Are the 2024 Outback vs 2024 WRX Oil Filters interchangeable?

[schastleevo]

I don't know if this has been discussed. I was interested in finding out if an Oil Filter for a 2024 WRX can be installed on a 2024 Outback without any problems with the oil system? I've bought both filters, & have done some quick measurements for comparisons. The biggest differences between the filters that I can see are the housing heights & diameters. I was interested in what other readers think about this possible swap.

 

[schastleevo]

I've taken the gaskets out of both filters, & they're almost completely the same. The I.D. & gasket height are exactly the same between the gaskets. The wall thickness of the Outback gasket it just 0.4mm thicker then the WRX gasket, It's this thicker wall thickness that translates to the difference in the O.D. of 1.1mm between the gaskets. It's this difference that makes the Outback gasket O.D. slightly larger than the WRX gasket.

 

[schastleevo]

As I mentioned I'm interested in the possibilitiy of using the WRX oil filter in place of the Outback oil filter. With the larger outer canister diameter of the WRX oil filter it would have more pleats (filter material) then the Outback filter. Except for a minor difference in the gaskets of the 2 filters, I would believe the WRX filter to be a better filter. As I mentioned, I hope to hear the forums thoughts on this possibile oil filter swap.

 

[ZeeOSix]

As I mentioned I'm interested in the possibilitiy of using the WRX oil filter in place of the Outback oil filter. With the larger outer canister diameter of the WRX oil filter it would have more pleats (filter material) then the Outback filter.

Not necessarily. I though the same thing about two interchangeable filters too, but after I cut them both open the one that I though had more media area actually had less media area, due to center tube diameter difference and pleat depth difference. You wouldn't really know for sure without actually measuring the media area in both filters. Plus, in your case the Outback filter is taller, which ads media area. due to longer pleats.

 

[schastleevo]

Plus, in your case the Outback filter is taller, which ads media area. due to longer pleats.

I was thinking that the larger diameter of the WRX filter would have more then offset the height differance of the Outback filter. Without cutting both open, I would assume everything else would be the same with the filters.

 

[twX]

I wouldn't worry about the gasket diameter. The filter base is right on top of the engine, so it should be easy to see if it'll mount flush.

That said, if you have the 3.6L 6-cylinder, I'd definitely stick with the larger filter. That engine has a ridiculous oil pump rated at 83 L/minute, and Subaru specs a filter with 50% more media area than for the turbo 4-cylinders.

Not only does the smaller filter probably have less media area, it also only has a bypass rating of 12 psi, instead of the Subaru spec of 23 psi. On a 3.6L, it'll be bypassing pretty much all the time. Even on the WRX it will bypass. On a non-turbo 4-cylinder, it should be adequate. The Wix 57055 has a 27 psi bypass, and probably a lot more media area.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Only way to really know for sure would be to cut them open and measure the media area. My guess is the difference in media area would be slight, regardless of which one has the most.

 

[earlyre]

do they both have the same threadpitch?

 

[schastleevo]

do they both have the same threadpitch?

Unfortunately I don't have any thread gauges to check the pitches. The only other way would be to see if they both thread onto the filter fitting on the housing. But because there's a lot of commonization of parts I would think the timing cover housing (where the filter inlet is) would be the same on various motors.

 

[schastleevo]

That said, if you have the 3.6L 6-cylinder, I'd definitely stick with the larger filter.

No, the Outback has a 2.5L non turbocharged motor.

 

[Lubener]

Save yourself some possible headaches. Since you are under warranty, just stick with the filter which is the correct one for your engine. Why give your dealer an excuse not to honor your warranty if you had engine failure. Wait till your warranty is expired before experimenting.

 

[earlyre]

Unfortunately I don't have any thread gauges to check the pitches. The only other way would be to see if they both thread onto the filter fitting on the housing. But because there's a lot of commonization of parts I would think the timing cover housing (where the filter inlet is) would be the same on various motors.

They're both 20x1.5mm threads.
all the specs are readily available on wixfilters.com

 

[earlyre]

Not only does the smaller filter probably have less media area, it also only has a bypass rating of 12 psi, instead of the Subaru spec of 23 psi. On a 3.6L, it'll be bypassing pretty much all the time. Even on the WRX it will bypass. On a non-turbo 4-cylinder, it should be adequate. The Wix 57055 has a 27 psi bypass, and probably a lot more media area.

ummm... according to Wix, yes, the 57055 bypass is 27psi...
but the WL10078 shows a bypass setting of 30psi... not sure where you got the 12 psi figure...
WIX 57055 spec sheet
WIX WL10078 Spec Sheet

 

[schastleevo]

I reviewed the WIX charts for both filters. I was disappointed that certain specs were called out on the 57055, & were missing with the 10078 filters. Like the max flow rate, & the Nominal micron rating. I don't know what the difference is between Cellulose & Enhanced Cellulose, & how much of a difference in the filtration there is.

 

[ZeeOSix]

I'd use the 57055 if that's the filter called out for your Outback, mostly if you have missing specs that you seem to need on the 10078. That 10078 isn't going to have much if any more media area than the 57005, which seems to be the driving reason why you want to use the 10078.

 

[KCJeep]

I would guess enhanced cellulose is some type of synthetic blend, so efficiency should be better but who knows how much.

 

[twX]

ummm... according to Wix, yes, the 57055 bypass is 27psi...
but the WL10078 shows a bypass setting of 30psi... not sure where you got the 12 psi figure...
WIX 57055 spec sheet
WIX WL10078 Spec Sheet

You're right. I just looked at the spec table that popped up at the top of google search, but it was for the NAPA equivalent.

Either filter will work fine, but I'd stick with a recommended filter while in warranty, just in case.

 

[schastleevo]

I appreciate everyone's input with this subject. With both filters being so close on the spec sheets (except for the missing specs) I don't know why Subaru decided to use the 2 different filters & just could have saved some $ by just going with 1 filter.

 

[twX]

BTW, somebody posted a particle count test with the WIX 57055 on a Subaru FB25 engine a few years ago. The ISO code was 23/21/15, which indicates pretty poor efficiency.

Here are some particle counts from a different Subaru with OEM and Purolator oil filters. They have the proper bypass spec and seem to be much more efficient than the WIX.
OEM Tokyo Roki (black): 16/16/13
Purolator PureOne: 14/13/11 to 16/15/13

 

[ZeeOSix]

BTW, somebody posted a particle count test with the WIX 57055 on a Subaru FB25 engine a few years ago. The ISO code was 23/21/15, which indicates pretty poor efficiency.

Wix shows a nominal efficiency (which typically means 50%) at 15 microns. So its efficiency at 20 microns isn't going to be much better, probably around 80% at 20u.