Fram Toughguard Failure (well, almost..)
- Thread starter Oversteer
- Start date
- Status
dnewton3
Staff member
May have been poor construction and not a field failure. Or not. We don't know.
Happens to any brand. I consider it rare, but possible.
Excellent reason to stick to the filter maker's recommended application. Had this failure actually resulted in damage, but was used where it was not spec'd, then the onslaught of tit-for-tat legal debates would be rampant.
Happens to any brand. I consider it rare, but possible.
Excellent reason to stick to the filter maker's recommended application. Had this failure actually resulted in damage, but was used where it was not spec'd, then the onslaught of tit-for-tat legal debates would be rampant.
Hey guys, correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the threaded end plate the new style that came out within the last year or year and a half??
- Joined
- Dec 30, 2006
- Messages
- 29,558
Originally Posted By: Oversteer
That screen seems like a good feature though, it trapped some metal shavings that could have gone through the bypass valve.
What exactly are all those black chunks on the metal screen? Chunks of sludge? If that`s the case,that filter must`ve been on there a VERY long time.
That screen seems like a good feature though, it trapped some metal shavings that could have gone through the bypass valve.
What exactly are all those black chunks on the metal screen? Chunks of sludge? If that`s the case,that filter must`ve been on there a VERY long time.
I feel sorry for the motor that filter was attached to. It obviously gets no love...
(No, my comment is not FRAM-bashing...I mean that motor is not properly maintained.)
(No, my comment is not FRAM-bashing...I mean that motor is not properly maintained.)
Last edited:
yep I bet that motor looks terrible inside. I just don't get it, changing oil is the cheapest thing u can do for a vehicle. compared to motors, oil and filters are cheap. you gain nothing running oil and filters way past due.
Amazing that the media seems to have held up to that kind of abuse-I don't see and tears anywhere. Looks like some short changes with PYB or other high detergent oil is needed, looks pretty sludged.
Rather than the age of the Tough Guard filter, it would appear vehicle maintenance, oci/fci was more the issue here. Tough Guard's with the screen over bypass are seen on bitog dissections dated to 09. So screen likely discontinued ~4-5 years ago. Wondering what under the valve cover pics would look like?
Originally Posted By: sayjac
Rather than the age of the Tough Guard filter, it would appear vehicle maintenance, oci/fci was more the issue here.
Of course it is. However the age of the filter may be an indicator of the OCI/FCI if this was just removed. FWIW I believe you can see the date code in one of his pictures.
Originally Posted By: sayjac
Tough Guard's with the screen over bypass are seen on bitog dissections dated to 09. So screen likely discontinued ~4-5 years ago. Wondering what under the valve cover pics would look like?
I'm guessing under valve cover pictures would look bad... is this one of the Toyota engines with a reputation for being a "known sludger"?
Rather than the age of the Tough Guard filter, it would appear vehicle maintenance, oci/fci was more the issue here.
Of course it is. However the age of the filter may be an indicator of the OCI/FCI if this was just removed. FWIW I believe you can see the date code in one of his pictures.
Originally Posted By: sayjac
Tough Guard's with the screen over bypass are seen on bitog dissections dated to 09. So screen likely discontinued ~4-5 years ago. Wondering what under the valve cover pics would look like?
I'm guessing under valve cover pictures would look bad... is this one of the Toyota engines with a reputation for being a "known sludger"?
Originally Posted By: DuckRyder
Originally Posted By: sayjac
Rather than the age of the Tough Guard filter, it would appear vehicle maintenance, oci/fci was more the issue here.
.....However the age of the filter may be an indicator of the OCI/FCI if this was just removed....
Perhaps it does, but unlike some I'm not willing to make that great a leap without more specific oci/fci information.
And properly stored, no reason for me to conclude here the TG wouldn't have been in useable condition when installed. But I agree, based on the filter's appearance the engine/valve train likely not pretty.
Originally Posted By: sayjac
Rather than the age of the Tough Guard filter, it would appear vehicle maintenance, oci/fci was more the issue here.
.....However the age of the filter may be an indicator of the OCI/FCI if this was just removed....
Perhaps it does, but unlike some I'm not willing to make that great a leap without more specific oci/fci information.
And properly stored, no reason for me to conclude here the TG wouldn't have been in useable condition when installed. But I agree, based on the filter's appearance the engine/valve train likely not pretty.
LOL - OK.
Based on the information provided, I think my conclusion is reasonable. I suppose I could make the leap and conclude that because the manufacture date as quoted appears to be dated to ~07 (most likely) that said TG had been in service that long or close. Instead, I posited that based on the TG's appearance it was left in service too long, and more a maintenance issue than a filter issue. With more confirming information I could go closer to the initial supposition.
It's ok if you don't agree with my conservative conclusion, that's why it's a discussion board. It's all good.
It's ok if you don't agree with my conservative conclusion, that's why it's a discussion board. It's all good.
Originally Posted By: sayjac
...
It's ok if you don't agree with my conservative conclusion, that's why it's a discussion board. It's all good.
I actually do agree, that is the part of my quote you left out.
I agree it would be nice to know what the O/FCI was but since it appears we never will we have to use other evidence. The age of the filter from manufacture is but one part of the evidence but it is evidence none the less...
I think it is a reasonable conclusion that whatever it (the FCI) was it was too long for that engine/usage/oil/etc... at least that is my opinion...
...
It's ok if you don't agree with my conservative conclusion, that's why it's a discussion board. It's all good.
I actually do agree, that is the part of my quote you left out.
I agree it would be nice to know what the O/FCI was but since it appears we never will we have to use other evidence. The age of the filter from manufacture is but one part of the evidence but it is evidence none the less...
I think it is a reasonable conclusion that whatever it (the FCI) was it was too long for that engine/usage/oil/etc... at least that is my opinion...
I guess the "LOL-OK" response to my post threw me off then, ie., interpreted as sarcasm. And the portion I quoted (with...to indicate more to quote)) was that portion I had a difference of opinion. The filter's production date 'may' indicate it was used longer than recommended, or not at all. To me the TG's appearance is the primary indicator for my conservative conclusion. Also why I said, mostly rhetorically, wonder what the valve train looks like.
And much like the unknown fci, the OP's Toyota being a sludger is also unknown and that too is unlikely to change. However, many more Toyota's are not known sludgers than those that are. Again using the TG's appearance as primary basis, it being used longer than recommended or optimal is an easier assumption for me, than an unknown engine.
And for comparison of conclusions on maintenance vs defect, if dnewton's post is noted/read, his opinion is more open to either option than my post.
And much like the unknown fci, the OP's Toyota being a sludger is also unknown and that too is unlikely to change. However, many more Toyota's are not known sludgers than those that are. Again using the TG's appearance as primary basis, it being used longer than recommended or optimal is an easier assumption for me, than an unknown engine.
And for comparison of conclusions on maintenance vs defect, if dnewton's post is noted/read, his opinion is more open to either option than my post.
I am seeing a lot of replies about had this filter not have stayed in service for a very long time the ADBV might not have suffered this problem.
What if a TG filter made this year (2014) had the same problem? What then would you contribute the problem to?
Just sayin........
What if a TG filter made this year (2014) had the same problem? What then would you contribute the problem to?
Just sayin........
Originally Posted By: BlueOvalFitter
I am seeing a lot of replies about had this filter not have stayed in service for a very long time the ADBV might not have suffered this problem.
What if a TG filter made this year (2014) had the same problem? What then would you contribute the problem to?
Just sayin........
As long as it was used in the proper application that would of course be a manufacturing defect.
You missed your chance Blue, here is a great example of what can happen if you do run a filter too long, you coulda plastered ONE FILTER ONE OCI all over the place!
Not that you've ever done that or anything.
I am seeing a lot of replies about had this filter not have stayed in service for a very long time the ADBV might not have suffered this problem.
What if a TG filter made this year (2014) had the same problem? What then would you contribute the problem to?
Just sayin........
As long as it was used in the proper application that would of course be a manufacturing defect.
You missed your chance Blue, here is a great example of what can happen if you do run a filter too long, you coulda plastered ONE FILTER ONE OCI all over the place!
Originally Posted By: KCJeep
Originally Posted By: BlueOvalFitter
I am seeing a lot of replies about had this filter not have stayed in service for a very long time the ADBV might not have suffered this problem.
What if a TG filter made this year (2014) had the same problem? What then would you contribute the problem to?
Just sayin........
As long as it was used in the proper application that would of course be a manufacturing defect.
You missed your chance Blue, here is a great example of what can happen if you do run a filter too long, you coulda plastered ONE FILTER ONE OCI all over the place!
Not that you've ever done that or anything.
I am so happy that you finally acknowledge my quote.
Originally Posted By: BlueOvalFitter
I am seeing a lot of replies about had this filter not have stayed in service for a very long time the ADBV might not have suffered this problem.
What if a TG filter made this year (2014) had the same problem? What then would you contribute the problem to?
Just sayin........
As long as it was used in the proper application that would of course be a manufacturing defect.
You missed your chance Blue, here is a great example of what can happen if you do run a filter too long, you coulda plastered ONE FILTER ONE OCI all over the place!
I am so happy that you finally acknowledge my quote.
I wouldn't be blaming the TG for this one, the oil looks like molasses.
- Status
