deal or no deal

Status
Not open for further replies.
quote:

The TP filters with very few exceptions, are too small for truck diesels. They need changed every 1000 miles or so.

Not to be picky, but that's a bit of an exaggeration - I normally go 2500 miles on the TP in my Frantz, and ALWAYS get excellent analysis #'s.

In this same forum area is my thread on results with the Frantz, Delo and a Fleetguard full flow installed - my thread includes a particle count which was pretty impressive - at least to me.

My truck sees all the normal around-town use, some freeway miles, and LOTS of RV towing miles - so should be reasonably typical as a comparison.
 
Yeah understand, that's why I said "or so." I've heard alot of reports that people are changing them more frequently on the diesels. Probably just overzealous maintenance obsessives. I've run the Motorguards on my V8s (one big block) 5k w/ no issues, so I thiink around 3k on the diesels should work too.

But it is certainly a limiting factor the prospective user needs to consider in terms of both mileage and maintenance effort.
 
I got a call from a retired Boeing engineer that helped get Frantz and Motor Guard started. He told me that TP filters have been around since the 20s. They were bought out once by a major oil company and again by a major auto maker. They have always been a threat to the oil change industry. When I started using the Frantz oil cleaner there was a major oil company telling their station managers to tell their customers they were no good. When people started asking about the Frantz they decided that it would be better to back off.
The only filters that can filter as good as the TP filters are the TP filter copies. These days you have TP in a sock or other cartridge. I am sending the large filters to a couple of trucking companies. Those are the guys that really benefit from clean oil. You can neglect a car and it will still last longer than most people keep them. The big filters are in a class by themselves. They were big and now they they have been increased in size; over four gallons.

Ralph
burnout.gif
 
quote:

Originally posted by acewiza:
Yeah understand, that's why I said "or so." I've heard alot of reports that people are changing them more frequently on the diesels. Probably just overzealous maintenance obsessives. I've run the Motorguards on my V8s (one big block) 5k w/ no issues, so I thiink around 3k on the diesels should work too.

But it is certainly a limiting factor the prospective user needs to consider in terms of both mileage and maintenance effort.


The above quote and philosophy is worth discussion.

It will always be true that "one size rarely fits all" - and trying to convince a Ford fan to buy a Dodge is nearly impossible - regardless of how many facts or statistics are provided to influence the final choice.

Bypass filters will undoubtedly follow the same pattern.

Still, in a product or device that has the clear and intended goal of cleaning our oil the absolutely best we can, that choice DOES seem a bit more clearly defined!

Sure, there are tradeoffs in price, ease of maintenance, and installation - but how MUCH will we allow or accept those tradeoffs to erode the basic goal of cleanest oil - and if we are willing to accept significantly reduced performance to "gain" some degree of convenience, maybe we'd be better off to simply avoid bypass filtering altogether?

Is it wiser to choose a spin-on type filter because it's easier to change, and lasts longer than another type - even if the spin-on can easily be shown to do a poorer job at what we bought it for - CLEANING the oil?

After all, it has been seen MANY times that these engines WITHOUT anything other than routine maintenance are capable of lifespans FAR greater than most of us will ever keep them!

Personally, I chose to install bypass filtering on my truck because, at least during the time *I* own the truck, I want the cleanest oil possible circulating thru it. In earlier years, Frantz TP filters were about the ONLY product available for that purpose.

Now, we have a fairly broad selection - with new ones hitting the scene regularly - and some like Amsoil developing what they claim are the best filter media available.

So which one is REALLY the best? It's certainly true that test results will vary to a degree, depending upon individual mods and truck applications - but at the same time, oil filtration isn't rocket science, and the ability of one filter's performance vs another isn't really likely to be all that hard to determine.

We'll argue the quality and performance of one oil vs another REPEATEDLY in these forums - and usually without the faintest shred of supporting individual testing or analysis to support our personal decision - resorting instead, to "warm and fuzzy feelings", or some claims made by the folks SELLING the oil.

In the case of bypass filters, direct comparison isn't all that hard to obtain - it's as easy as taking a sample and having it analyzed. Then, when results are in, only the buyer/user can decide whether the ease of a throw-away spin-on outweighs the efficiency of a unit that requires the few added minutes to physically remove the old element and install a new one into it's housing . Or, perhaps only scrape out the crusted residue accumulated in a specific number of months or miles.

But unless the bottom line goal is cleanest oil possible, at a relatively comparable price and reasonable effort, why even bother?
 
Just about everything in life is a compromise of some sort. The tradeoffs we accept are personal choices that reflect our goals or values, be they cleanest possible oil or longest lasting deodorant.

This limb I'm out on is starting to bend pretty bad. Please don't hurt me Pablo!!!
 
quote:

We'll argue the quality and performance of one oil vs another REPEATEDLY in these forums - and usually without the faintest shred of supporting individual testing or analysis to support our personal decision - resorting instead, to "warm and fuzzy feelings", or some claims made by the folks SELLING the oil.

In the case of bypass filters, direct comparison isn't all that hard to obtain - it's as easy as taking a sample and having it analyzed. Then, when results are in, only the buyer/user can decide whether the ease of a throw-away spin-on outweighs the efficiency of a unit that requires the few added minutes to physically remove the old element and install a new one into it's housing . Or, perhaps only scrape out the crusted residue accumulated in a specific number of months or miles.

But unless the bottom line goal is cleanest oil possible, at a relatively comparable price and reasonable effort, why even bother?

Gary ..I don't quite understand your anxiety here. There are few arguments of what filters the finest ..at least at any reasonable cost. Can you link me to any post that disputes the filtering ability of tp? Some say that they don't like it. Some love the novelty of it ..but I doubt that anyone disputes it's cost/benefit sensibility.

The ONLY disputes that I've obseved have been over service intervals. I don't use tp. I don't do 3000 mile oil changes ..I don't do "frequent" anything. My whole personality is to "set it and forget it".

So given that personality characteristic ..am I going to use tp? No. Suppose I want to reach deeper levels of filtration then a ff under those requirements? What will I use?

So ...can you say that filtering to (at least the former standard) 3um absolute is WORTHLESS and if you can't go submicronic you might as well pack it up and go home because you're obviously not committed in the proper "spirituality" required to save your engine
confused.gif


I really don't quite get your slant on this.
confused.gif



btw- you're not the first to do PC with UOA with a bypass filter. The reason most don't is because they know what they can expect. A lot fewer particles. Oddly, it doesn't seem to radically effect UOA when compared to like service with like engines.
dunno.gif
 
quote:

I really don't quite get your slant on this.

My "slant" is actually pretty simple - IF a guy becomes convinced of the value of bypass filtering as a means to extending the life of his engine, why - all things being relatively equal - go halfway, or settle for half the cure?

There are various compromises between brands and types - the Frantz uses a separate, manually inserted cartridge - but delivers what quite possibly is the best overall filtering of competing units - or perhaps threads like this will prove otherwise.

My suspicion is that the spin-in type units will be easier serviced, but substantailly lower in efficiency - the price of convenience.

The spinner types, relying on the weight of contaminents, have been shown to not provide equal filtration of all types of contaminents.

So, if a guy chooses ease over efficiency right from the start, why bother at all?
dunno.gif


We all have our individual goals and priorities - but my own have always been either do it all the way and right - or not at all - no half measures.
grin.gif
 
Well, Gary ..you're not quite there yet. You just contact Schultz at PALL and he has any number of filters that will make TP look like a sieve. Now if you don't mind paying $300 a pop ..and, perhaps, change them every week ...or have them be 4ft long.

..but you did say that you wanted to do it right
dunno.gif


grin.gif


But ..there are other factors than just "ease over effiency". Suppose you do 25k a year? 8 quart for a 4 quart sump? Suppose you normally do 18k a year with one OCI? The principle sales pitch of tp isn't lack of engine wear ...it's clean oil. If you're just doing your normal 3k/3m and exchange it for 3k tp changes ..fine. If you're just using 6 quart over 18k and would be doing so anyway ..you just bought yourself a filter ..and that's it
dunno.gif


[ July 04, 2006, 11:20 PM: Message edited by: Gary Allan ]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top