Cartridge filters - changing and inspection easy
- Thread starter Blazered
- Start date
- Status
Those advantages are nice, but they cost more than the spin-on cans! Even though the cartridges don't come with an ADBV, bypass, a baseplate, or even the metal can itself, they charge you more for less!
I was going to post mine, but it was just a brown soggy Hengst. Nothing crazy to see.
I agree it's easier, and the filters are generally higher quality as well.
I agree it's easier, and the filters are generally higher quality as well.
Originally Posted By: slacktide_bitog
Those advantages are nice, but they cost more than the spin-on cans! Even though the cartridges don't come with an ADBV, bypass, a baseplate, or even the metal can itself, they charge you more for less!
Hogwash. I purchased a Wix canister for my STS for $6.90 last spring. The Wix spin on filter for the pickup was almost $2 more.
Those advantages are nice, but they cost more than the spin-on cans! Even though the cartridges don't come with an ADBV, bypass, a baseplate, or even the metal can itself, they charge you more for less!
Hogwash. I purchased a Wix canister for my STS for $6.90 last spring. The Wix spin on filter for the pickup was almost $2 more.
I really like the cartridge filters now that I own a vehicle that uses one for all the reasons mentioned. If you're a person that likes to use a filter for two or more OCI's and don't like the idea of leaving dirty oil in the engine that's trapped in a regular filter, no problem with a cartridge filter. Remove the cap, remove the filter and inspect it, and use it again if you wish. Prices might come down a bit as more and more vehicles are using them.
I would go 20K miles on that cartridge MC oil filter.
Do a Mini Cooper, and then tell me how easy it is to change and inspect.
+1000 the new MINI's with the oddball engine there a shield you open and takes a thin cartridge filter and pain in A** to get to. Not fun
I totally disagree. The cartridge filter on our 2011 camry 2.5 is a pain in the a** vs. the metal can on our previous 2007 camry. I had to buy a filter wrench to remove it, had it leak because the o-ring broke when I put it on, and it costs more. Steel filters = pure simplicity. Spin the old can off, screw the new can on. Forget that plastic filter housing junk!
Add to this thread this question:
Do engines with "bare element cartridge" filters have built in by-pass and/or anti drain-back functions?
I like the hard feel and perfect, straight appearance of the MANN and Hengst cartridges available for my 5 cylinder Volvo ("white engine" from the 850, V/S/C 70 etc.) but I do not know if they're inherently better than what's in a spin-on can.
I have no problem changing the plastic (sort of an outdated word now-a-days) canister and have never had an "O" ring break.
In fact, I kinda like the feel of the "O" ring as it goes into the bore and I really love the fact that the canister simply stops when the shoulder hits its limit.
You don't have to concern yourself with torque limits. The filter canister just stops.
It makes for satisfying, smooth screwing action. Kira
Do engines with "bare element cartridge" filters have built in by-pass and/or anti drain-back functions?
I like the hard feel and perfect, straight appearance of the MANN and Hengst cartridges available for my 5 cylinder Volvo ("white engine" from the 850, V/S/C 70 etc.) but I do not know if they're inherently better than what's in a spin-on can.
I have no problem changing the plastic (sort of an outdated word now-a-days) canister and have never had an "O" ring break.
In fact, I kinda like the feel of the "O" ring as it goes into the bore and I really love the fact that the canister simply stops when the shoulder hits its limit.
You don't have to concern yourself with torque limits. The filter canister just stops.
It makes for satisfying, smooth screwing action. Kira
Six to one, half a dozen the other.
A cartridge filter located up top is easy to change with less time involved laying on your back under the car.
OTOH, some are pretty fiddly installations that will leak if not done exactly as required.
I can deal with either and do, but I really prefer spin-ons, since they are pretty well leak-proof, unless you have a rare base gasket failure.
I've had one in forty years, with a made in America K&N, so this is pretty uncommon.
OTOH, I've fiddled with the cap on my old BMW a couple of times to get a seal around the bolt that runs through the filter cap to the bottom of the housing.
You'd be surprised at how quickly a BMW four cylinder can blow out an entire quart of M1 15W-50 around the washers on the cap bolt with improper installation.
OTOH, the cartridge filter install on an old MB diesel is idiot proof based upon my experience.
A cartridge filter located up top is easy to change with less time involved laying on your back under the car.
OTOH, some are pretty fiddly installations that will leak if not done exactly as required.
I can deal with either and do, but I really prefer spin-ons, since they are pretty well leak-proof, unless you have a rare base gasket failure.
I've had one in forty years, with a made in America K&N, so this is pretty uncommon.
OTOH, I've fiddled with the cap on my old BMW a couple of times to get a seal around the bolt that runs through the filter cap to the bottom of the housing.
You'd be surprised at how quickly a BMW four cylinder can blow out an entire quart of M1 15W-50 around the washers on the cap bolt with improper installation.
OTOH, the cartridge filter install on an old MB diesel is idiot proof based upon my experience.
Originally Posted By: Kira
Do engines with "bare element cartridge" filters have built in by-pass and/or anti drain-back functions?
The 2.2L Ecotec cartridge has a bypass valve built into the cap. No ADBV needed since the filter is vertical at the top of the engine
Do engines with "bare element cartridge" filters have built in by-pass and/or anti drain-back functions?
The 2.2L Ecotec cartridge has a bypass valve built into the cap. No ADBV needed since the filter is vertical at the top of the engine
You know, up top I said it's easier and I suppose on my BMW, that is the case.
On my VW I have to completely remove the #2 airbox and fresh air ducting. It does have a 24mm hex on it, so maybe it is still easier than a can.
And, as fdcg27 said above, some of the earlier cartridges were a right pain. On the M30 the cartridge is in a metal can that you have to install from the bottom, and the bolt to tighten it is up top and impossible to thread correctly without at least a dozen words you wouldn't want your mom to hear you say.
But! Every cartridge filter I have purchased from Hengst/Mann/Mahle has had perfect quality control. They all look the same going in, and coming out.
On my VW I have to completely remove the #2 airbox and fresh air ducting. It does have a 24mm hex on it, so maybe it is still easier than a can.
And, as fdcg27 said above, some of the earlier cartridges were a right pain. On the M30 the cartridge is in a metal can that you have to install from the bottom, and the bolt to tighten it is up top and impossible to thread correctly without at least a dozen words you wouldn't want your mom to hear you say.
But! Every cartridge filter I have purchased from Hengst/Mann/Mahle has had perfect quality control. They all look the same going in, and coming out.
MrQuackers
Site Donor 2024
Oh Kira
Originally Posted By: Pop_Rivit
Originally Posted By: slacktide_bitog
Those advantages are nice, but they cost more than the spin-on cans! Even though the cartridges don't come with an ADBV, bypass, a baseplate, or even the metal can itself, they charge you more for less!
Hogwash. I purchased a Wix canister for my STS for $6.90 last spring. The Wix spin on filter for the pickup was almost $2 more.
+1 to hogwash. I'll compare the Pronto cartridges on my Cruze for $1.82 to any filter posted here.
Originally Posted By: slacktide_bitog
Those advantages are nice, but they cost more than the spin-on cans! Even though the cartridges don't come with an ADBV, bypass, a baseplate, or even the metal can itself, they charge you more for less!
Hogwash. I purchased a Wix canister for my STS for $6.90 last spring. The Wix spin on filter for the pickup was almost $2 more.
+1 to hogwash. I'll compare the Pronto cartridges on my Cruze for $1.82 to any filter posted here.
I used to convert my Small Block Chevy's to cannister filter housings back in the day. Chevy switched to Spin-On around 1967 or so on truck motors, earlier for car motors. But you could add a conversion kit and go cannister on small-block and straight-6's made up to the 1980's. The filters were cheaper but as the older motors went to the wreckers over time, the spin-on became the least expensive option. It's all just a matter of demand what these things cost ... if you had to build spin-on filters as 1-off's they would be $80 each.
Maybe what my friend slck_bit meant to say (perhaps but no guarantee preempting Pop's deep end dive of typical righteous indignation) is, 'generally speaking' cartridge filters are still more expensive than the spin-on/canister type filters. Further, for what they are 'relatively speaking', the element alone, there's no reason that should be the case. However,economies of scale dictate the price. There are simply many more vehicles and more applications using spin on type than cartridge filters.
As for the advantages noted, cleaner 'in some cases' and filter inspection ease, that's true. However, many also have at least one or sometimes two O-rings that must be removed and new ones lubed and installed with the cartridge. And not all cartridge applications are on the top of the engine, (Toyota under vehicle) which are more advantageous to the inspection, and/or using filter twice. Or using a mightyvac to extract the oil with cartridge on engine top, and not touch drain bolt. Underneath engine cartridges not as beneficial in those situations.
It's also true that it's more expensive per unit for the vehicle manufactures to include the cartridge housing. One member here reported that it was GM iirc that had gone back to spin on from a cartridge in one engine application. I don't look for the spin on type filter to go away any time soon.
While cartridges have some benefits that some like or prefer, having had both, I still prefer the spin on type for ease of installation and removal, spin off, spin on. If using a cartridge though, I much prefer the engine top side type.
As for the advantages noted, cleaner 'in some cases' and filter inspection ease, that's true. However, many also have at least one or sometimes two O-rings that must be removed and new ones lubed and installed with the cartridge. And not all cartridge applications are on the top of the engine, (Toyota under vehicle) which are more advantageous to the inspection, and/or using filter twice. Or using a mightyvac to extract the oil with cartridge on engine top, and not touch drain bolt. Underneath engine cartridges not as beneficial in those situations.
It's also true that it's more expensive per unit for the vehicle manufactures to include the cartridge housing. One member here reported that it was GM iirc that had gone back to spin on from a cartridge in one engine application. I don't look for the spin on type filter to go away any time soon.
While cartridges have some benefits that some like or prefer, having had both, I still prefer the spin on type for ease of installation and removal, spin off, spin on. If using a cartridge though, I much prefer the engine top side type.
JHZR2
Staff member
On some cars it's implemented well. A topside install is clean, easy to access and allows for a simple process. Underside installations like vw and some Toyota are as messy as a spin on.
Originally Posted By: Sayjac
Maybe what my friend slck_bit meant to say (perhaps but no guarantee preempting Pop's deep end dive of typical righteous indignation) is, 'generally speaking' cartridge filters are still more expensive than the spin-on/canister type filters. Further, for what they are 'relatively speaking', the element alone, there's no reason that should be the case. However,economies of scale dictate the price. There are simply many more vehicles and more applications using spin on type than cartridge filters.
correct
Maybe what my friend slck_bit meant to say (perhaps but no guarantee preempting Pop's deep end dive of typical righteous indignation) is, 'generally speaking' cartridge filters are still more expensive than the spin-on/canister type filters. Further, for what they are 'relatively speaking', the element alone, there's no reason that should be the case. However,economies of scale dictate the price. There are simply many more vehicles and more applications using spin on type than cartridge filters.
correct
- Status