Please Rank These Fully Synthetic Oil Filters

Status
Not open for further replies.
YEah we had a good dialog on the MG and you did say that. I think there is something to that as well and since no dual stage design uses it, the case becomes even stronger.

My mail here although dialoging with you is as targeted more at guys making absolute claims and a few others.
I always enjoy my discussion with you.

We also see eye to eye on the wear vs cleanliness, but many on BITOG say filter efficiency simply does now matter and cite a car with "X" high miles on it. Thing about that is we have no way of knowing how well it runs or how tight it is because those poster dont show us 15 years of smog data or leak downs to really define anything.

Agreed Wix has been less than forthright with many and thats a bummer as I used to like and respect them more- I still think they make a decent quality filter, but there are better for the money.

Also agreed its a good if not gold standard reference for a single stage, and if you can compare apple s to apple all other things being equal its a good indicator of the filters efficiency.

Do I always believe what a manufacturer prints on a box ? Im a skeptic at heart and have watched many of these numbers change over time.

We agree on much more than we disagree on.

UD
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
We agree on much more than we disagree on.

UD

Yep ... I like reading your posts to and appreciate your viewpoints. Always good dialog.
grin.gif
 
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Do I always believe what a manufacturer prints on a box ? Im a skeptic at heart and have watched many of these numbers change over time.

In today's world I think published claims are true from reputable companies. I doubt they could get away with making false claims about efficiency because the competitors can verify said claims, and would certainly threaten a lawsuit if they found blatant spec lies. Lying about performance specs could take business away, so the big competitors are watching each other's claims pretty closely.
 
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Do I always believe what a manufacturer prints on a box ? Im a skeptic at heart and have watched many of these numbers change over time.

In today's world I think published claims are true from reputable companies. I doubt they could get away with making false claims about efficiency because the competitors can verify said claims, and would certainly threaten a lawsuit if they found blatant spec lies. Lying about performance specs could take business away, so the big competitors are watching each other's claims pretty closely.


I see it all the time in my day job(Tv business) , and in my hobby job (boating business)

Competitive products ship with a set of specs, or claims and when my guys get their hands on it they turn out to be way off.

Wasn't the Fram ultra 99.9% efficient at one point in time and that got pulled back to 99 or 99%+?

Lawsuits and proving damages are so expensive few want to undertake them, and even fewer win.

I guess the skeptic in me believes many pull the same stuff.



UD
 
Last edited:
UncleDave and Zee0six you both are super smart, insightful, and a tremendous asset to this place. You both help make this a place of higher learning, thinking critically and very helpful for many other people. You guys both are just bad donkey in my strong opinion
smile.gif
 
Haha thanks, lots of smart well read guys here and lots Ive learned myself.

Many times I don't take enough time and sound mean when I go rearead stuff, not my intention.
I try to look at forums like a bunch of guys sitting around a campfire talking about filters, engines, chargers, whatever....



UD
 
UD it's H E double L hockey sticks typing/writing stuff and not come across in the wrong way. Especially when two people disagree over something. It really has to be literally typed out what you are really thinking to help mitigate that from happening. That really helps a whole lot from what I have noticed. When in person it's much easier to get our thoughts across in the right way usually. I have told a number of guys on here that if we were in person it would much easier. I told StevieC just a bit ago that if we were in person he likely would have called me a crackhead for what I thought about something we were discussing. And that I would have laughed at him. And I would add now... That I would maybe agree with him as well. But it's much easier in person vs typing stuff.
 
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Haha thanks, lots of smart well read guys here and lots Ive learned myself.

+1 ... I've learned a lot hanging out on this site too. Tons of knowlege here.
 
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Wasn't the Fram ultra 99.9% efficient at one point in time and that got pulled back to 99 or 99%+?

I think Fram claimed 99% when it was the Extended Guard (XG), then it went to and still shows 99%+ when the XG was upgraded and called the Ultra. There was some talk that Fram might show it as 99.9% in the future.

Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Lawsuits and proving damages are so expensive few want to undertake them, and even fewer win.

I'm betting a nasty letter or two from the company lawyers with threats of a lawsuit would probably do the trick if there really was obvious deception going on with published performance specs. Any company, or even any "Joe" could have filters tested at an independent certified test lab like SwRI ( LINK ) to prove or disprove ISO 4548-12 claims ... if you got cash to burn.
smile.gif
 
Even simple letters aren't as cut and dried as you'd think. Especially if its company to company - company to person different matter.

Once We had a guy that wasnt a dealer claiming to carry our product advertising it at a low price, and a our in house attorney that specialized in contract law needed to consult with outside council to look up precident on cases. They came up with these cases where people advertised but did not carry a product and convinced s jury of damages.

Bandag Vs Al Bolser Tire Stores
May Kay Vs Weber
Bernina sewing machines Vs Fashion fabrics.

Even with an in house attorney a simple letter cost my company 3918.00 dollars.

I thought I read a Jim Allen thread about the Ultras changing ratings? Maybe not.


UD
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: UncleDave

Even with an in house attorney a simple letter cost my company 3918.00 dollars.


We had a female management employee cost the major aerospace company I was at a LOT MORE THAN THAT! It was just a simple written note, too.

As a result, every employee in the ENTIRE COMPANY (multiple 1000's) had to have a meeting (about 30 at a time) with a couple attorneys about sharing proprietary information with the customer. ... along with the stern warning that if any of us make the same mistake, there will be no tolerance. (you have now all been warned)
 
I'm going to import cheap oil filters from china, and advertise they are 99.999% efficient at catching particles 100 microns or larger.

That should be a successful business venture. Does the average consumer even know what a micron is?
 
Originally Posted By: Linctex
I'm going to import cheap oil filters from china, and advertise they are 99.999% efficient at catching particles 100 microns or larger.

That should be a successful business venture. Does the average consumer even know what a micron is?


On the side of the box: "99.999% efficiency" *









*at 100 microns
 
Fram Ultra, because it's the best filter available right now for the money and can be found at any Walmart and several parts stores.
Amsoil, good filter, pricey and hard to come by though.
Wix XP, seems decent. Not sure I'd pay more for one over a regular Wix though since these don't seem to be very efficient.
TRD, don't know a thing about these, and they're probably marked up stupidly high because it says TRD on the box.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top