Quote:
Quote:
I don't know how much the MFT will be affected by the 0w-30 as opposed to a 5w30.
Grades indicate little as far as gasoline economy. You need to be talking in terms of HTHS, FMs, and Kinematic Viscosities.
Quote:
I saw an increase when I went from a 10w-30 to 5w30.
Good...then use the 5w30. But that has little to do with the filter.
Quote:
I appreciate the higher film strength in a synth. I don't think I would have trusted a 5w30 dino to replace a 10w-30 dino.
What evidence do you have that the 5w30 synth your using has a higher film strength than another 10w-30 dino? Further, please define "Film Strength" for me. What are the dimensions of "Film Strength"?
I'll give you a hint...there aren't any. It's like saying it's "warm outside"...extremely vague and relative.
Quote:
Yes, I suppose changing more frequently would also keep clean oil in the crankcase, but why would you want to when this filter keeps it cleaner than new oil? Reference George's earlier posts in this thread regarding that issue.
As mentioned before, you hinging all your follow on logic based on ONE PC whose values are most likely extrapolated. It could be the case the pore blockage method used had a filtering particle size just below a critical level for the OEM filter and just above the Ea0 filter. This would skew all the data allowing a particular filter to look much better than it really is. I still contend we need more data under different circumstances before we start making blanket statements.
Quote:
The MPG savings would disappear in increased costs of more frequent OCs.
Not necessarily. If your train of logic contains a falsehood, the conclusion is likely faulty.
Quote:
It would seem that clean oil would be better than dirty oil, and the consensus here seems to be that the Eao keeps oil cleaner.
The only consensus I see here is a small group a people making unsubstantiated claims that this filter is second only to the next coming of a particular deity.
Quote:
The OEM filter in George's analysis allowed 100 and 50 micron particles to circulate. How long would a particle that size have to stay in the oil to start causing damage? What if it formed immediately after changing the oil? Then you would have to change oil every day.
I addressed this several times already. At this point I think you really need to study up on what various particle counts really entail. In short, your extrapolating from an extrapolation.
Quote:
I would just feel more comfortable with a filter that has shown superior cleaning ability.
Bob
Whatever floats your boat. But keep in mind that people will still question the cost benefit ratio as I don't see a wealth of evidence substantiating what you consider a forgone conclusion.
427,
First, let me preface by saying I am not affiliated in any way with Amsoil, Amway, or any other marketing campaign. I have nothing to gain from any statements I make here.
I pulled the term "film strength" out of my behind, because I didn't remember the actual term for the property that synth has inside a bearing. Under pressure inside a bearing, a 10w-30 dino will have the characteristics of a 20 weight oil, if I recall what I read correctly. I have since found the term used in other articles describing what I was attempting to.
Scroll down to Part3 in this article, the term is used there.
http://www.volvoclub.org.uk/engine_oil_history.shtml
My theory (not proven, have no data to back up) is that the superior performance of synthetics allow the use of a lower viscosity, which will improve fuel mileage. You say it won't, by analysis, but in practice, it does.
The last paragraph of the second to last post here, also states this fact:
http://forums.noria.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/616604995/m/3781046331
I am not a professional oil analyst, in fact 95% of what I know about oil I have learned here (the other 5% from oil companies' advertising, so it may be "tweaked").
George's tests seemed to be accurate, and I had no reason to doubt them. I agree that extrapolating from a small measurement can be inaccurate, but sometimes that's all you have to go on. I have no reason to doubt your experience, either, I'll take all information and try to form a conclusion. Seems that for $20, you're not going to get an extremely accurate answer. I liken it to determining the number of grains of sand in a beach. You measure the amount in a ml, and multiply to get the estimate. If you measured from a part of the beach that had coarse grains, your final answer will be way off.
You're right, the filter doesn't really have anything to do with fuel mileage as far as we know, but TeeDub did say that "The improved filtration should also mitigate oxidative thickening over long OCI's and help maintain high fuel efficiency, much like a bypass filter setup." More frequent oil changes would probably accomplish the same thing, but with more hassle (maybe more expense, too). I'm trying to determine if one really is spending more money overall to experiment with different oils and filters. The Eao would be about $20 with tax and shipping (less if I joined their "club"). My K&Ns were about $10 ea. shipped. A cheapy filter is about $4 with tax. It wouldn't take much to make that up in savings at $3.25/gal for gasoline, IF it really does save fuel. If it doesn't, well, $16 toward my further education.
On the subject of VIIs being stripped out with finer filtration, bypass filtration systems filter down to 1 micron or less, and the virtues of bypass are touted everywhere, why hasn't this been an issue before?
-Bob
