at risk as well. If using a chemically active filter such as fuller’s earth, polar additives (extreme pressure, anti-wear, demulsifiers, etc.) can be stripped, affecting the lubricant’s additive package and ability to protect the machine’s surfaces."

 

[Ihatetochangeoil]

No, I did not read that until you posted it, but neither of the filters I have linked to claim to filter at the "sub-micron" level. The paragraph after what you have posted states:

While clean oil is always better, balancing the needs of the machine with the cost of cleaning the fluid can lead to greater reliability and fewer failures. Remember, when it comes to filtration, it isn’t a one-size-fits-all approach. All systems have unique requirements for cleanliness, and they should all be viewed independently."

The filters I am using (and about to use) are DESIGNED for internal combustion engine use, not medical or FDA usage which requires finer filtration. Thanks for the post.

Additionally: The claim of extending oil and machine life by utilizing fine filtration (less than 5 microns) is based on real-world experience and case studies. A good additive package should be fully blended and dissolved in the base oil. Therefore, fine filtration should not be able to strip out any additives. http://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/30266/oil-life-filtration

I'm not "Striving for very low cleanliness codes;" just a little better than new oil, which IS contaminated.

 

[camrydriver111]

Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: Ihatetochangeoil
The best method of purification would be to use a combination of both purifiers and bypass filtration, since each has its limitations. Centrifugal purifiers are good at removing larger particles and water but not for removing the smaller organo-metallic particles, which a filter will remove. If you already have purifiers, keep them and add bypass filtration. http://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/29426/purifying-engine-oil


Did you see this Machinery Lubrication article too?
http://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/29359/oil-over-filtered

"Some filters can actually filter at a sub-micron level. As they become more aggressive, filters can begin to strip out some additives, affecting lubricant health. For example, defoamants are among the most common additives to be filtered out, as they are quite large. Depending on the filter media, other additives may be at risk as well. If using a chemically active filter such as fuller’s earth, polar additives (extreme pressure, anti-wear, demulsifiers, etc.) can be stripped, affecting the lubricant’s additive package and ability to protect the machine’s surfaces."


It sounds like it's a problem in chemically activated filters, not for automotive applications.

 

[Tony10s]

Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: Ihatetochangeoil
It has been boasted here that Fram Ultras are "99% efficient > 20 microns; well, my filtration is 99.97% at 2 microns., which means they are 95% better than Fram at 20 microns, and good luck with asking Fram how efficient their filters are a 2 microns? I think it may be reasonable to say my filtration is 1000 times more effective.


Motorking has said a few times that the Ultra is 80% @ 5 microns. Not as good as a real bypass filter, but pretty darn good for a spin-on filter.

...

IMO, something like the Ultra (or any other filter that is 99% @ 20 microns or better) will give adequate filtration efficiency, even for those concerned with efficiency.

I agree with you ZeeOSix ... 99+% @ 20 microns and 80% @ 5 microns is more than good enough.


_________________________
2012 Hyundai Elantra GLS, 1.8L
Quaker State Conventional (QSAD/QSGB) 5W-30
Baldwin Oil Filter #B7243
Hastings Engine Air Filter #AF1511

2011 Ford Focus SE, 2.0L
Castrol GTX Conventional 5W-30
FRAM Tough Guard Oil Filter #TG3614
Motorcraft Engine Air Filter #FA-1890

 

[Ihatetochangeoil]

^^^Yes, they are. Good enough to throw away the oil and filter every few thousand miles. This must be done to rid the engine of the contamination that the filter doesn't filter, otherwise, the Fram will allow your engine to self destruct. 80% at 5 microns is not even a beta 10; and they're probably not even a beta 2 at 2 microns. Lots of rocks floating around between your cam/lifters, rings/cylinder walls, valves/valve guides, etc. If you REALLY want to scare yourself, do a UOA and get a particle count done at the end of your OCI...Then tell me how great your Fram is...or isn't.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: Ihatetochangeoil
... the Fram will allow your engine to self destruct.

If you REALLY want to scare yourself, do a UOA and get a particle count done at the end of your OCI...Then tell me how great your Fram is...or isn't.


If you think an Ultra will 'allow your engine to self destruct' then I guess all those other less efficient filters will literally blow the engine right out of the engine compartment!

 

[Tony10s]

^^^

 

[Ihatetochangeoil]

^^^^Nice job of taking things out of context. What I said was the truth. Good enough to throw away the oil and filter every few thousand miles. This must be done to rid the engine of the contamination that the filter doesn't filter...You kinda left that part off for your convenience (or amusement), huh?

As I recall, the original subject was the best filter for extended OCI, and I correctly mentioned bypass filtration. There are other posters on this forum besides myself such as Slalom44 and A310 who use bypass filtration, they have posted UOA, and they run their oil and filters far in excess of what anyone in their right mind would run a Fram or similar rock catcher.

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/2930840/Re:_whats_your_longest_oci?#Post2930840

Try running your Fram or rock catcher of your choice out to about 40K, do a UOA with a particle count at that stage, THEN get back to me about how healthy your engine is and how your filter is "good enough." I don't mind a healthy debate, but it needs to be based in facts. The only thing your mockery demonstrates to me is how small and closed your mind is.

 

[kschachn]

Well, I have run much more of a rock catcher filter on all my engines (Toyota OEM, Honda A01, BMW OEM) and seem to have done just fine. I'm not sure how much longer life I need. None of the vehicles consume any sort of abnormal amounts of oil.

You don't happen to sell bypass filtration systems, do you? You sure take all of this pretty personally.

Originally Posted By: Ihatetochangeoil
Try running your Fram or rock catcher of your choice out to about 40K, do a UOA with a particle count at that stage, THEN get back to me about how healthy your engine is and how your filter is "good enough." I don't mind a healthy debate, but it needs to be based in facts. The only thing your mockery demonstrates to me is how small and closed your mind is.

 

[goodtimes]

Here is a quote from Fram literature:

A few other cautions are in order. Although B ratio is a far superior measure of filter performance than micron rating, it should not be regarded as the only important measure. For example, hydrostatic (leak) resistance, which is not
addressed by multi-pass testing, is an important consideration for spin-on filters.
End-users should also be wary of numbers games – they can also be played with B ratios. B ratios higher than 75 indicate little additional improvement in filtering efficiency. Furthermore, the test procedure to develop the B ratio is valid only for B value up to 75. For B ratios of 75 and higher, there are not enough particles in downstream liquid samples to make counting them
statistically significant.
Another numbers game has to do with illegitimate comparisons. Even though multi-pass data does lend itself to comparison of filters from different manufacturers, it is still necessary for the end-user to be very alert to various ways in which information can be presented. The end-user should be certain that
valid comparisons are made, and that these are supported by recognized and accepted test methods."

http://www.framcatalog.com/RelatedInfo.aspx?b=F&f=FRAM/2Now_a_Fluid_Filter_Rating.pdf

Motorking's quote of 80% @5 microns is very impressive for a full flow $6-9 oil filter. I plan to keep my car twenty years because then I will have the change car bug. I also will be an old man with the exit door approaching. It will have 120K on it then. So I am not too worried about using the Toyota rock catcher. Engine sounds very good with the RC on it. I already have the change car bug at nine + years.

I know the article is a few years old, but it is still current published info. The article doesn't say the particles can't be counted, since that's what people are going to say that tech has improved. Statistics hasn't improved. The other thing is people talk about particles, what kind of particles? Organic matter I'm small sizes isn't going to hurt anything in an engine.

 

[CarbonSteel]

Originally Posted By: Ihatetochangeoil
^^^Yes, they are. Good enough to throw away the oil and filter every few thousand miles. This must be done to rid the engine of the contamination that the filter doesn't filter, otherwise, the Fram will allow your engine to self destruct.
Are you really serious with this stuff? I am certain no one here would argue that a spin-on filter is better than a bypass system, but for the average car owner how long will it be before a pay-off is seen? Oil can be had these days for nothing with rebates, clearances, etc. The same goes for oil filters and when one considers it is no real feat to reach 500K with only routine maintenance, I am not sure what you are attempting to prove.

If it is Bypass filtration > full flow filtration = yes.

If it is Bypass filtration will give more engine life than the average person will ever need = a resounding no.

 

[Ihatetochangeoil]

Originally Posted By: kschachn
Well, I have run much more of a rock catcher filter on all my engines (Toyota OEM, Honda A01, BMW OEM) and seem to have done just fine. I'm not sure how much longer life I need. None of the vehicles consume any sort of abnormal amounts of oil.

You don't happen to sell bypass filtration systems, do you? You sure take all of this pretty personally.



Finally, a little humor. No, I don't sell bypass filtration systems, but I think I could have a good time at it if I tried. I probably need to slightly disengage. If anyone is perfectly happy with whatever they're doing, fine by me. I can't and won't try to argue with results of lots of folks using whatever they wish and changing oil as often as they feel necessary; I started pursuing bypass filtration several years ago because I travel quite a bit for my job, and I love my wife passionately, but she is a total imbecile when it comes to taking care of her car. Bypass filtration on her car lets ME sleep at night when I'm away from home, and I'm not worried about how many miles she's racking up.
As far as Fram literature stating that "Furthermore, the test procedure to develop the B ratio is valid only for B value up to 75. For B ratios of 75 and higher, there are not enough particles in downstream liquid samples to make counting them statistically significant."

I find this downright amusing coming from a company that manufactures a filter that THEY RATE at 99% (beta 100). In addition, this statement is not backed up by other sources such as Machinery Lubrication: http://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/564/filter-beta-ratios Or even other filter manufacturers, who happen to make better filters than Fram: http://www.baldwinfilter.com/TechTips201210.html http://www.pall.com/main/aerospace-defense-marine/what-to-look-for-in-a-filter-17932.page http://www.ntzfilter.com/popup/slide26.asp

Mr. Jim Fitch, Ralph Wood, Pablo and many others tout the benefits of bypass when used properly. I am very well aware that the MAIN markets for bypass are heavy industry, trucking, mining, offshore, etc., but I also believe that there is very strong brainwashing in the automotive market AGAINST bypass filtration because Iffy Lube and Stealerships and the like stand to lose business if bypass were to become commonplace in the automotive world. Even here on BITOG, I stand against the crowd..All you have to do is go over to "Post your latest oil change" and see how many change their oil at 3, ,5, 7, 10, 12K.

Maybe Fram discounts beta above 75 because THEY don't make filters that great, and they certainly don't want their customers thinking that better filtration might be...Well, better.