as a side note i always change my filter with the oil. even if its a "extended" one like amsoil's. i think its the safest bet. i also agree that the oil is more important than the filter. i guess im just trying to find out if, in the oil filter world, its worth paying the extra money for a premium filter. and what would be the perfect median (price, performance, quality etc.) filter.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
best oil filter?
- Thread starter whitson01
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Amsoil EaO or Donaldson Endurance. They have the same media inside but with different names. Donaldson holds the patent for the media and Amsoil holds a manufacturing license from Donaldson to make the media. Donaldson calls it SynTeq and Amsoil calls it NanoFiber.
Last edited:
ok, after doing some research here is what i found, as i would guess most of you may already know. i would say its safe to say synthetic media would be the best filtration while not compromising the flow. agree/disagree? the only ones i found that have FULL synthetic media are:
(prices/filters are for a 05 mazda 6 v6)
1 amsoil/donaldson $13.15 (preferred price EA011)
2 bosch distance plus $13.49
3 napa platinum $8.04
4 royal purple $11.99
this is all i found that have a FULLY synthetic media. any others? by looking at this i would say the napa platinum would be my next pick.
(prices/filters are for a 05 mazda 6 v6)
1 amsoil/donaldson $13.15 (preferred price EA011)
2 bosch distance plus $13.49
3 napa platinum $8.04
4 royal purple $11.99
this is all i found that have a FULLY synthetic media. any others? by looking at this i would say the napa platinum would be my next pick.
The bosch distance plus is not a wire backed full syn media like the others you posted.Go with the napa platinum.
Don't forget thread-end bypasses; unless like some people you don't mind the idea of oil washing over the filter media should it ever go into bypass mode.
Originally Posted By: glum
Don't forget thread-end bypasses; unless like some people you don't mind the idea of oil washing over the filter media should it ever go into bypass mode.
That's controversial also.
Don't forget thread-end bypasses; unless like some people you don't mind the idea of oil washing over the filter media should it ever go into bypass mode.
That's controversial also.
It's controversial whether or not it's a good thing for oil to rinse off previously-filtered particles in bypass mode? It probably wouldn't be controversial if most manufacturers had thread-end bypasses.
I'd rather have thread-end also,just saying it's been discussed many times here.
and why the "mad" emoticon,some one %#$* you off today?
and why the "mad" emoticon,some one %#$* you off today?
Originally Posted By: daman
The bosch distance plus is not a wire backed full syn media like the others you posted.Go with the napa platinum.
i just realized that the bosch is not a fully synthetic media. it will be removed. also by wire backed do you mean the media is supported by a wire screen/mesh? sorry for the newb question.
The bosch distance plus is not a wire backed full syn media like the others you posted.Go with the napa platinum.
i just realized that the bosch is not a fully synthetic media. it will be removed. also by wire backed do you mean the media is supported by a wire screen/mesh? sorry for the newb question.
Originally Posted By: glum
Don't forget thread-end bypasses; unless like some people you don't mind the idea of oil washing over the filter media should it ever go into bypass mode.
this is greek to me. please explain. thanks
Don't forget thread-end bypasses; unless like some people you don't mind the idea of oil washing over the filter media should it ever go into bypass mode.
this is greek to me. please explain. thanks
Thread-end bypass valves are at the end of the filter that screws onto your engine. The thought is that if the valve has to open and allow oil through it, the oil does not flow over the filter meida (that has junk trapped on it) to get to the valve and back to the engine unfiltered. This could be the case with a dome-end bypass.
Thought: Even with a filter in bypass mode, the media is still passing oil, unless it's completely clogged. In that case, there would be two directions of oil flow: One through the media, and another to the bypass valve. There is still pressure against/and flow through the media, trapping the junk in place and not allowing it to go through the valve.
Thought: Even with a filter in bypass mode, the media is still passing oil, unless it's completely clogged. In that case, there would be two directions of oil flow: One through the media, and another to the bypass valve. There is still pressure against/and flow through the media, trapping the junk in place and not allowing it to go through the valve.
Originally Posted By: Virtuoso
There is still pressure against/and flow through the media, trapping the junk in place and not allowing it to go through the valve.
Well if it wasn't extremely or completely clogged, it wouldn't be in bypass mode. Even if there was flow through the media, I wouldn't like to count on that pressure being enough to hold the stuff in place.
There is still pressure against/and flow through the media, trapping the junk in place and not allowing it to go through the valve.
Well if it wasn't extremely or completely clogged, it wouldn't be in bypass mode. Even if there was flow through the media, I wouldn't like to count on that pressure being enough to hold the stuff in place.
Purolator seems to think it's okay, so I would bet it's not that bad.
How do we know that's all it takes to hit bypass pressure? Perhaps a certain engine's oil pump can push enough oil at 4,000 RPM to put a filter into a few PSI bypass; even with clean media. Who knows?
What I wouldn't give to see the innards of a few filter's in action.
How do we know that's all it takes to hit bypass pressure? Perhaps a certain engine's oil pump can push enough oil at 4,000 RPM to put a filter into a few PSI bypass; even with clean media. Who knows?
What I wouldn't give to see the innards of a few filter's in action.
Originally Posted By: whitson01
Originally Posted By: daman
The bosch distance plus is not a wire backed full syn media like the others you posted.Go with the napa platinum.
do you mean the media is supported by a wire screen/mesh?
Correct
Originally Posted By: daman
The bosch distance plus is not a wire backed full syn media like the others you posted.Go with the napa platinum.
do you mean the media is supported by a wire screen/mesh?
Correct
I think to an extent your best bet is to first find a filter that's suitable for your application, then look for "what's best". For instance, if your car requires a really high bypass setting, I wouldn't ignore that--likewise, if the mfg spec's its own filters to have the bypass in the base of the filter versus the dome end, you may want to give that consideration as well.
I wouldn't write off a filter, or say that it's inferior, simply based on the "type" of media. There are synthetic/cellulose blends that both filter very well and offer excellent flow, and have provided specs on how they perform, both beta ratios and flow rates. The Pure One and Ford Racing filters are both blends, yet they both flow very well and filter very fine. The beta ratio on the Ford Racing filter was actually higher than the RP (though the RP flows a little better).
Regarding "full synthetic media", both Amsoil and RP have provided some data. They both filter really well. RP provided a flow chart, and the flow is exceptional (it's posted on here somewhere). As far as the Amsoil, I'd guess it's good, but I believe they just say "it flows really well", with no information besides that. The Napa filter is unknown. Making a glass filter is pretty complex, and in the absence of any data, I'm just not going to take it on faith that it's "the same" as the other "full synthetic" options. I think it's probably a great filter, but (like everyone's opinion on it, that's a guess. There's hard data on some of the premium synthetic/cellulose blends, so I wouldn't discount them.
I wouldn't write off a filter, or say that it's inferior, simply based on the "type" of media. There are synthetic/cellulose blends that both filter very well and offer excellent flow, and have provided specs on how they perform, both beta ratios and flow rates. The Pure One and Ford Racing filters are both blends, yet they both flow very well and filter very fine. The beta ratio on the Ford Racing filter was actually higher than the RP (though the RP flows a little better).
Regarding "full synthetic media", both Amsoil and RP have provided some data. They both filter really well. RP provided a flow chart, and the flow is exceptional (it's posted on here somewhere). As far as the Amsoil, I'd guess it's good, but I believe they just say "it flows really well", with no information besides that. The Napa filter is unknown. Making a glass filter is pretty complex, and in the absence of any data, I'm just not going to take it on faith that it's "the same" as the other "full synthetic" options. I think it's probably a great filter, but (like everyone's opinion on it, that's a guess. There's hard data on some of the premium synthetic/cellulose blends, so I wouldn't discount them.
Originally Posted By: JOD
I think to an extent your best bet is to first find a filter that's suitable for your application, then look for "what's best". For instance, if your car requires a really high bypass setting, I wouldn't ignore that--likewise, if the mfg spec's its own filters to have the bypass in the base of the filter versus the dome end, you may want to give that consideration as well.
I wouldn't write off a filter, or say that it's inferior, simply based on the "type" of media. There are synthetic/cellulose blends that both filter very well and offer excellent flow, and have provided specs on how they perform, both beta ratios and flow rates. The Pure One and Ford Racing filters are both blends, yet they both flow very well and filter very fine. The beta ratio on the Ford Racing filter was actually higher than the RP (though the RP flows a little better).
Regarding "full synthetic media", both Amsoil and RP have provided some data. They both filter really well. RP provided a flow chart, and the flow is exceptional (it's posted on here somewhere). As far as the Amsoil, I'd guess it's good, but I believe they just say "it flows really well", with no information besides that. The Napa filter is unknown. Making a glass filter is pretty complex, and in the absence of any data, I'm just not going to take it on faith that it's "the same" as the other "full synthetic" options. I think it's probably a great filter, but (like everyone's opinion on it, that's a guess. There's hard data on some of the premium synthetic/cellulose blends, so I wouldn't discount them.
Right on! (+1)
I think to an extent your best bet is to first find a filter that's suitable for your application, then look for "what's best". For instance, if your car requires a really high bypass setting, I wouldn't ignore that--likewise, if the mfg spec's its own filters to have the bypass in the base of the filter versus the dome end, you may want to give that consideration as well.
I wouldn't write off a filter, or say that it's inferior, simply based on the "type" of media. There are synthetic/cellulose blends that both filter very well and offer excellent flow, and have provided specs on how they perform, both beta ratios and flow rates. The Pure One and Ford Racing filters are both blends, yet they both flow very well and filter very fine. The beta ratio on the Ford Racing filter was actually higher than the RP (though the RP flows a little better).
Regarding "full synthetic media", both Amsoil and RP have provided some data. They both filter really well. RP provided a flow chart, and the flow is exceptional (it's posted on here somewhere). As far as the Amsoil, I'd guess it's good, but I believe they just say "it flows really well", with no information besides that. The Napa filter is unknown. Making a glass filter is pretty complex, and in the absence of any data, I'm just not going to take it on faith that it's "the same" as the other "full synthetic" options. I think it's probably a great filter, but (like everyone's opinion on it, that's a guess. There's hard data on some of the premium synthetic/cellulose blends, so I wouldn't discount them.
Right on! (+1)
What about the Pure one filters? Those full syn?
Originally Posted By: bustednutz
What about the Pure one filters? Those full syn?
No
What about the Pure one filters? Those full syn?
No
Micro Green filters are very costly but work very well. Members have remarked that oil color isn't an indication of of oil quality degradation however in my experience oil clarity and color lasted far longer,mileage wise than any filter I have used.
I'm pleased with Microgreen results. I wasn't sure if their integrated bypass system worked or a scam but I liked the idea so I tested particle counts comparing Microgreen with a K&N using identical oil and driving routine. Microgreen did extremely well. My latest run was over 15k miles. If I continue at 15k intervals, cost isn't bad.
Micron particle size and respective counts/ml. Note, first count value represent oem size microgreen filter, second is oem size K&N and third is an oversized mircogreen filters. First and second count had ~12,000miles, whereas, third is with 15,458miles. First two counts is with RedLine 5w20 and third with oversize filter with 0w20 Redline. Car is a 2009 Focus.
>=2: 1085,, 2878,, 833
>=5: 402,, 1066,, 308
>=10: 111,, 295,, 85
>=15: 43,, 114,, 33
>=25: 10,, 27,, 7
>=50: 1,, 2,, 0
>=100: 0,, 0,, 0
Doug
Micron particle size and respective counts/ml. Note, first count value represent oem size microgreen filter, second is oem size K&N and third is an oversized mircogreen filters. First and second count had ~12,000miles, whereas, third is with 15,458miles. First two counts is with RedLine 5w20 and third with oversize filter with 0w20 Redline. Car is a 2009 Focus.
>=2: 1085,, 2878,, 833
>=5: 402,, 1066,, 308
>=10: 111,, 295,, 85
>=15: 43,, 114,, 33
>=25: 10,, 27,, 7
>=50: 1,, 2,, 0
>=100: 0,, 0,, 0
Doug
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 35
- Views
- 2K
- Replies
- 20
- Views
- 1K
- Replies
- 28
- Views
- 2K
