Question for Ralph Wood.

MDD30240 · Jan 12, 2005

Ralph,

I would like to install one of your Motor Guard filters and maximize the oil flow by getting rid of the full flow filter. It seems like a Perma-Cool remote oil filter mount and a Motor Guard MG-30-ATF would be the simple approach but I am concerned that this would restrict oil flow just as much as a full flow filter. The application is a Chevy 3.4 (Monte Carlo) Do you have any reccomendations? Thanks in advance.

Gary Allan · Jan 12, 2005

Unless you have a real high volume pump ..or a very heavy viscosity oil ..the flow is always the same whether you have a lousy filter, a fine filter, or no filter. As long as the pressure relief valve isn't shunting oil pump output, you're at 100% flow...100% of the time. Only the velocity of the oil changes.

So, eliminating the ff will not increase your oil flow.

msparks · Jan 12, 2005

quote:

Originally posted by MDD30240:
Ralph,

I would like to install one of your Motor Guard filters and maximize the oil flow by getting rid of the full flow filter. The application is a Chevy 3.4 (Monte Carlo) Do you have any reccomendations? Thanks in advance.

Why would you want to get rid of you last line of defense with the full flow filter? Makes no sense, even if the by-pass keeps the oil analyitically clean, you could still have catistrophic failure by particles larger than 30 microns getting into your engine.

Why not increase the capacity of your full flow filter to reduce restriction? Find a 1.5 quart FF filter and I'm sure it will flow more than the filter on there.

Corrected sentence.

[ January 13, 2005, 02:47 PM: Message edited by: 59 Vetteman ]

MDD30240 · Jan 12, 2005

Gary,

Would it be accurate to say that the only time the Perma-Cool sandwich adapter would normally restrict flow would be at startup with cold oil? I suppose I should stop trying to re-invent the wheel and just order what Ralph reccomends on his websight

.

msparks,

I enamoured with the idea of changing the bypass element regularly and topping off the oil to replinish additives so the Amsoil approach is less attractive.

slalom44 · Jan 12, 2005

quote:

Originally posted by MDD30240:
I enamoured with the idea of changing the bypass element regularly and topping off the oil to replinish additives so the Amsoil approach is less attractive.

If you look in the UOA forum and search for results using bypass filters, you will find that because all bypass filters remove moisture, acid formation is significantly reduced therefore TBN numbers stay high much longer. That means less oxidation takes place, and the additives last much longer regardless of which filter you use.

Granted, you have to replenish less oil with the Amsoil filter sinc you leave it in longer, but the additives aren't breaking down fast enough to need replenishing.

Gary Allan · Jan 13, 2005

quote:

Would it be accurate to say that the only time the Perma-Cool sandwich adapter would normally restrict flow would be at startup with cold oil?

Maybe, and ONLY IF the relief valves in the oil pump reach their limit. Otherwise 5 gpm ..is 5 gpm (plug in any gpm you wish). If you're using a 15w40 in subfreezing weather ..it might force the relief valve open. You'll know if you see less start up oil pressure. Is your oil sender near the top of the block on the V6? Most are "post filter" in location. I think my jeep (allegedly) is one of the few that reads pre-filter pressure.

quote:

I suppose I should stop trying to re-invent the wheel and just order what Ralph reccomends on his websight

Or you could learn it the hard way like I did.

If you're in the mood to spend a few more $$, get a couple of tees and add a couple of small 0-100 gauges on the inlet and outlets of the filter. This will give you the "view" of what really happens with the Permacool setup.

RalphPWood · Jan 14, 2005

It was common back in the 60s to toss the almost useless full flow filter and use only the Frantz and Motor Guards. Frantz and Motor Guard had adapter plates that screwed on in place of the full flow filter. You ended up with one 1/8" port. The clean oil was returned to the engine with a hollow bolt in an intake namifold or a self tapping hollow bolt in the oil pan. Frantz went on to make the two port sandwich adapter and the two port converter that was a plate that had both a pressure and return port and replaced the full flow filters. You can do about anything you want with Perma-Cool adapters,including eliminating the full flow filter. At least one on this forum has drilled a remote filter mount adapter to eliminate the full flow filter. I did it on my Camry. My Camry engine is in pristine condition with low mileage for a Toyota at 185,000 miles. It doesn't need the full flow filter. The only use the full flow filter has is to grab anything large that gets in the oil. That is almost nothing in a good engine. I drilled the adapter thru with a 1/4" drill bit so that the oil could flow from the inlet port to the outlet port with pipe plugs in both ports. Then I tapped the outside and plugged the hole. 1/4" is enough to supply the engine and have enough resistance to supply the MG-30. It might not be enough for a larger engine. On the GM engines with the relief valve in the filter mount if you restrict the flow with too small an orifice it doesn't matter the stock relief valve will take over. We need to remember that before 1953 there were no full flow filters. They were all bypass filters and were far superior to the junk they put on cars now. The bypass filters were more expensive for the engine makers and that brought the less expensive and less effective full flow filters. It's not a good sign when tne OIL gets dirty and the FILTER stays clean. There is no advantage to eliminating the full flow filter except it is good to trouble shoot the engine. The larger particles that would be out of sight in the full flow filter will be on the TP roll to see. If you see no large particles you know the engine isn't about to give problems. Probably best to keep the full flow filter for insurance and change it every couple of years or 20,000 miles.

Ralph

daves66nova · Jan 25, 2005

so, let me get this straight, A.you can skip a full-flow filter,B.you can run a full-flow AND a bypass filter inline (one right after the other) and not worry about damage? can i just buy a block adapter,run a dual remote filter base,and run a f.f. and a bypass with no problems? this would be for a 96 saturn sc2 with 5w30 oil. thanks

mjo · Jan 25, 2005

daves66nova wrote:

quote:

so, let me get this straight, A.you can skip a full-flow filter,B.you can run a full-flow AND a bypass filter inline (one right after the other) and not worry about damage? can i just buy a block adapter,run a dual remote filter base,and run a f.f. and a bypass with no problems? this would be for a 96 saturn sc2 with 5w30 oil. thanks

No, Dave, bypass filters are always run in bypass of (parallel with) the FF filter. The permacool adapter basically divides the flow - giving the ff filter most of the flow and bypass filter a small fraction. Bypass filters are so dense that they require the same pressure but use very little flow (2 to 3 CC per second). IOW, don't put the bypass filter in series with the FF or you will starve your engine of oil.

Check out the pics on my Frantz installation on a '95 Saturn (my second car):
Frantz Install on 1995 Saturn SL2

The Frantz eliminated the oil burning. I change TP element every 2500 -3k miles and oil still looks clear (not black). No longer do I get that awful oil smell coming from the vent. If I could do it over again I would use the permacool sandwich adapter (if it fits) and use RTF as thread sealant on all fittings.

Question for Ralph Wood.

Similar threads