NAPA Gold or ?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Fram recently changed their website and no longer call out a micron rating or give a 4548-12 micron and efficiency at that micron rating for the Ultra - at least that I see.

Don't panic. I sent them a message via their comment tool and Fram responded saying it was an oversight by the web developers since the EG and TG still shows the ISO 4548-12 efficiency numbers. Check the Fram website in a few days for a correction.


Thats for doing that and good, I'd hate to discover my "mini stash" isn't what it was advertised to be.

I see the can color has changed to silver as well.

Im always skeptical of everyones numbers - its the cynic in me.

UD
 
Originally Posted By: UncleDave

I see the can color has changed to silver as well.


TGs are still silver and the Ultra still gold.

TG: LINK

Ultra: LINK
 
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: UncleDave

I see the can color has changed to silver as well.


TGs are still silver and the Ultra still gold.

TG: LINK

Ultra: LINK


Weird - I saw a silver can that said " synthetic" - but not now.

I like the little swoop they added- is it different font?

UD
 
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: MetalSlug
... only thing I will be miss about the ultra is the grip.


And the efficiency.
wink.gif



Few % aint made no different, if any one think these are so important, I feel sorry for them.
 
Less crud in the oil results in less wear - it's not rocket science. Been plenty of info posted about it, and plenty of SAE papers published. But some people can't seem to grasp the concept. Oh well ...
21.gif
 
Originally Posted By: goodtimes
Originally Posted By: Nyogtha
Originally Posted By: JohnnyJohnson
Originally Posted By: SatinSilver
Anyone know the efficiency of the ST oil filter at Walmart, made by Wix?




This should have to be on every filter box and rated at 20 microns.


Well if you follow where that asterisk leads you on that box, you'll discover that figure is at 30 microns on that box.


Which is exactly why ST and Purolator and some others have an asterisk instead of the number. We see here people think it all means 20 microns. Plenty of room on the box to put 30 microns in large numbers. Same with UP TO 20k they make it hard to see so many people start saying 20K as the number for all. Not 20k for all. Bad and dishonest advertising techniques.


I didn't assume it was 20 microns I'm suggest all filters should be rated by the same standard 20 micron to eliminate the little hype and B. S. game going on here by these people.
 
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: goodtimes
Bad and dishonest advertising techniques.


It's typical advertising techniques. Nothing "dishonest" about it because the information is accurate, just not in your face. People need to not be lazy and read stuff carefully.


To me it's dishonest. Making info hard to see and only for the reason knowing many will not look, is dishonest. Especially the ones that bury the info on their website. Honesty is putting 30 microns next to 99% or 85% and 20 microns, whatever. Period on that one for my definition of honesty.
 
Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies
Originally Posted By: AZjeff
Uh, this is BITOG, we LIKE changing oil! Since you brought up extended OCIs, what about MicroGreen filters? Don't see much about them but the claims of 30K on one fill is impressive. My search skills are lame but I did find one reference to good UOAs out to 30K.
True, if you like changing oil, a 10,000 mile interval might be best, and a Fram Ultra or MicroGreen would be a good choice. The MicroGreen needs to be changed every 10,000 miles, while the Fram Ultra could go 2 10,000 mile intervals. Oil choice could be any full syn you see on the shelf at Walmart for 10,000 miles. ... MicroGreens have a blended glass-cellulose fiber media which is comparable to Fram ToughGaurd or Mobil1 or Wix or Napa Gold oil filters, and they have the nice silicone ADBV instead of nitrile. MicroGreens have the unique extra path thru a small element which should work to clean up the oil further, although possibly not much different than a Fram Ultra does anyway.


Thanks for the detailed explanations. This Toyota 2.5 uses a cartridge so no ADBV and not sure if the MicroGreen works the same either.
 
"Sneaky" advertising has been around forever. Typical definition of dishonest is: "containing information that is untrue", which is essentially lying.

Making it hard to find the information isn't necessarily lying. Guess withholding information purposely could also be interpreted as being 'dishonest' when someone knows there is information missing. I think people need to be somewhat self informed in this technical world to see through advertising like that. I agree they should all give the standard efficiency info, but until there's a law that mandates that "nutritional" info be on the box people will have to do some closer reading.

WIX seems to be falling into the 'sneaky advertising' category. Call them 'dishonest' if you want to.
 
Originally Posted By: goodtimes


Originally Posted By: goodtimes

Originally Posted By: Nyogtha


Which is exactly why ST and Purolator and some others have an asterisk instead of the number. We see here people think it all means 20 microns. Plenty of room on the box to put 30 microns in large numbers. Same with UP TO 20k they make it hard to see so many people start saying 20K as the number for all. Not 20k for all. Bad and dishonest advertising techniques.


I didn't assume it was 20 microns I'm suggest all filters should be rated by the same standard 20 micron to eliminate the little hype and B. S. game going on here by these people.


Sorry about that. I thought about the wording after but too late to change it. I do think some people will assume 20 after reading the Fram box. The better informed ones. Most others I have a feeling only will look at the percent number.


You've attributed a quote to me that was never stated by me. Why?
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Nyogtha
Originally Posted By: goodtimes


Originally Posted By: goodtimes

Originally Posted By: Nyogtha


Which is exactly why ST and Purolator and some others have an asterisk instead of the number. We see here people think it all means 20 microns. Plenty of room on the box to put 30 microns in large numbers. Same with UP TO 20k they make it hard to see so many people start saying 20K as the number for all. Not 20k for all. Bad and dishonest advertising techniques.


I didn't assume it was 20 microns I'm suggest all filters should be rated by the same standard 20 micron to eliminate the little hype and B. S. game going on here by these people.


Sorry about that. I thought about the wording after but too late to change it. I do think some people will assume 20 after reading the Fram box. The better informed ones. Most others I have a feeling only will look at the percent number.


You've attributed a quote to me that was never stated by me. Why?


Hey, I made a mistake in editing is why. The reply was full and I tried to rearrange by deleting some of it so it would post. I didn't notice my original statement now was in your quote. Your words are there below it. It was a mistake. I asked them to remove it.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
"Sneaky" advertising has been around forever. Typical definition of dishonest is: "containing information that is untrue", which is essentially lying.

Making it hard to find the information isn't necessarily lying. Guess withholding information purposely could also be interpreted as being 'dishonest' when someone knows there is information missing. I think people need to be somewhat self informed in this technical world to see through advertising like that. I agree they should all give the standard efficiency info, but until there's a law that mandates that "nutritional" info be on the box people will have to do some closer reading.

WIX seems to be falling into the 'sneaky advertising' category. Call them 'dishonest' if you want to.


I think deceptive is a better word. Like you mention/allude too, it's a tricky world and people need to step carefully/cautiously, while in it. Personally, deceptive practices, like we are talking about here, are enough for me to stay far away from companies like this.
 
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
"Sneaky" advertising has been around forever. Typical definition of dishonest is: "containing information that is untrue", which is essentially lying.

Making it hard to find the information isn't necessarily lying. Guess withholding information purposely could also be interpreted as being 'dishonest' when someone knows there is information missing. I think people need to be somewhat self informed in this technical world to see through advertising like that. I agree they should all give the standard efficiency info, but until there's a law that mandates that "nutritional" info be on the box people will have to do some closer reading.

WIX seems to be falling into the 'sneaky advertising' category. Call them 'dishonest' if you want to.


I will, and anyone else who uses tricks to deceive people. It isn't just Wix or Fram. When anyone uses tricks to deceive people, it is dishonest in my book. People who are sneaky can't be called honest. Maybe they are a blend.
 
From what I'm seeing, Fram is pretty good at giving the efficiency specs. Many other big name filter makers like WIX, and now Purolator with their new line, and many others try to make the data unavailable, only give partial information or make it very hard to get.
 
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
From what I'm seeing, Fram is pretty good at giving the efficiency specs. Many other big name filter makers like WIX, and now Purolator with their new line, and many others try to make the data unavailable, only give partial information or make it very hard to get.


People with quality products have nothing to hide just sayin.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

U
Napa Gold - Made in China
3 4 5
Replies
91
Views
10K
Sayjac
P
wix or subaru oem
2 3
Replies
52
Views
2K
JRHAWK9
D
Wix, NAPA
Replies
18
Views
3K
Opelman
C
Problem with Napa Gold(Mann Hummel) 7356? Pictures
Replies
10
Views
4K
Sayjac
jeepman3071
Napa Gold 1085 - cut open - 3,000 miles
Replies
7
Views
2K
Hermann
Back
Top