Is the Baldwin B-164 a good bypass filter?
- Thread starter Griz95
- Start date
- Status
griz I don't know if oil will come out of the port on the block. you could get a pipe plug to plug the hole then start it up to check. not sure what the normal flow rate is but the full flow filter I run is rated for 30 some GPM. the wix are rated for 17 GPM
The Baldwin B164 is a perfectly fine filter for a bypass setup. It has a 1/16" orifice and is rated at 1-3gpm flow, without adding any restrictions. The ratings that Tim says he got from Gina Johnikins aren't the ratings she gave me. She told me that the B50 and B164 were 98.??% efficient at 2 microns. Maybe Hastings can't keep their numbers straight, but I'll look to the results for my final decision. Quite frankly, UOA is the ONLY way I can think of to determine the efficiency of a bypass filter setup. Looking at the inside of a filter may tell you that it caught a lot of impurities, but it can't tell you how many impurities were left in the engine! Several consecutive UOAs , with particle counts will be the ONLY testimony I need. As Blackstone told me ref. a UOA on my wife's Honda (without bypass):
"Lead can be from a gas additive or a particle streak through a bearing (which would be temporary) or it's from excess bearing wear. We'll know more as we see wear trends develop in future samples. We suggest a ~5400-mile oil change to get rid of the excess metals in the oil that can make it abrasive. Check back then with a sample for another look at lead."
So, I wouldn't get hyper about the lead levels, yet. I believe your bypass oil filter setup to be a very good one. We'll see what the numbers show in the next UOA.
"Lead can be from a gas additive or a particle streak through a bearing (which would be temporary) or it's from excess bearing wear. We'll know more as we see wear trends develop in future samples. We suggest a ~5400-mile oil change to get rid of the excess metals in the oil that can make it abrasive. Check back then with a sample for another look at lead."
So, I wouldn't get hyper about the lead levels, yet. I believe your bypass oil filter setup to be a very good one. We'll see what the numbers show in the next UOA.
luckydog I find it kind of funny that they give out different numbers to different people!!!??? kinda made me laugh when you posted that. if the b164 were 2 micron absolute I would run it in a heart beat. even though I already got a Frantz ready to install. Maybe some more emails to baldwin are in order. somebody else want to email them and see what you come up with. here is the email address
[email protected]
I also agree that it could very easily be a streak. I would not get overly concerned with the UOA yet. How many miles are on the oil you are running so far? even with the filter if you are close to the same amount of mile you would have run the oil without the bypass then you are fine. Its not the filter fault for the lead findings.
[email protected]
I also agree that it could very easily be a streak. I would not get overly concerned with the UOA yet. How many miles are on the oil you are running so far? even with the filter if you are close to the same amount of mile you would have run the oil without the bypass then you are fine. Its not the filter fault for the lead findings.
Okay, I plan to test the flow rate as soon as I can find some one to help me. I don't want to try this without another hand.
well how about this! I emailed Gina again at baldwin and asked for the specs again. 15 micron absolute and they don't have a nominal rating established at this time.
????????????????????
same person same company 2 very different replies???? well how know which way is up now. other than both replies told me that the absolute rating is 15 micron.
????????????????????
same person same company 2 very different replies???? well how know which way is up now. other than both replies told me that the absolute rating is 15 micron.
Houston we got a problem...sounds like someone at Baldwin needs to go back and review the data specs for this filter
Yea, it's beginning to look as if the answer we get depends on what page happens to be open in front of the person answering the question. And, for all we know, it may be from a Cosmopolitan, or Mother Earth News magazine!!
I know it'll be a month, two, or even more, but let's let the UOAs answer the questions on this. At least we're not all getting into a "urination contest" about it. That's one thing I like about this forum
I certainly hope that the B164 proves out as a good bypass filter! I just won a bid on six new ones, on ebay, for a total of $38, shipping included! Considering that the cheapest I'd found, so far, had been over $16 each, with shipping, I think I did well.
I know it'll be a month, two, or even more, but let's let the UOAs answer the questions on this. At least we're not all getting into a "urination contest" about it. That's one thing I like about this forum
I certainly hope that the B164 proves out as a good bypass filter! I just won a bid on six new ones, on ebay, for a total of $38, shipping included! Considering that the cheapest I'd found, so far, had been over $16 each, with shipping, I think I did well.
Its a good filter but not a super bypass filter.
Without knowing details of any of the specs, the tests and test variables, I don't care what the manufacturerer states. This is why you could run the Fram, Purolater, Wix, Champ, or Donaldson equivalent PN. They all meet the OEM requirement and we're hoping that certain brands use a better media.
I'm assuming that the media is simple pleated filter media like on full flow filters. If so, even with an orifice, the media itself might flow too easily.
Griz, start a thread in the UOA section the same way you started this one. All you have to do is manual type in all the numbers off the UOA that you've recieved. You don't need to attach pictures.
Without knowing details of any of the specs, the tests and test variables, I don't care what the manufacturerer states. This is why you could run the Fram, Purolater, Wix, Champ, or Donaldson equivalent PN. They all meet the OEM requirement and we're hoping that certain brands use a better media.
I'm assuming that the media is simple pleated filter media like on full flow filters. If so, even with an orifice, the media itself might flow too easily.
Griz, start a thread in the UOA section the same way you started this one. All you have to do is manual type in all the numbers off the UOA that you've recieved. You don't need to attach pictures.
if the b164 is only a 15 micron absolute its no where near a bypass filter. I can go to napa and get a 1734 wix full flow filter for my powerstroke that is rated at 15 micron absolute. pure and simple. Why would a manufacturer low ball their numbers???
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,799
Errr...not according to Wix. Your standard 51734 is 19 micron nominal (50% 1 pass) and is 2/20=10/30 (multipass) 10 micron nominal (50%) and 30 micron @ 95%
The 51734XE is 30 micron absolute (beta30=75
Part Number: 51734XE
UPC Number: 765809527348
Principal Application: Synth Media Version Of 51734
All Applications
Style: Spin-On Lube Filter
Service: Lube
Type: Full Flow
Media: Glass
Height: 8.122
Outer Diameter Top: 4.266
Outer Diameter Bottom: Closed
Thread Size: 1 1/2-16
By-Pass Valve Setting-PSI: None
Beta Ratio: 4/75=10/30
Burst Pressure-PSI: 200
Max Flow Rate: 28-30 GPM
Nominal Micro Rating: 10
Gasket Diameters
Number O.D. I.D. Thk.
Attached 3.967 3.587 0.340
The 51734XE is 30 micron absolute (beta30=75
Part Number: 51734XE
UPC Number: 765809527348
Principal Application: Synth Media Version Of 51734
All Applications
Style: Spin-On Lube Filter
Service: Lube
Type: Full Flow
Media: Glass
Height: 8.122
Outer Diameter Top: 4.266
Outer Diameter Bottom: Closed
Thread Size: 1 1/2-16
By-Pass Valve Setting-PSI: None
Beta Ratio: 4/75=10/30
Burst Pressure-PSI: 200
Max Flow Rate: 28-30 GPM
Nominal Micro Rating: 10
Gasket Diameters
Number O.D. I.D. Thk.
Attached 3.967 3.587 0.340
The WIX cross for the B164 is the 51704 with a nominal of 28. I find it very hard to believe that Baldwin would make a MUCH better filter for the same application. Even @ 15 micron absolute, it is way better than 28 nominal, which makes me
.
The 15 micron is the only number that keeps coming up. That is no better than an Eao full flow!
The 15 micron is the only number that keeps coming up. That is no better than an Eao full flow!
unDummy...okay tonight I'll post my UOA numbers in UOA section. I have given up trying to figure out how to post the UOA report itself. I must be a computer dummy or something. I have seen others who have posted them but can't figure it out myself.
Griz95
well thats what i get for listening to an email from wix! thanks Gary I stand corrected! Gary where do you get your info. I would love to be able to look it up like that and not have to rely on a human with email!
oh and i guess 19 was the number i was told was absolute rating for the 1734
thanks sdeeter. I remember seeing that a while back but that was before I got an education here on what all the beta number nominal meant. thanks!
I crossed the B164 to a Fleetguard LF778. I have an information request in to Fleetguard to find out the micron rating of the Fleetguard version...they tend to have better filters generally.
I am also going to start looking into running a HF6604 with a restriction...they have a 1 micron rating at 95%. And they have a pretty good "dirt" holding capacity...expensive, but I feel they would be a very good filter...
steved
I am also going to start looking into running a HF6604 with a restriction...they have a 1 micron rating at 95%. And they have a pretty good "dirt" holding capacity...expensive, but I feel they would be a very good filter...
steved
- Status
