Fram Endurance = Amsoil EA - Confirmed

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Dec 20, 2020
Messages
298
In case you missed this. They’re 100% confirmed the same product.



I will say that one thing that gives me pause about these filters is that Fram may not have actually tested FE filters. I don’t understand how they can even get away with testing TG filters and applying the results to FE filters - when the two filters are totally different.
IMG_6922.jpeg
 
FE### is an endurance part number...so they have been tested.
Regarding the comment about equivalent TG, EG I don't know what that's about.

But yes, it is known that the filter is identical to Amsoil.
 
This is already being discussed.

Yeah, we know:

 
I searched “Fram Endurance AMSOIL” and nothing came us, sorry for the duplication.
 
In case you missed this. They’re 100% confirmed the same product.



I will say that one thing that gives me pause about these filters is that Fram may not have actually tested FE filters. I don’t understand how they can even get away with testing TG filters and applying the results to FE filters - when the two filters are totally different.
View attachment 163614

I too don't understand the reference to the TG and EG model lines.

What all three have in common is they are all rated at 99% @ 20 microns.
All three have different media and different life ratings . . . TG 15K, EG 20K and FE 25K.

Perhaps Fram has determined that for filtering efficiency only, results for the FEs, EGs and TGs are consistent and repeatable.

I'll let the experts chime in on this for the correct answer.
 
I too don't understand the reference to the TG and EG model lines.

What all three have in common is they are all rated at 99% @ 20 microns.
All three have different media and different life ratings . . . TG 15K, EG 20K and FE 25K.

Perhaps Fram has determined that for filtering efficiency only, results for the FEs, EGs and TGs are consistent and repeatable.

I'll let the experts chime in on this for the correct answer.
I don't think there is anyone here except for a Fram rep that could answer these questions with confidence.

Fram is playing a bit of word toss-up here.
 
I will say that one thing that gives me pause about these filters is that Fram may not have actually tested FE filters. I don’t understand how they can even get away with testing TG filters and applying the results to FE filters - when the two filters are totally different.
View attachment 163614
They reference the 3 sized Endurance (FE) models that were tested per ISO 4548-12 right in the footnotes of what you screen shot. Fram has a full ISO test lab.
 
Regarding the comment about equivalent TG, EG I don't know what that's about.
That's Fram website technical content manager being lazy and unclear. Each Fram filter line (PH, TG, XG, FS, FE) should all have their own ISO 4548-12 testing. Obviously, Fram can't base the XG efficiency on testing the PH, as an example.
 
Last edited:
I don't think there is anyone here except for a Fram rep that could answer these questions with confidence.

Fram is playing a bit of word toss-up here.
We went through that confusion with Motorking (Fram Rep) when he was active here. There are old threads about it somewhere.

He tried to get Fram to clarify those efficiency statements, and some were made more clear, but others remain erroneously referencing the other lines. Each filter line should only reference that specific filter line. It's simple, but Fram is lazy to make them clear.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top