I had two thoughts on the subject. The first was that 32 microns was possibly too coarse and would let the large dirt particles through.
Strickly on micron rating, that is preferable filter. But, while nominal is generally taken to mean 50%, it's still rather a vague term. When I look at said filter on Wix site, spec sheet beta shows 95% @20um.
I'd not thought making sure my OPE had a silicon ADBV but I'll remember this now. At least for my air cooled engines. Thanks!
Good Morning Kira,
Hi Kira,
The adbv not huge deal on OPE, imo. But, if one can get it and at a significantly lower cost, it's a win win. Because of economies of scale, OPE filters tend to be pricey for what they are. If room permits, I always choose the automotive application.
For a Summer time use machine definitely get the 21 micron.
Why just for summer?
XG or FE3614 is a direct match and is 99%+@20 microns. I used an XG3600 on my FR730V for 139 hours, and switched to the Fram Endurance. No complaints or issues.
Say you have 2 same size oil filters, both cellulose media one about 99 to 96% efficiency with 20 micron dirt and the second oil filter is 99 to 96% efficient with 30 microns.
Nope, you can’t claim a 20 micron will bypass more than a 30 micron on its face. You’d need to see the differential pressure curves that show the amount of GPM through the filter and the restriction (differential pressure) from the media itself and design, and then compare bypass ratings and the amount of time either filter would be in bypass. It’s much lower than you’d expect, and I’d wager that OPE will literally almost NEVER cause an auto filter to bypass, since they don’t generate anywhere near the amount of flow that an auto engine will.
That's a misconception. As @SubieRubyRoo explained, you would have to actually see the dP vs flow vs oil viscosity curve of the filter, and look at the filter's bypass setting along with the actual oil flow from the engine's oil pump to get a real handle on what will happen. Trying to determine all of that by just looking at the efficiency rating is totally useless. Need a curve like this.
That pretty much proves my point aren't Royal purple filters like 99% efficient at 15 micron and aren't the new generation of wix XP just higher end rock catchers doing something like 95% efficiency at 35 micron?
How are you seeing this data? You have your engine instrumented with dP gauges, etc? If you are comparing hydraulic filters to automotive filters, it's not a good comparison.
That Royal Purple is not 99% efficiency @ 15u (see link below - more like 96.5% @ 15u). It's worse efficiency than the Fram Ultra in that testing (Ultra shows 99.8@ @ 15u), but yet the Ultra flow dP was better. That's why you can not "conclude" that a more efficient oil filter will result in more dP. You have to test it to see, just like Ascent did in the ISO 4548-12 test.
