Oil filter discussion

Messages
1,241
Location
Glenshaw, PA
Thread starter
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by Dad2leia
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by Dad2leia
Briefly looking at that thread...interesting concept, but as he stated, 10 years old now, and filters have changed a bit, which was the whole point of starting this thread. I can't say much to time frames of posting...I haven't been posting on here until recently either grin2
Well, what's not changed since oil filters were first made, is that higher filter efficiency means cleaner oil as seen in particle count data.
Agreed...but the whole reason I started this thread was to find out about the happy medium. I too can appreciate wanting the cleanest possible oil circulating around my pistons, but for someone that really doesn't rack up the mileage anymore, wants very good (not spared no expense) protection and filtration, is why I was asking about the particular filters that I mentioned. After countless times of reading, cross referencing, and viewing videos (good joking fodder there..), for me, I no longer can justify spending top dollar on everything car anymore, particularly when the more research you do, the more you find out that, just like most everything else, price goes up exponentially for every tenth of a percent of additional protection you get. I know...more flaming to come...
If you want a "happy medium", then buy a brand name filter that is 95% @ 20u or better. Lots of filters fit that bill. If you're not driving a lot, you could also buy a high efficiency full synthetic filter and leave it on for 2 or 3 oil changes if you only say put 1000~2000 miles a year on the vehicle. Some guys here have done that too. If you bought a $10 filter and used it for 3 OCIs then it's only costing you $3.33 per OCI. It all comes down to do you want to save a few bucks a year or do you want very good filtration?
So in your case ZeeOSix, given your specific parameters, which filter or filters do you use? I am truly curious.
 
Messages
24,130
Location
PNW
^^^ Like I said before, my lower point cut-off is 95% @ 20u. I've used Amsoil, AC Delco Ultraguard, regular WIX/NAPA Gold, Purolators (Classic and PureOne ... before the tearing problem) and of course the Ultra. I stopped using Toyota OEM filters on my Tacoma after seeing how inefficient they were at filtering. Many people here who where into PureOne filters (me included) for their high efficiency jumped over the the Ultra when the Purolator media tearing problem popped up 4~5 years ago. I won't use a filter that I don't know the ISO 4548-121 xx% @ yy micron efficiency rating.
 
Messages
1,241
Location
Glenshaw, PA
Thread starter
Originally Posted by daman
Baldwin are quality well made filters but there filtering specs are nothing to wright home about.
I will confess, I bought them for the build quality, plus I got a decent price on buying the case of 12. Case is almost gone which is why my query with this topic.
 
Messages
1,241
Location
Glenshaw, PA
Thread starter
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
^^^ Like I said before, my lower point cut-off is 95% @ 20u. I've used Amsoil, AC Delco Ultraguard, regular WIX/NAPA Gold, Purolators (Classic and PureOne ... before the tearing problem) and of course the Ultra. I stopped using Toyota OEM filters on my Tacoma after seeing how inefficient they were at filtering. Many people here who where into PureOne filters (me included) for their high efficiency jumped over the the Ultra when the Purolator media tearing problem popped up 4~5 years ago. I won't use a filter that I don't know the ISO 4548-121 xx% @ yy micron efficiency rating.
Ok, so you listed what you have used, which particular one has the best efficiency rating based on your standards?
 
Messages
24,130
Location
PNW
Originally Posted by Dad2leia
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
^^^ Like I said before, my lower point cut-off is 95% @ 20u. I've used Amsoil, AC Delco Ultraguard, regular WIX/NAPA Gold, Purolators (Classic and PureOne ... before the tearing problem) and of course the Ultra. I stopped using Toyota OEM filters on my Tacoma after seeing how inefficient they were at filtering. Many people here who where into PureOne filters (me included) for their high efficiency jumped over the the Ultra when the Purolator media tearing problem popped up 4~5 years ago. I won't use a filter that I don't know the ISO 4548-121 xx% @ yy micron efficiency rating.
Ok, so you listed what you have used, which particular one has the best efficiency rating based on your standards?
The PureOne (now just called "One") and the Ultra are basically the same efficiency. But I won't use Purolators anymore because of quality issues. If you want high efficiency, high holding capacity and low delta-p across the filter, then just go with the Ultra.
 
Messages
6,415
Location
Wet side WA
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by Dad2leia
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
^^^ Like I said before, my lower point cut-off is 95% @ 20u. I've used Amsoil, AC Delco Ultraguard, regular WIX/NAPA Gold, Purolators (Classic and PureOne ... before the tearing problem) and of course the Ultra. I stopped using Toyota OEM filters on my Tacoma after seeing how inefficient they were at filtering. Many people here who where into PureOne filters (me included) for their high efficiency jumped over the the Ultra when the Purolator media tearing problem popped up 4~5 years ago. I won't use a filter that I don't know the ISO 4548-121 xx% @ yy micron efficiency rating.
Ok, so you listed what you have used, which particular one has the best efficiency rating based on your standards?
The PureOne (now just called "One") and the Ultra are basically the same efficiency. But I won't use Purolators anymore because of quality issues. If you want high efficiency, high holding capacity and low delta-p across the filter, then just go with the Ultra.
I have already used the new Purolator One (blue can) worked just fine. No cuts, no tears, no errors. Used it on a 5K OCI on my Corolla. Got five of them on Amazon for $5.95 ea. The Ultra currently runs $3 each more than that.
 
Messages
24,130
Location
PNW
^^^ Even if they were free I'd still have to consider using them or not. $3 extra a year isn't gonna put me into debt ... just one less cheap cheeseburger a year. smile Did you do a C&P on that Puro One? ... I don't recall.
 
Messages
1,241
Location
Glenshaw, PA
Thread starter
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by Dad2leia
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
^^^ Like I said before, my lower point cut-off is 95% @ 20u. I've used Amsoil, AC Delco Ultraguard, regular WIX/NAPA Gold, Purolators (Classic and PureOne ... before the tearing problem) and of course the Ultra. I stopped using Toyota OEM filters on my Tacoma after seeing how inefficient they were at filtering. Many people here who where into PureOne filters (me included) for their high efficiency jumped over the the Ultra when the Purolator media tearing problem popped up 4~5 years ago. I won't use a filter that I don't know the ISO 4548-121 xx% @ yy micron efficiency rating.
Ok, so you listed what you have used, which particular one has the best efficiency rating based on your standards?
The PureOne (now just called "One") and the Ultra are basically the same efficiency. But I won't use Purolators anymore because of quality issues. If you want high efficiency, high holding capacity and low delta-p across the filter, then just go with the Ultra.
Zee, is the tearing issue still really an issue with Purolator at this point? I seem to recall that posts started showing up around here about 2 years ago on the matter. One would think (Yeah, I know, brave term) that they would have addressed this point and that what is being produced today would be better in quality.
 
Messages
24,130
Location
PNW
Originally Posted by Dad2leia
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by Dad2leia
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
^^^ Like I said before, my lower point cut-off is 95% @ 20u. I've used Amsoil, AC Delco Ultraguard, regular WIX/NAPA Gold, Purolators (Classic and PureOne ... before the tearing problem) and of course the Ultra. I stopped using Toyota OEM filters on my Tacoma after seeing how inefficient they were at filtering. Many people here who where into PureOne filters (me included) for their high efficiency jumped over the the Ultra when the Purolator media tearing problem popped up 4~5 years ago. I won't use a filter that I don't know the ISO 4548-121 xx% @ yy micron efficiency rating.
Ok, so you listed what you have used, which particular one has the best efficiency rating based on your standards?
The PureOne (now just called "One") and the Ultra are basically the same efficiency. But I won't use Purolators anymore because of quality issues. If you want high efficiency, high holding capacity and low delta-p across the filter, then just go with the Ultra.
Zee, is the tearing issue still really an issue with Purolator at this point? I seem to recall that posts started showing up around here about 2 years ago on the matter. One would think (Yeah, I know, brave term) that they would have addressed this point and that what is being produced today would be better in quality.
Hard to say because not many here use them and perform a cut & post like back in the days when torn media was running amuck. I'm not going to find out first hand. Maybe guys who use them regularly these days can post all their Purolator C&Ps to bring back some confidence.
 
Top