Honda OEM filters

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jay, since you decided to post in this thread (a good thing), could you answer my question that I posted earlier, about the multipass test:

Your comment brings up something I have wondered at--at what point in the OCI are these multipass tests simulating? Does multipass mean "five trips through the filter, one right after another" or does it mean "we took measurements at separate points in time, the last one a hundred hours after the first time"?


Originally Posted By: Motorking
You just described multi pass efficiency. Honda OE filters made by FRAM are 65% @ 20 microns, they have 15 gram capacity and flow 10gpm
 
Last edited:
The Multi pass test occurs over a time based test protocol. It is a really a true test of how much dirt the filter removes in particle sizes 5- whatever size becomes absolute or 98.7%. You can get a copy of the full 4548-12 ISO test at the filter manufacturers council website. I cannot publish it on here bc I do not own it. FMC.org
 
Originally Posted By: Motorking
You just described multi pass efficiency. Honda OE filters made by FRAM are 65% @ 20 microns, they have 15 gram capacity and flow 10gpm


So, if the specified efficiency is 20 microns @ 65%, in the testing protocol, how many passes does it take to capture the 65%? It seems logical that the filter would eventually capture all particles if no more were introduced.
 
How many passes, and at what intervals in the OCI?

I searched for the fmc, but didn't see a site for them (fmc.org didn't work), and couldn't find an already published spec for the 4548-12:2017 test.
 
Originally Posted By: Bottom_Feeder
Originally Posted By: jhass
65%!! thats crazy...how is that even safe to put on your car? so it lets 35% of dirt and particles by?

Well it depends on the particle size of course. 20 microns is generally the standard size we go by. I can't imagine they are only 65% and 50% efficient at 20 microns. That's a gravel screen.


Not really...
the old VW type 1 engines used (literally) a "screen door screen" for an "oil filter".
Sand could go through WITH EASE!

I think it boils down to this:
1) Even a filter that's 50% at 20-25 microns will get the car to 150,000 with no issues...
that's really all the car companies car about... and IT IS "ENOUGH".
They would prefer you buy another before you get that far, anyway

2) Better filters exist. They won't help you get to 150,000 any easier.
They might help make your car get to 300,000 or more, though.
 
Originally Posted By: Danh
Originally Posted By: Motorking
You just described multi pass efficiency. Honda OE filters made by FRAM are 65% @ 20 microns, they have 15 gram capacity and flow 10gpm


So, if the specified efficiency is 20 microns @ 65%, in the testing protocol, how many passes does it take to capture the 65%? It seems logical that the filter would eventually capture all particles if no more were introduced.


I have often wondered the same.

At 5 gpm, a 4-qt sump would be filtered 5 times every minute (well, essentially - not purely)
That's 300 passes in one 1-hr drive.
 
Quote:
There are both single pass and multipass tests out there. I believe now, the multipass test (or one of them, at any rate) is most common, but that doesn't mean that all efficiency ratings are multipass....

There are both, however the current industry standard ISO 4548-12 is a multipass test. It's also the test that Amsoil did of some OEM filters including the A02, and where that efficiency data point was derived. As OEM's efficiency is generally proprietary, difficult to get authoritative efficiency information.

eao-efficiency-chart.jpg
 
Is there any difference between a Fram Tough Guard and a Honda oem besides the Honda oem having a thicker can?
 
I've noticed numerous people comment how an Honda or Toyo engine will last 200,or 300,000 miles. Imagine if you used a fram ultra or a quality synthetic filter. Add another 200,000 miles. I tend to keep my vehicles a very long time. Vehicles (DD) depreciate, so they are not an investment, excluding classic/vintage. BITOG transformed my thinking. Manufacturing today is planned obsolescence.



Respectfully,

Pajero!
 
Originally Posted By: Pajero
I've noticed numerous people comment how an Honda or Toyo engine will last 200,or 300,000 miles. Imagine if you used a fram ultra or a quality synthetic filter. Add another 200,000 miles. I tend to keep my vehicles a very long time. Vehicles (DD) depreciate, so they are not an investment, excluding classic/vintage. BITOG transformed my thinking. Manufacturing today is planned obsolescence.

Well I've gotten almost 400,000 on my Sienna using mostly Toyota OEM filters, what that says to me is that it really doesn't matter much. Right now the consumption is about a quart every 3500 miles which is somewhat worse than it was when new, but not by a lot. In my case it is likely valve stem seals or some other seal but I don't know for sure.

I'm not certain how many more miles I want to get TBH.
 
Originally Posted By: CT8
Originally Posted By: jhass
Here is one example of the information I've seen:


Originally Posted By: KCJeep
Originally Posted By: gregk24
does anyone know the figures for filtration and flow on the honda a01 and a02 filters???


According to Fram, who makes the A02 filter, efficiency is 65% because that is what Honda wants. With that kind of low efficiency it would be reasonable to expect flow is very high. Toyota OEM's are spec'd at about 50% efficiency, clearly they are doing this on purpose I don't know if its for flow reasons, weak oil pumps or what but it is intentional.


I don't know what the A01 is but I imagine it's similar since it's Honda spec.

The Ultra will be 99% efficient but will still flow very well due to being synthetic.

As I mentioned before both are very high flowing filters and I'd be a lot more concerned about ADBV's than flow if I was having start up noise.


65%!! thats crazy...how is that even safe to put on your car? so it lets 35% of dirt and particles by?
_________________________
2012 Honda Accord EX-L K24z3
50,xxx miles
PPPP 0w20 / Fram Ultra

2014 VW Jetta SE 1.8T ea888
30,xxx miles
Castrol Edge 0w40 / OEM filter
Why do Hondas last as long running oem oil filters and conventional oil as they do running top dollar syn oil and oil filters?


My Man
grin.gif

Local retired congressman (a great guy) only runs conventional oil (whatever is on sale at AAP) with honda filters and changes every 3K. I spoke with him at a funeral last spring and his last Accord was passed down at over 400K to a young man. He normally goes 300K before he sells them.
 
Originally Posted By: paulri
There are both single pass and multipass tests out there. I believe now, the multipass test (or one of them, at any rate) is most common, but that doesn't mean that all efficiency ratings are multipass.


ISO 4548-12 has been the industry standard since about 2000. It's a multi-pass test, but if you understand how the test is conducted it's really like a real time single pass test since there are particle counters upstream and downstream of the filter and efficiency data it collected real time of what's getting through the filter.

Originally Posted By: paulri
Your comment brings up something I have wondered at--at what point in the OCI are these multipass tests simulating? Does multipass mean "five trips through the filter, one right after another" or does it mean "we took measurements at separate points in time, the last one a hundred hours after the first time"?


The ISO 4548-12 test is conducted until the filter gets loaded up to the point where the bypass valve starts to open up. The amount of time that transpires to achieve that point is dependent on the filter's performance and also how concentrated the test dust is in the test oil slurry.

For those who don't understand oil filter multi-pass testing, please go do some Googling and research it and also research ISO 4548-12 test methods.
 
Originally Posted By: Pajero
I've noticed numerous people comment how an Honda or Toyo engine will last 200,or 300,000 miles. Imagine if you used a fram ultra or a quality synthetic filter. Add another 200,000 miles. I tend to keep my vehicles a very long time. Vehicles (DD) depreciate, so they are not an investment, excluding classic/vintage. BITOG transformed my thinking. Manufacturing today is planned obsolescence.


Many other components are much more likely to fail before the engine going. On old Hondas, even the 6th gen Accords(98-02) many of them I see going to the bone yard for transmissions, rusted out sub-frames etc.
 
Well this test sure seems like a thorough one--it would probably take a longer time than the average OCI, to get the filter so clogged it has to go into bypass mode, so we can then take the multipass test efficiency as a percentage of all the particles that it can be expected to clean up, until it is removed from the car, then. So its not like a 65% filter can be expected to clean up the first 65% in the first 1000 miles of driving after an oil change, and the last 35% in the second 1000 miles. If I understand you correctly, that 65% would be ALL it would be expected to pick up.

Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: paulri
There are both single pass and multipass tests out there. I believe now, the multipass test (or one of them, at any rate) is most common, but that doesn't mean that all efficiency ratings are multipass.


ISO 4548-12 has been the industry standard since about 2000. It's a multi-pass test, but if you understand how the test is conducted it's really like a real time single pass test since there are particle counters upstream and downstream of the filter and efficiency data it collected real time of what's getting through the filter.

Originally Posted By: paulri
Your comment brings up something I have wondered at--at what point in the OCI are these multipass tests simulating? Does multipass mean "five trips through the filter, one right after another" or does it mean "we took measurements at separate points in time, the last one a hundred hours after the first time"?


The ISO 4548-12 test is conducted until the filter gets loaded up to the point where the bypass valve starts to open up. The amount of time that transpires to achieve that point is dependent on the filter's performance and also how concentrated the test dust is in the test oil slurry.

For those who don't understand oil filter multi-pass testing, please go do some Googling and research it and also research ISO 4548-12 test methods.
 
Originally Posted By: goodtimes
The oil flow to the engine is determined by the oil pump, and if the oil pump goes into relief mode or not. In a normal situation where the filter is not clogged and the bypass valve is large enough, the filter type isn't an issue.


Not sure exactly what you're saying here, but the filter's bypass valve has nothing to do with the oil pump or the pump's pressure relief valve operation. A filter can go into bypass without the pump being in relief, and the pump can go into relief without the filter going into bypass. They aren't really dependent on each other - each does it's own thing.

Originally Posted By: goodtimes
The notion Toyota and Honda specified low efficiency for flow is a myth told here over and over, and over. Eventually it gets believed. You can read here where others say the same thing about flow.


True ... a lot of people here don't understand the power of a positive displacement oil pump or how they operate. As long as the pump isn't in pressure relief, then all the volume leaving the pump will go through the filter & engine. If an oil filter is really restrictive, it just means the oil pump output pressure will increase some to maintain the same flow volume.

In most cases, if the filter is very restrictive then the delta-p across the media will be high enough to cause the filter's bypass valve to open well before the pump's pressure relief valve opens. The oil pump pressure relief valve will mostly open on very cold morning start-ups combines with elevated engine RPM. About the only scenario where you might see both filter bypass and pump pressure relief happening at the same time is with a very cold start-up with elevated engine RPM (ie, cold start and rev the engine to 4000+ RPM on 0 deg F morning).
 
Originally Posted By: paulri
Well this test sure seems like a thorough one--it would probably take a longer time than the average OCI, to get the filter so clogged it has to go into bypass mode, so we can then take the multipass test efficiency as a percentage of all the particles that it can be expected to clean up, until it is removed from the car, then. So its not like a 65% filter can be expected to clean up the first 65% in the first 1000 miles of driving after an oil change, and the last 35% in the second 1000 miles. If I understand you correctly, that 65% would be ALL it would be expected to pick up.

If an oil filter is 99% @ 20 microns, then it's essentially capturing 99% of all the particles that are 20 microns and larger. Also keep in mind that a filter that is 99% @ 20 microns might also be 70~80% efficient at 5 microns depending on the media design. It doesn't mean everything below 20 microns is not captured. Depending on the media type, the shape of the efficiency vs particle size curve can be noticeably different. See the graph below that describes this situation.



So the bottom line is the ISO efficiency test is a good way to compare oil filters - it's been used since 2000 by the filter industry. There's no evidence I've ever seen that says a filter that ISO tested at 50% @ 20 microns is going to be magically more efficient on an engine compared to a filter that test to be 99% efficiency at 20 microns. IMO, you can expect a filter mounted on an engine used in real life that's rated at 99% @ 20 microns to clean the oil faster/better than a filter rated at 50% @ 20 microns.

Like I said, the ISO 4548-12 multi-pass test measures the efficiency across the oil filter in real time by measuring upstream and downstream particle size and counts, so it's really like a "continuous real time singe pass" test. The ISO efficiency rating you see on the box is the average efficiency over the duration of the test, as defined in the calculations section of the ISO test procedure.
 
Originally Posted By: Danh
Filters do get more efficient, with use ...

Not according to Purolator/Mann+Hummel testing. The graph shows that the larger particles efficiency suffered some over time as the filter became loaded up. As mentioned above, the ISO efficiency calculation is the average over the duration of the test. So if you looked at the 20 micron line, the efficiency started out at around 90% but ended up at around 60%, so the ISO test calculation would say this filter is around 75% efficient at 20 microns.

 
Originally Posted By: aquariuscsm
Is there any difference between a Fram Tough Guard and a Honda oem besides the Honda oem having a thicker can?


Obviously the media since the ISO efficiencies are really different between the two.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

J
Honda motorcycle in on filter
Replies
5
Views
1K
dwendt44
Q
Spec sheets for Purolator One & Boss, Mobil 1, and Fram Ultra Synthetic oil filters that fit Honda/Acura, not sure how to interpret some specs
2
Replies
25
Views
1K
paulri
RevRider
HiFlo Filtro HF171RC Filtering Efficiency
2
Replies
25
Views
1K
RevRider
RevRider
K&N 171 - Forum Article in Response To Their Oil Filter Performance For Harley’s
2
Replies
35
Views
2K
johnmyster
RevRider
Mazda OEM Oil Filter, PEO1-14-302A-MV (P5518), In Service 7.5 Months w/5,898 Miles
Replies
13
Views
1K
RevRider
Back
Top