Oil bypass micro-filtration: school me please

[carock]

Engines wear out due to different problems. If you overheat the motor and blow a head gasket, a great oil filter isn't going to help you. Years ago, it was determined that engine wear was related directly to the weight of contaminates in the oil. A bypass filter removes the contamination products that cause wear. The more contaminates the filter picks up the less wear the engine will see. In the late 80's early 90's Mack and Peterbilt added oil bypass filters and synthetic air filters to their trucks as standard equipment and engine life went from 350,000 to over 1,000,000 miles. Most of the gains in longevity were attributed to the filtration, though I also notice that considerable effort was put into improving the valve seats and the piston ring pack to handle the improved lifespan of the other components.How this relates to gasoline engines is not entirely clear.
My experience is that bypass filtration systems work pretty well. The single biggest problem is getting them correctly plumbed so that they do not leak. I have seen three engines completely destroyed by the bypass plumbing coming unstuck. The second biggest problem is just finding a place to put the filter.

 

[UncleDave]

Originally Posted By: kschachn
Originally Posted By: edwardh1
fuel economy improvement of 4%?

doubtful


Lol I'll say. At least microGreen removed that silly claim from their website.




A few companies claim 4% improvement in mileage with their products.

Note Pennzoil claim their oil can give you 4.1% more MPG vs a "dirty engine."

http://www.pennzoil.com/en_us/products/f...tinum-5W-30.pdf



UD

 

[slalom44]

People that have no experience with bypass filtration typically wont make positive claims about their benefits. People that use it and understand it will give you a different story. The consensus agree that it will keep your oil cleaner longer, therefore allow you to significantly extend your OCIs without harming your engine.

What is debated is whether it will reduce engine wear and allow your engine to last longer. In theory it should but most people dont keep their car long enough to find out. And many cars break down for unrelated reasons. Let's face it - you can get 300,000 miles on just about any engine without a bypass filter. So what's the point?

Well, eventually we should get some users that will find out. I currently have 354,000 miles on my '03 Honda S2000 and have been doing 40,000 OCIs for almost 250,000 miles. If this engine lasts longer than any other engine like it then i will have a decent argument for improved engine life. It's not "proof" but statistically it would suggest that I'm doing something better than everyone else.

 

[Crusher]

2016 Accord
I would like to reply to your query on bypass filters. I stumbled across BITOG about 2 yrs ago and was exposed to Bypass Filtration. I spent several months doing my due diligence and bought an Amsoil BMK-23 last Christmas. I run Signature Series Amsoil 5w-20. In mid Jan 2016 I put the unit on my 2011 King Ranch Ford Expedition EL 4x4. 9+ months later my oil has 30k miles on it. I replaced the full flow filter @ 25k miles. I had the oil tested twice. I'm due for another test in 3500 miles. I'll post the test results shortly along with some Unit Install pics. I've found that I get approx 5-7% better fuel economy on the highway.(this was a complete surprise to me)

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted By: Crusher
2016 Accord
I would like to reply to your query on bypass filters. I stumbled across BITOG about 2 yrs ago and was exposed to Bypass Filtration. I spent several months doing my due diligence and bought an Amsoil BMK-23 last Christmas. I run Signature Series Amsoil 5w-20. In mid Jan 2016 I put the unit on my 2011 King Ranch Ford Expedition EL 4x4. 9+ months later my oil has 30k miles on it. I replaced the full flow filter @ 25k miles. I had the oil tested twice. I'm due for another test in 3500 miles. I'll post the test results shortly along with some Unit Install pics. I've found that I get approx 5-7% better fuel economy on the highway.(this was a complete surprise to me)

Due to the filter? Wow, who would have thought.

Instead of straining gnats with 0W-16 oil to get a minuscule fuel economy improvement, I wonder why manufacturers don't just install Amsoil bypass filters?

 

[Crusher]

Kschachn
I'm pretty sure the increased fuel economy came from me switching from Mobil 1 5w-20 to Amsoil Signature Series 5w-20 (I should have made that clear). The reason I originally posted was because I think that the Amsoil dual bypass setup is a very nice/clean product to work with. In my case it represents an honest representation of what a bypass filter can do. In 30k miles on my 2011 Expedition I've only had 1 quart of makeup oil, plus 1 quart of oil when I replaced the full flow filter at 25k miles. After I changed the full flow filter and added 1 quart of fresh oil the TBN went from 2.07 up to 2.35. In the coming months the TBN will be depleted and I'll need to change the oil, but I'm quite satisfied with the results. All thanks to BITOG!

 

[kschachn]

So you are claiming that staying with the same grade but changing the brand (to Amsoil) gave you 5-7% better fuel economy? That's just as amazing.

 

[Crusher]

Kschachn
Here is my observation:
I bought my 2011 King Ranch Ford Expedition EL 4x4 new in March of 2011 (ordered it in December 2010) At about 1k miles I dumped the Factory Fill and started using Mobil 1 5w-20. (My previous 1999 Expedition has 450k+ and still going strong with M1). I take lots of cross country road trips. With M1 my mileage was consistently 16.0 cruising @ 77 mph, after I switched to Amsoil Signature Series and a dual bypass filter I now get 17-17.5 mpg. On my latest trip from Key West to Chicago I reduced my speed to 70 mph and got 20 mpg which is the same as my brother's new 2016 F-150 with a 5.0 L. All I know is that after I switched from M1 to Amsoil and the dual bypass filter I got better fuel economy.

 

[kschachn]

You really should contact Amsoil and let them know. As far as I've seen they don't market that oil nor the filter for such an improvement.

Heck, even ExxonMobil only claim a 0.2% to 2.3% improvement for their Advanced Fuel Economy products - and that is when compared to "higher viscosity" oils. Your observed improvement is just from a brand change within the same grade!

 

[Ihatetochangeoil]

Originally Posted By: kschachn
You really should contact Amsoil and let them know. As far as I've seen they don't market that oil nor the filter for such an improvement.

Heck, even ExxonMobil only claim a 0.2% to 2.3% improvement for their Advanced Fuel Economy products - and that is when compared to "higher viscosity" oils. Your observed improvement is just from a brand change within the same grade!


ExxonMobil is not bypass filtration. I am not familiar if Amsoil claims any increased fuel mileage with their bypass systems, but cleaner oil which (obviously) reduces internal engine friction leads to less horsepower loss which leads to better fuel efficiency. I do not doubt 5% gain in fuel economy; but I'm too lazy to track things that closely.

http://www.machinerylubrication.com/Read/401/oil-engine-fuel-consumption

A study reported by J. Fodor and F. Ling of the Research Institute of Automotive Industry-Budapest and published in Lubrication Engineering magazine (Table 2) found a sharp improvement in fuel economy in a six-cylinder diesel engine fitted with improved filtration. By reducing oil contamination by 98 percent, not only was a nearly 5 percent reduction in fuel consumption achieved but wear and friction were reduced by 93 percent and 2.9 percent respectively.

(Scroll down and read...Above is the 5th to last paragraph).

There are both bypass users and naysayers on this thread. In the light of skeptics opinions (edward1, Donald, and kschachn) one must choose who to believe. I choose Machinery Lubrication magazine over the keyboard tribologists on BITOG. And I also trust Crusher, the new poster, who has plainly stated that he was completely surprised by his findings.

Edit: I'm NOT trying to start a flame war, only attempting to lend credibility to a claim that some seem to find doubtful.

 

[slalom44]

My fuel economy varies greatly depending upon the time of year. When the temps drop and the oil companies use more ethanol in their fuels, my fuel economy drops at least 5%. If someone installed a bypass system on their car in the spring, they would surely see increased fuel economy and it would have nothing to do with the filter.

I can believe different oils give you different results but I find the claims of improved fuel economy due only to the bypass filter non-credible. If anything, it would be slightly the opposite - you have increased weight and (with the Amsoil BMK-13) you have higher parasitic loss due to the increased oil backpressure.

 

[CT8]

Originally Posted By: kschachn
So you are claiming that staying with the same grade but changing the brand (to Amsoil) gave you 5-7% better fuel economy? That's just as amazing.
Amsoil the first is sythetics is just plain amazing,,,, yes it is.

 

[SteveSRT8]

Originally Posted By: slalom44
My fuel economy varies greatly depending upon the time of year. When the temps drop and the oil companies use more ethanol in their fuels, my fuel economy drops at least 5%. If someone installed a bypass system on their car in the spring, they would surely see increased fuel economy and it would have nothing to do with the filter.

I can believe different oils give you different results but I find the claims of improved fuel economy due only to the bypass filter non-credible. If anything, it would be slightly the opposite - you have increased weight and (with the Amsoil BMK-13) you have higher parasitic loss due to the increased oil backpressure.


I agree with everything except your statement about oil back pressures. When installing a typical bypass system you actually open a new place for flow, albeit small. This will reduce pressure, usually by an infinitesimally small amount...

 

[slalom44]

Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8

I agree with everything except your statement about oil back pressures. When installing a typical bypass system you actually open a new place for flow, albeit small. This will reduce pressure, usually by an infinitesimally small amount...


For a typical bypass system that dumps into the oilpan, you would be correct. But with the Amsoil Dual Remote Byapss System (BMK-23 or it's predecessor BMK-13) that's not how it is designed. The proportioning valve causes this. Here is a write-up by BobIsTheOilGuy himself many years ago explaining it:

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/315296/14

The benefit of this system is that all of the pumped oil goes through the engine and none of it gets diverted. The disadvantage is that this system increases back pressure. Since oil pumps are positive-displacement pumps, back pressure does not reduce flow. The only negative consequence is that the back pressure puts slightly more load on the engine, which is a parasitic loss.

 

[Ihatetochangeoil]

Originally Posted By: slalom44
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8

I agree with everything except your statement about oil back pressures. When installing a typical bypass system you actually open a new place for flow, albeit small. This will reduce pressure, usually by an infinitesimally small amount...


For a typical bypass system that dumps into the oilpan, you would be correct. But with the Amsoil Dual Remote Byapss System (BMK-23 or it's predecessor BMK-13) that's not how it is designed. The proportioning valve causes this. Here is a write-up by BobIsTheOilGuy himself many years ago explaining it:

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/315296/14

The benefit of this system is that all of the pumped oil goes through the engine and none of it gets diverted. The disadvantage is that this system increases back pressure. Since oil pumps are positive-displacement pumps, back pressure does not reduce flow. The only negative consequence is that the back pressure puts slightly more load on the engine, which is a parasitic loss.


All of this ONLY applies to Amsoil. I'm running an NTZ, my wife has a Kleen-oil, I'm going to install a Puradyn, lots of guys run Frantz. To the best of my knowledge, no other bypass filter manufacturer besides Amsoil uses a proportioning valve. Steve SRT8 is correct on most "typical" systems.

 

[slalom44]

Originally Posted By: Ihatetochangeoil


All of this ONLY applies to Amsoil. I'm running an NTZ, my wife has a Kleen-oil, I'm going to install a Puradyn, lots of guys run Frantz. To the best of my knowledge, no other bypass filter manufacturer besides Amsoil uses a proportioning valve. Steve SRT8 is correct on most "typical" systems.


The Trasko filter has a proportioning valve as well.