LoL ... 99% @ 34u (Ascent testing) and certainly 99% >46u (M+H Spec Sheet) is nothing to get too excited about. The crickets are chirping loudly about non-correlations.Not so bad after all eh? Do I hear crickets again...
LoL ... 99% @ 34u (Ascent testing) and certainly 99% >46u (M+H Spec Sheet) is nothing to get too excited about. The crickets are chirping loudly about non-correlations.Not so bad after all eh? Do I hear crickets again...
That gets me "Too" excited! And since you take that Ascent test result for face value on the Fram you must accept 99%@34u on that Boss. That's like Super Tech & basically a ton of filter's efficiency level, 99%@30, with the benefit of never tearing... I'll get you excited about that last part at least. Come on Zee lets see you crack a smile for the sake of data ...Wheeee Zeeee (that's your new rap name) J/kLoL ... 99% @ 34u (Ascent testing) and certainly 99% >46u (M+H Spec Sheet) is nothing to get too excited about. The crickets are chirping loudly.
That gets me "Too" excited!
Now efficiency is ignored and low efficiency accepted because of some kind of potential media failure? <---- I've been smiling and laughing throughout this thread.And since you take that Ascent test result for face value on the Fram you must accept 99%@34u on that Boss. That's like Super Tech & basically a ton of filter's efficiency level, 99%@30, with the benefit of never tearing... I'll get you excited about that last part at least. Come on Zee lets see you crack a smile for the sake of data ...Wheeee Zeeee (that's your new rap name) J/k
LOL"Too" is correct. Should we turn this into a spelling and grimmer thread?
View attachment 195285
Now efficiency is ignored and low efficiency accepted because of some kind of potential media failure?
Back from cards... I lost.
What would you consider 60% @ 20μ, or how about 50% @ 20μ?99%@34um I don't consider low efficiency. More like Mid-Tier efficiency.
I see where you're going with this & to be quite honest those efficiencies don't get me excited. I think that is pretty bad & I'd wish that was better. I do believe that using a good synthetic oil at reasonable intervals could hold a lot of those particles in suspension though. Using UOA's would be wise to see when the oil started getting too contaminated & started trending higher on wear.What would you consider 60% @ 20μ, or how about 50% @ 20μ? What about 25% @ 15μ?
You probably know where those came from - actual ISO test data from a couple of those "mid-tier" filters.I see where you're going with this & to be quite honest those efficiencies don't get me excited. I think that is pretty bad & I'd wish that was better. I do believe that using a good synthetic oil at reasonable intervals could hold a lot of those particles in suspension though. Using UOA's would be wise to see when the oil started getting too contaminated & started trending higher on wear.
Even if particles are in suspension, they can still get between moving parts. The only way to prevent particles from causing wear as the OCI goes on is to remove them by filtering, or dumping the sump quite often.I do believe that using a good synthetic oil at reasonable intervals could hold a lot of those particles in suspension though.
Yes, they were from some of the spec sheets. It all depends on the filter though. Some filters may do much better at 50% than others even though they don't have the greatest at 99%. As we see here those efficiencies are probably better than stated. If this one PBL22500 filter tested at 99%@34 then it will test better at 50% too most likely.You probably know where those came from - actual ISO test data from a couple of those "mid-tier" filters.
There's a reason the filter marketers use "99% @ xx microns". If someone saw "60% @ 20μ" or "25% @ 15μ" instead of "99% @ 35μ" do you think they would feel any different about the level of efficiency? All those efficiencies are for the same filter off the efficiency vs particle size curve.
Oil encapsulates the soot particles etc. to create a protective layer around them to prevent wear. They can do this until other factors start breaking them down like sheer, etc. Yes, eventually they have the potential to cause wear & that's where UOA trending comes in to see when that wear starts to happen. Then you can do the next ODI's within that safe mileage or hours.Even if particles are in suspension, they can still get between moving parts. The only way to prevent particles from causing wear as the OCI goes on is to remove them by filtering, or dumping the sump quite often.
It's 50% @ 17-18μ. Yes, some filters drop off pretty fast below around 30μ. This is why some marketers will just say their filter is "98-99% efficient" without giving a micron rating. Every filter is 98-99% efficient at some particle size - except for the WIX XP in Ascent's test which could have has some kind of leak past the media or something going on since it never made it above 90% efficiency.Some filters may do much better at 50% than others even though they don't have the greatest at 99%. As we see here those efficiencies are probably better than stated. If this one PBL22500 filter tested at 99%@34 then it will test better at 50% too most likely.
No, you are not making a good choice in choosing “cold flow” over efficiency. Not that you’re doing that anyway.This has been a great thread so far. So I ditched my usual Amsoil filter for a Purolator BOSS 22500 for my L84 5.3L. I made the change due to the cold flow highlighted in the comparison video. I’m not too excited about the filtration efficiency but I think it’s more important in below zero temps here in MN winters. I’m also dumping my Wix filters for the BOSS on my 21 Subaru 2.5L. Low filtration resistance and 20-30 psi bypass is looking good. Am I making a good choice in choosing cold flow over 99% efficiency at 20 microns vs say an Amsoil or Fram endurance filter ?
Of course you are..This has been a great thread so far. So I ditched my usual Amsoil filter for a Purolator BOSS 22500 for my L84 5.3L. I made the change due to the cold flow highlighted in the comparison video. I’m not too excited about the filtration efficiency but I think it’s more important in below zero temps here in MN winters. I’m also dumping my Wix filters for the BOSS on my 21 Subaru 2.5L. Low filtration resistance and 20-30 psi bypass is looking good. Am I making a good choice in choosing cold flow over 99% efficiency at 20 microns vs say an Amsoil or Fram endurance filter ?