Triple_Se7en
$50 Site Donor 2024
Anyone....
Are any of these new AAP Fram filters louvers?
Are any of these new AAP Fram filters louvers?
Fram Titanium 20k mile oil filters at AAP....
- Thread starter bbhero
- Start date
Synthetic blend could be a writers interpretation error. Have to see it. There is no blend yet needing a heavy mesh screen, and the numbers and filters tested look like copied from the ultra. Those are clues. My guess is when the writer saw synthetic two ply media, they decided to say synthetic blend. Which it is if it is two different synthetic layers, but not what is normally known as a blend of cellulose and synthetic.
At $14.99 they'll be collecting dust on the shelf.
IMO not good.
Bet it has higher profit built in by making inferior filter sound better...
Trico under bid Puro, they needed new filters to do it... whatever they did is not good for consumer I'd wager.
Bet it has higher profit built in by making inferior filter sound better...
Trico under bid Puro, they needed new filters to do it... whatever they did is not good for consumer I'd wager.
Originally Posted by NormanBuntz
At $14.99 they'll be collecting dust on the shelf.
They won't sell them, maybe as part of an oil change special. Overpriced even with online codes.
At $14.99 they'll be collecting dust on the shelf.
They won't sell them, maybe as part of an oil change special. Overpriced even with online codes.
Hmmm...what's this all about? More marketing hooplah?
Seems recently BITOG'rs are heading toward more frequent OCI's due to trends in engine design (GDI, HPCR, etc.). Seems like the wrong marketing direction for the times?
Seems recently BITOG'rs are heading toward more frequent OCI's due to trends in engine design (GDI, HPCR, etc.). Seems like the wrong marketing direction for the times?
Originally Posted by Triple_Se7en
Anyone....
Are any of these new AAP Fram filters louvers?
Simply curious
Why is the internal flow control method a factor when its based on the overall filter path design?
Anyone....
Are any of these new AAP Fram filters louvers?
Simply curious
Why is the internal flow control method a factor when its based on the overall filter path design?
Triple_Se7en
$50 Site Donor 2024
Originally Posted by ABN_CBT_ENGR
Originally Posted by Triple_Se7en
Anyone....
Are any of these new AAP Fram filters louvers?
Simply curious
Why is the internal flow control method a factor when its based on the overall filter path design?
I've seen too many crooked or half-blocked louver photos at this place, to have more-than-enough reason to avoid them. So I would hate to see Fram become louverish too.
The small eyelid louvers annoy me. The big round holes are OK. I';d use one of those in a pinch. Lately I've been using AC Delco Ecore again. Want to try Fram Ultra next
Originally Posted by Triple_Se7en
Anyone....
Are any of these new AAP Fram filters louvers?
Simply curious
Why is the internal flow control method a factor when its based on the overall filter path design?
I've seen too many crooked or half-blocked louver photos at this place, to have more-than-enough reason to avoid them. So I would hate to see Fram become louverish too.
The small eyelid louvers annoy me. The big round holes are OK. I';d use one of those in a pinch. Lately I've been using AC Delco Ecore again. Want to try Fram Ultra next
Last edited:
Originally Posted by Triple_Se7en
I've seen too many crooked or half-blocked louver photos at this place, to have more-than-enough reason to avoid them. So I would hate to see Fram become louverish too.
The small eyelid louvers annoy me. The big round holes are OK. I';d use one of those in a pinch. Lately I've been using AC Delco Ecore again. Want to try Fram Ultra next
I generally gloss over the filter discussions here over the years ( other that the autopsy ones- they are cool) but maybe should have read more.
I'm not sure what crooked or half blocked means colloquially (angled say on a Z axis relative to flow and a semi closed[metering] as opposed to fully open?
But in a nominal filtration design with all other things being equal- both of those are superior components of a well designed filtration path ( based on the filtration strategy ) than the traditional orifice (hole) would ever be ( or could be)
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder but if high end filtration and retention over time is desired (with flow being equal in terms of delta) in the same space or area, the louver design is superior by orders of magnitude.
I've seen too many crooked or half-blocked louver photos at this place, to have more-than-enough reason to avoid them. So I would hate to see Fram become louverish too.
The small eyelid louvers annoy me. The big round holes are OK. I';d use one of those in a pinch. Lately I've been using AC Delco Ecore again. Want to try Fram Ultra next
I generally gloss over the filter discussions here over the years ( other that the autopsy ones- they are cool) but maybe should have read more.
I'm not sure what crooked or half blocked means colloquially (angled say on a Z axis relative to flow and a semi closed[metering] as opposed to fully open?
But in a nominal filtration design with all other things being equal- both of those are superior components of a well designed filtration path ( based on the filtration strategy ) than the traditional orifice (hole) would ever be ( or could be)
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder but if high end filtration and retention over time is desired (with flow being equal in terms of delta) in the same space or area, the louver design is superior by orders of magnitude.
Originally Posted by Farnsworth
The louver design is fine it's the manufacturing of the louvers that is spotty. Grinding out thousands of center tubes per day means the machines have to be closely maintained. But that costs more $$.
Not sure I follow you- please clarify
These things are stamped ( whether flat or roll stamped with forming dies aside)- there is no grinding or any need to because these are flow controls, not precision orifices.
They will be virtually identical throughout the run.
Maybe I am not seeing what the issue or point is
The louver design is fine it's the manufacturing of the louvers that is spotty. Grinding out thousands of center tubes per day means the machines have to be closely maintained. But that costs more $$.
Not sure I follow you- please clarify
These things are stamped ( whether flat or roll stamped with forming dies aside)- there is no grinding or any need to because these are flow controls, not precision orifices.
They will be virtually identical throughout the run.
Maybe I am not seeing what the issue or point is
Originally Posted by NormanBuntz
At $14.99 they'll be collecting dust on the shelf.
At $14.99 they'll be collecting dust on the shelf.
Originally Posted by Farnsworth
The louver design is fine it's the manufacturing of the louvers that is spotty. Grinding out thousands of center tubes per day means the machines have to be closely maintained. But that costs more $$.
Hastings/Baldwin is the only company that knows how to make louvers properly. They use a different design, though
Here is an example of a Hastings slotted center tube:
![[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]](https://i.postimg.cc/3Y6xPFXH/IMG-5367.jpg "[Linked Image from i.postimg.cc]")
The louver design is fine it's the manufacturing of the louvers that is spotty. Grinding out thousands of center tubes per day means the machines have to be closely maintained. But that costs more $$.
Hastings/Baldwin is the only company that knows how to make louvers properly. They use a different design, though
Here is an example of a Hastings slotted center tube:
$14.99 so even i I use a 25% off coupon that they always have or AAP, I can still get an Ultra from Walmart or $9 and Rural King has had them on sale or $8 or the last couple months, which is quite a good deal cheaper than $11.25.
Last edited:
Originally Posted by ABN_CBT_ENGR
Originally Posted by Triple_Se7en
I've seen too many crooked or half-blocked louver photos at this place, to have more-than-enough reason to avoid them. So I would hate to see Fram become louverish too.
The small eyelid louvers annoy me. The big round holes are OK. I';d use one of those in a pinch. Lately I've been using AC Delco Ecore again. Want to try Fram Ultra next
I generally gloss over the filter discussions here over the years ( other that the autopsy ones- they are cool) but maybe should have read more.
I'm not sure what crooked or half blocked means colloquially (angled say on a Z axis relative to flow and a semi closed[metering] as opposed to fully open?
But in a nominal filtration design with all other things being equal- both of those are superior components of a well designed filtration path ( based on the filtration strategy ) than the traditional orifice (hole) would ever be ( or could be)
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder but if high end filtration and retention over time is desired (with flow being equal in terms of delta) in the same space or area, the louver design is superior by orders of magnitude.
He's talking about this. Not all louvers are created equal - louvers are only "superior" if formed correctly.
Which filter would you use between the two shown below? People just need to inspect the center tube for correctly opened up louvers before buying a filter with louvers.
Bad Louvers
![[Linked Image]](https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/attachments/usergals/2020/06/full-37311-45257-bad_louvers.jpg "[Linked Image]")
Good Louvers
![[Linked Image]](https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/attachments/usergals/2020/06/full-37311-45258-good_louvers.jpg "[Linked Image]")
Originally Posted by Triple_Se7en
I've seen too many crooked or half-blocked louver photos at this place, to have more-than-enough reason to avoid them. So I would hate to see Fram become louverish too.
The small eyelid louvers annoy me. The big round holes are OK. I';d use one of those in a pinch. Lately I've been using AC Delco Ecore again. Want to try Fram Ultra next
I generally gloss over the filter discussions here over the years ( other that the autopsy ones- they are cool) but maybe should have read more.
I'm not sure what crooked or half blocked means colloquially (angled say on a Z axis relative to flow and a semi closed[metering] as opposed to fully open?
But in a nominal filtration design with all other things being equal- both of those are superior components of a well designed filtration path ( based on the filtration strategy ) than the traditional orifice (hole) would ever be ( or could be)
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder but if high end filtration and retention over time is desired (with flow being equal in terms of delta) in the same space or area, the louver design is superior by orders of magnitude.
He's talking about this. Not all louvers are created equal - louvers are only "superior" if formed correctly.
Which filter would you use between the two shown below? People just need to inspect the center tube for correctly opened up louvers before buying a filter with louvers.
Bad Louvers
Good Louvers
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
He's talking about this. Not all louvers are created equal - louvers are only "superior" if formed correctly.
Which filter would you use between the two shown below? People just need to inspect the center tube for correctly opened up louvers before buying a filter with louvers.
Well, Not the language or description I usually associate with a manufacturing defect but to each his own.
It does raise the question on whether that is a design restriction or a bad stamp that got all the way through every QA/QC process on the line but they do happen.
( which if one made it through- it probably had lots of company)
He's talking about this. Not all louvers are created equal - louvers are only "superior" if formed correctly.
Which filter would you use between the two shown below? People just need to inspect the center tube for correctly opened up louvers before buying a filter with louvers.
Well, Not the language or description I usually associate with a manufacturing defect but to each his own.
It does raise the question on whether that is a design restriction or a bad stamp that got all the way through every QA/QC process on the line but they do happen.
( which if one made it through- it probably had lots of company)
Both of the types of louvers direct flow in two directions, not just one towards the outlet pipe So what is the flow direction advantage really. I like holes where the metal is removed rather than cut and stretched open. The reason for louvers may well be for speed of manufacturing and not dealing with hole slugs and if some wayward slugs are not removed etc.
Originally Posted by Farnsworth
Both of the types of louvers direct flow in two directions, not just one towards the outlet pipe So what is the flow direction advantage really. I like holes where the metal is removed rather than cut and stretched open. The reason for louvers may well be for speed of manufacturing and not dealing with hole slugs and if some wayward slugs are not removed etc.
Without knowing the actual design properties of the media, entrance and exit velocities and the CFD model, I can give you an accurate "theoretical" answer based on various filtering models based on variants of the Darcy equation.
The 2 directions is "counter-current" flow and its normally used to create a cyclone effect ( google hydro cyclone and read up) which results in heavier particles dropping as well as a back pressure.
The louver concept is used a lot in fans ( forced and induced draft) because of the properties of round versus square ducting and the various differentials. It does the same thing in filtration- creates a fluid denser phase on one side allowing velocity to equalize volume distribution.
What this would do in conjunction with the media is decouple the velocity of the fluid with the velocity of the particles allowing them to be better captured.
The louver would also be superior in dispersal over orifices in directed flow which would aid in retention and reduce blow through.
"theoretically" that's a generic flow path for CFD purposes with an almost infinite number of variations in design and construction based on what the components are and the desired outcome is.
Both of the types of louvers direct flow in two directions, not just one towards the outlet pipe So what is the flow direction advantage really. I like holes where the metal is removed rather than cut and stretched open. The reason for louvers may well be for speed of manufacturing and not dealing with hole slugs and if some wayward slugs are not removed etc.
Without knowing the actual design properties of the media, entrance and exit velocities and the CFD model, I can give you an accurate "theoretical" answer based on various filtering models based on variants of the Darcy equation.
The 2 directions is "counter-current" flow and its normally used to create a cyclone effect ( google hydro cyclone and read up) which results in heavier particles dropping as well as a back pressure.
The louver concept is used a lot in fans ( forced and induced draft) because of the properties of round versus square ducting and the various differentials. It does the same thing in filtration- creates a fluid denser phase on one side allowing velocity to equalize volume distribution.
What this would do in conjunction with the media is decouple the velocity of the fluid with the velocity of the particles allowing them to be better captured.
The louver would also be superior in dispersal over orifices in directed flow which would aid in retention and reduce blow through.
"theoretically" that's a generic flow path for CFD purposes with an almost infinite number of variations in design and construction based on what the components are and the desired outcome is.
Originally Posted by ABN_CBT_ENGR
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
He's talking about this. Not all louvers are created equal - louvers are only "superior" if formed correctly.
Which filter would you use between the two shown below? People just need to inspect the center tube for correctly opened up louvers before buying a filter with louvers.
Well, Not the language or description I usually associate with a manufacturing defect but to each his own.
It does raise the question on whether that is a design restriction or a bad stamp that got all the way through every QA/QC process on the line but they do happen.
( which if one made it through- it probably had lots of company)
It's just bad manufacturing - simply a "bad stamp" job. There is no planned "design restriction" in those misinformed louvers. Why would any filter designer want more flow restriction in the center tube when minimal flow restriction is the goal. Think about hat happens when flow restriction in the center tube (or media for that matter) is too much.
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
He's talking about this. Not all louvers are created equal - louvers are only "superior" if formed correctly.
Which filter would you use between the two shown below? People just need to inspect the center tube for correctly opened up louvers before buying a filter with louvers.
Well, Not the language or description I usually associate with a manufacturing defect but to each his own.
It does raise the question on whether that is a design restriction or a bad stamp that got all the way through every QA/QC process on the line but they do happen.
( which if one made it through- it probably had lots of company)
It's just bad manufacturing - simply a "bad stamp" job. There is no planned "design restriction" in those misinformed louvers. Why would any filter designer want more flow restriction in the center tube when minimal flow restriction is the goal. Think about hat happens when flow restriction in the center tube (or media for that matter) is too much.
![[Linked Image]](https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/attachments/usergals/2020/06/full-37311-45260-purolator_boss_bad_louvers.jpg "[Linked Image]")
![[Linked Image]](https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/attachments/usergals/2020/06/full-37311-45261-really_bad_louvers_closed.jpg "[Linked Image]")
Similar threads
