EcoTec Filter suggestions?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: cronk
The Amsoil filter for the Ecotec applications uses wire backed full synthetic media. I ran one in mine for 1 year and 11k miles and it held up well.
It doesn't filter as well as the Fram Ultra is the problem. And it costs more than an Ultra. Expensive, and not as good.
 
Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies
Originally Posted By: cronk
The Amsoil filter for the Ecotec applications uses wire backed full synthetic media. I ran one in mine for 1 year and 11k miles and it held up well.
It doesn't filter as well as the Fram Ultra is the problem. And it costs more than an Ultra. Expensive, and not as good.

Any proof of this?
 
Last edited:
I didn't know the Amsoil is 98.7%@20. Nice filter. Heavier construction. Of course in the real world things aren't as simple as the 4 hour heavy load test dust procedure. But if it makes people feel warm and fuzzy 98.7 is worse than 99 that is just fine. Probably extends one's life to be soothed.
laugh.gif
 
ISO 4548-12 is the only measurable way to compare oil filter efficiency. Anything beyond that is just speculation.
 
Originally Posted By: goodtimes
I didn't know the Amsoil is 98.7%@20. Nice filter. Heavier construction. Of course in the real world things aren't as simple as the 4 hour heavy load test dust procedure. But if it makes people feel warm and fuzzy 98.7 is worse than 99 that is just fine. Probably extends one's life to be soothed.
laugh.gif


You're missing the main point being made: Amsoil oil filters are expensive.
The main point is Amsoil filters are twice as expensive as Fram Ultra's, and you get nothing for that. In fact, Amsoils are slightly worse at filtering. Amsoil filters aren't "bad", they're just not a good deal. Ditto Royal Purple filters, similar comparison.
Also, why go out of your way to pay extra for an inferior oil filter when Ultras are available at walmart or amazon or rockauto ? EZ to get; the others aren't.
 
Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies
Originally Posted By: goodtimes
I didn't know the Amsoil is 98.7%@20. Nice filter. Heavier construction. Of course in the real world things aren't as simple as the 4 hour heavy load test dust procedure. But if it makes people feel warm and fuzzy 98.7 is worse than 99 that is just fine. Probably extends one's life to be soothed.
laugh.gif


You're missing the main point being made: Amsoil oil filters are expensive.
The main point is Amsoil filters are twice as expensive as Fram Ultra's, and you get nothing for that. In fact, Amsoils are slightly worse at filtering. Amsoil filters aren't "bad", they're just not a good deal. Ditto Royal Purple filters, similar comparison.
Also, why go out of your way to pay extra for an inferior oil filter when Ultras are available at walmart or amazon or rockauto ? EZ to get; the others aren't.


THIS
thumbsup2.gif
 
Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies
Originally Posted By: deven
Any proof of this?
Fram Ultra 4548-12 test results are better than Amsoil. Otherwise, they are similarly built.
http://www.fram.com/products/consumer-products/oil-filters/fram-ultra-synthetic-oil-filter/
https://www.amsoil.com/shop/by-product/filters-and-by-pass-systems/oil/amsoil-ea-oil-filters/

---- No emotional attachment to "purple" things, or other baseless brand loyalties here, JUST the facts.


Are there any third party tests? All the ISO results I have came across lends me to believe that the Amsoil is better.

Yes I am very attached to Barney but that is a topic between me and my shrink!

BTW...those two links just sends me to Fram and Amsoil websites to buy filters. No study there...
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies
Originally Posted By: goodtimes
I didn't know the Amsoil is 98.7%@20. Nice filter. Heavier construction. Of course in the real world things aren't as simple as the 4 hour heavy load test dust procedure. But if it makes people feel warm and fuzzy 98.7 is worse than 99 that is just fine. Probably extends one's life to be soothed.
laugh.gif


You're missing the main point being made: Amsoil oil filters are expensive.
The main point is Amsoil filters are twice as expensive as Fram Ultra's, and you get nothing for that. In fact, Amsoils are slightly worse at filtering. Amsoil filters aren't "bad", they're just not a good deal. Ditto Royal Purple filters, similar comparison.
Also, why go out of your way to pay extra for an inferior oil filter when Ultras are available at walmart or amazon or rockauto ? EZ to get; the others aren't.


I know one costs more, so didn't miss any points. Why does the Fram racing filter cost $14? Heavier baseplate, heavier everything, with no wire mesh or full synthetic. It's interesting Fram chose synthetic blend for high flow, yet the Ultra is supposed to be such high flow it's like invisible. So why didn't Fram just take Ultra guts, which are in an EG can, and make the racing filter around that wonder element?
laugh.gif
 
Originally Posted By: goodtimes
Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies
Originally Posted By: goodtimes
I didn't know the Amsoil is 98.7%@20. Nice filter. Heavier construction. Of course in the real world things aren't as simple as the 4 hour heavy load test dust procedure. But if it makes people feel warm and fuzzy 98.7 is worse than 99 that is just fine. Probably extends one's life to be soothed.
laugh.gif


You're missing the main point being made: Amsoil oil filters are expensive.
The main point is Amsoil filters are twice as expensive as Fram Ultra's, and you get nothing for that. In fact, Amsoils are slightly worse at filtering. Amsoil filters aren't "bad", they're just not a good deal. Ditto Royal Purple filters, similar comparison.
Also, why go out of your way to pay extra for an inferior oil filter when Ultras are available at walmart or amazon or rockauto ? EZ to get; the others aren't.


I know one costs more, so didn't miss any points. Why does the Fram racing filter cost $14? Heavier baseplate, heavier everything, with no wire mesh or full synthetic. It's interesting Fram chose synthetic blend for high flow, yet the Ultra is supposed to be such high flow it's like invisible. So why didn't Fram just take Ultra guts, which are in an EG can, and make the racing filter around that wonder element?
laugh.gif


Racing filters are not meant to run 20,000 miles.
They do not need 99.9% filtering.
Racing motors are not expected to last 200,000 miles.
They are torn down multiple times in their life and oil changes after every use.

Plus Fram does not make a racing filter for the EcoTec motor (since that is what this thread is about).
thumbsup2.gif
 
I've had an ecotec for 6.5 years and used many different oil filters. I have settle on two different filters.

The cheapest no-name made in china cellulose filter appears to work well for $3. or... I use a $10 fram ultra, stout construction, excellent filtering efficiency and large capacity for extended change intervals.

Logically the Fram Ultra used for an extended time makes the most sense.
 
Originally Posted By: deven
Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies
Originally Posted By: deven
Any proof of this?
Fram Ultra 4548-12 test results are better than Amsoil. Otherwise, they are similarly built.
http://www.fram.com/products/consumer-products/oil-filters/fram-ultra-synthetic-oil-filter/
https://www.amsoil.com/shop/by-product/filters-and-by-pass-systems/oil/amsoil-ea-oil-filters/

---- No emotional attachment to "purple" things, or other baseless brand loyalties here, JUST the facts.


Are there any third party tests? All the ISO results I have came across lends me to believe that the Amsoil is better.

Yes I am very attached to Barney but that is a topic between me and my shrink!

BTW...those two links just sends me to Fram and Amsoil websites to buy filters. No study there...


I read a little further and I see in the footnotes that Fram Ultra filters at 99% ABOVE 20 microns and Amsoil filters 98.7% AT 20 microns. I wonder if Fram filters 99% AT 20 microns too or not.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Olas
German Mann or Austrian Mahle are the best of the best.

Do you want your chassis or engine to live longer?


The Mahle cartridge for this application is made in India
 
Originally Posted By: deven
I read a little further and I see in the footnotes that Fram Ultra filters at 99% ABOVE 20 microns and Amsoil filters 98.7% AT 20 microns. I wonder if Fram filters 99% AT 20 microns too or not.


"At" and "greater than" are for all practical purposes the same thing when talking about filter efficiency. It's been hashed over many many times in this forum.
 
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: deven
I read a little further and I see in the footnotes that Fram Ultra filters at 99% ABOVE 20 microns and Amsoil filters 98.7% AT 20 microns. I wonder if Fram filters 99% AT 20 microns too or not.


"At" and "greater than" are for all practical purposes the same thing when talking about filter efficiency. It's been hashed over many many times in this forum.

It may have been hashed over here many times but to me AT and OVER mean something different. To me when they say OVER 20 microns I think 21 microns and up.
 
Originally Posted By: deven
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: deven
I read a little further and I see in the footnotes that Fram Ultra filters at 99% ABOVE 20 microns and Amsoil filters 98.7% AT 20 microns. I wonder if Fram filters 99% AT 20 microns too or not.

"At" and "greater than" are for all practical purposes the same thing when talking about filter efficiency. It's been hashed over many many times in this forum.

It may have been hashed over here many times but to me AT and OVER mean something different. To me when they say OVER 20 microns I think 21 microns and up.

20.000000001 is still technically/mathematically greater than 20.

In the efficiency vs particle size curve example below, it could be said that this filter is "82% @ 30u" or "82% for all particles greater than 30u". Think of the blue curve starting at 30.000000001 microns. Both would be correct statements in the oil filter efficiency world.

Also, ISO 4548-12 does not express efficiency measurements using "at X microns" ... they always express it as "> X microns". So the way Fram expresses the efficiency is actually more accurate and in-line with ISO 4548-12.

 
I believe that the terminology of "absolute" micron rating should be used by Fram, Wix, Champion Lab or any other filter manufacturers. I believe that means 98.7% at whatever micron rating a manufacturer has their filter tested for. Saying this I am just about one hundred percent sure that Jay mentioned that the Fram Ultra had an absolute filter rating at 20 microns.

"Nominal" efficiency is at 50% in a majority of cases. Another term that could be added to these discussions as well.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

RevRider
K&N 171 - Forum Article in Response To Their Oil Filter Performance For Harley’s
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
johnmyster
F
The New Tokyo Roki Subaru filter
2
Replies
25
Views
6K
ARCOgraphite
Blake1107
Oil Filter Going 2 OCI Thoughts
2 3 4
Replies
64
Views
4K
Mewbs
A
Best Filter - GM 3.6L LGX/LGZ???
2
Replies
20
Views
3K
Rogueman2016s
T
Oil Filter Media Efficiency Spec's
Replies
15
Views
4K
RagnarokCamaro
Back
Top