BOBISTHEOILGUY FILTER TESTS

Pablo · Apr 7, 2003

Mr Stern, sir. Good first post.

The only problem with you: You're another stinkin' Volvo owner!!

Paul Seminara

[ April 07, 2003, 09:41 PM: Message edited by: Pablo ]

Larry B. · Apr 7, 2003

Hello ,
As far as all the testing has been done , I am a bit confused , Should one consider using a filter with a greater drop in pressure at output thus indicating better filtration or should one consider a filter with less of a pressure drop at output due to better flow rate and better lubrication .. hmmm I will say I have been using a basic fram filter and have always heard a slight carckle upon start up , then switched to a motorcraft and hear nothing at startup .. comments Larry B.

digitaldrifter91 · Apr 7, 2003

so many varibles like pressure and filtration makes it diffucult to actually choose the "best filter" in my world i am trying to go inbetween filtration and efficiency...still havent found the answer.

i used to use a fram and did get cracks on start up...bosch a little too..but not purolator. but im going to try them all.

Ken2 · Apr 7, 2003

Larry,
The decision is more complex. Filters can have high filtration efficiency and good flow if the filter maker chooses to use a better (higher priced) filter media. The size of the holes in the media determines the filtration efficiency. the number of holes of the correct size determines the flow.

We need test data that shows both pressure drop with hot oil to determine flow and particle counts to determine filtration efficiency.

Ken

Fillherup · Apr 7, 2003

Does this make sense?

On filtering vs flow rate, some of the filters tested have SAE rating for J806 or J1858. For example, the PUREONE has a beta ratio of 7.2 at 10 microns (J1858).

So just using the flow rates is a pretty good start, i.e you can start filling in a martix of flows vs filtering for the known filtering rates of the tested filters and get a overall picture of some of the tradeoffs of filter design, I hope.

Myself, I am hoping the hot flow rate of the PUREONE is better, since is has good filtering and is reasonably priced. The cold rate concerns me.

turbochem · Apr 7, 2003

quote:

The only problem with you: You're another stinkin' Volvo owner!!

I think the "problem" is that you advertise this place on other boards.....

You know, ones that talk about the best building material ever.....BRICK!!

Which, BTW, I haven't visited in forever!!

At least that's how I think I "found" this site...

It's all your fault....you Amsoil pusher!!

Al would be proud.....

Daniel J. Stern · Apr 8, 2003

Pablo writes:

Mr Stern, sir. Good first post.

You take that back!

The only problem with you: You're another stinkin' Volvo owner!!

Wellll....kinda sorta not as much any more. I sold my 245Ti a day before the war started, and I haven't driven my 164 since last century. It's undergoing slow-as-petroleum-SAE-50-in-Alaska-in-January restification at OJ Rallye in Wisconsin.

DS

TheTanSedan · Apr 8, 2003

The Daniel Stern, the minor god of light and great headlamp relay kits? I can overlook the Volvo thing since you mentioned the DODGE! (He's got a great site, guys, PM me if you want the link).

As to filter submissions, Bob, if you would please be so kind as to indicate your desire, I'd be glad to send along a BALDWIN B2-HPG and a DONALDSON 169071 as my recent post wants information I'll likely not get otherwise for a PH8A substitution.

pedaltothemetal · Apr 13, 2003

This is a cool test to find the least restrictive filter. However the main restriction is the engine(hot or cold running), and unless the filter is extremely clogged and goes to bypass mode, there will always be enough filtered oil for the engine. So I'm interested in how many miles a filter will become dirty enough so it becomes the restriction and not the engine. Testing dirty high mileage filters will be intresting which ones can go the distance of extended drains.

Leo

OneQuartLow · Apr 13, 2003

Leo, pressure drop affects flow. Reaching bypass pressure differential earlier means there's more pressure drop across the filter and less flow at the same rpm. You're right, filtering efficiency is also important but that's another test.

David

Spector · Apr 13, 2003

quote:

Originally posted by pedaltothemetal:
So I'm interested in how many miles a filter will become dirty enough so it becomes the restriction and not the engine. Leo

That is the $64,000 question. I just cut open a filter that went 10,041 miles over 8 months. I was surprised that the flow back valve still appeared to be in good shape and bypass still sturdy. The media, well, I scraped and scraped and to the naked eye nil debri but I will look at through mangifying glass this week. Quick observation, this filter could have gone much, much longer in service. The oil analysis results will be here in a week or so. The diff between this sample and previous is that this 10,000 mile change had no filter change at 6000 miles. previous two went 12,000 with a filter at 6000. Again. my premise is that in todays modern engines and great oils a filter is a useless appendage that is good for catastophic failures only with the assumption the engine has been maintained since day one etc.

This was an Amsoil SDF 29
Will see.

[ April 14, 2003, 09:41 AM: Message edited by: Spector ]

satterfi · Apr 13, 2003

Don't forget we're using PD pumps here. They pretty much put out the same flow regardless of downstream resistance. The engine alway gets enough flow, clogged filter or not.

quote:

Originally posted by pedaltothemetal:
... and unless the filter is extremely clogged and goes to bypass mode, there will always be enough filtered oil for the engine. ...

OneQuartLow · Apr 14, 2003

quote:

Originally posted by satterfi:
Don't forget we're using PD pumps here. They pretty much put out the same flow regardless of downstream resistance. The engine alway gets enough flow, clogged filter or not.

Even new positive displacement pumps have efficiency curves. Flow drops as backpressure increases. Add "acceptable" pump clearances and it's easier to understand why tests show flow isn't immune to restrictions.

To me this is less about the safe zones and more about the low margin. i.e. cold starts and lugging or short shifts. And can't say I'll miss the "I think's" in filter discussions.

fields · Apr 14, 2003

Unless I read wrong, he is putting a 40 lb pressure differential on the oil filter itself. I personally think this test has a flow rate that can not even be anywhere near the actual flow in an engine. These differences would then be extremely magnified in relation to real world numbers in our engines.

richard

[ April 14, 2003, 06:34 PM: Message edited by: fields ]

OneQuartLow · Apr 14, 2003

Richard, you're right, the numbers aren't yet matching reality as far as the pressures you'd see in an engine. Think of them as the other end of the spectrum from Jason's airflow data. We're still toying with heaters and instruments.

Once a test rig can duplicate operating temps, pump RPM, and then engine restrictions, things will look more realistic. Until these things are complete, with good gauges, pressure drops are either tough to determine or swing wildly as viscosity/temp and simulated engine restrictions change. So close but yet so far...

Michael SR · Apr 14, 2003

quote:

Originally posted by satterfi:
Don't forget we're using PD pumps here. They pretty much put out the same flow regardless of downstream resistance. The engine alway gets enough flow, clogged filter or not.

true, the pump's flow is almost constant (for a given rpm). but the output from the pump is not, since most pumps have internal bypasses.

also, note that the bypass is usually right back to the pump's inlet, rather than back to the sump. this is both good and bad, depending on point of view.

-michael

satterfi · Apr 14, 2003

quote:

Originally posted by OneQuartLow:
Even new positive displacement pumps have efficiency curves. Flow drops as backpressure increases. Add "acceptable" pump clearances and it's easier to understand why tests show flow isn't immune to restrictions.

I agree. For example the pump curve I’m looking at shows that clearly (Waukesha size 18 rotary pump). At 400 rpm pumping 10cps fluid, this pump will put produce 11 gpm at 25psi or 10 gpm at 50psi.

That's why I said "They pretty much put out the same flow ".

OneQuartLow · Apr 14, 2003

See? That's very different from the new Melling Mopar 318 gear pump I'm using. Flow appears to drop by >50% with net pressure somewhere near the 318 in my pickup at ~2Krpm engine speed. (though don't hold me to it until I can maintain temperatures with consistency)

My point is that it's pointless to generalize about pump performance or theory. Certainly with pumps made for different engines or completely different purposes.

satterfi · Apr 14, 2003

quote:

Originally posted by Michael SR:
but the output from the pump is not, since most pumps have internal bypasses.

I don't know if most oil pumps have internal reliefs or not. I don't see how it matters if the relief valve is internal or external. They are set to control max system pressure, like 85psi. Maybe I don't understand your point.

OneQuartLow · Apr 14, 2003

Michael, I'm also seeing interesting differences that make me suspect the varying specs for internal clearances. I've only tested two pumps so far (Melling Mopar 318 and Jeep 242) but while I'm not ready to name numbers I am confident there's significant loss from this factor, increasing at higher pressures (even with the relief valve disabled). No doubt this means ordering OEM pumps for comparison. Eventually. It'll never end.

[ April 14, 2003, 10:00 PM: Message edited by: OneQuartLow ]

BOBISTHEOILGUY FILTER TESTS

Similar threads