Spin-on bypass filters- options?

[deeter16317]

I would say what I'm running would be classified a "good" system...you will most likely never find a spin-on filter that is similar to your FS2500 in filtration. So you compromise, slightly.

Is his truck an 04 or 04.5?? And yes, it makes a difference. Mine is an 04.5.

The nice thing about the Baldwin B50 is the fact the restriction is built into the filter.

 

[Gary Allan]

The only thing I find objectionable FS2500 is the relative cost of the elements and their life span. If you followed my hopelessly (regardless of how I tried to keep it aloft) degenerating discussion with Tired Trucker, the whole point is to reduce service points and extend the oil usage. Soot production is going to track fuel use. Everything is going to revolve around sump size, sump life, soot level, miles/hours/gallons of fuel, filter's level of fine filtration, filter size, filter life, filter cost, down time, and how that all works out to lower/high $$$.

In the lighter duty stuff the harder part is getting enough use out of the engine to test the sump life all by itself.

While the restrictor is somewhat novel (I found it a neat adaptation

) in the B50, it's as proprietary as Amsoil's offerings with the oddball thread.

There's no other common remote that uses a full flow in the 5/8-18 thread. It appears to be a universal packaged bypass filter setup for smaller engines (that aren't necessarily "small") They're all bypasses and have the restrictors in the filter...so.. restrictor in the filter or restrictor in the proprietary mount is just about the same thing. It was mostly frustrating for me in that I couldn't use an Amsoil bypass filter without ponying up for the heavy duty mount. You'll note that the mount for your B50's is of Permacool grade (probably made by the same people). Amsoil's mounts are a totally different animal ..with a price to match.

while I understand that there's something special about this 2004.5 thingie with the Cummins...

do you mean to tell me that these are 3 distinctive units:

2004
2004.5
2005

That is, for whatever reason, there was a unique brief run of this 2004.5 that mostly just appeared and then disappeared? It existed for a maximum of 6 months in production?

which of the following is true?

They ran out something that the stop gap measure ended up being a banging feature.

They fixed a defect that was already slated for obsolescence at the 2005 model year but otherwise the 2004 had some advantage over the 2005 model otherwise.

If you have the 2004, you've got a known issue that needs to be fixed at some point.

 

[Gary Allan]

Originally Posted By: srtdiesel
Mr. Gary,
I need a filter that is good at soot control. I am also concerned that I need something to regulate the amount of oil pressure and flow that comes through the filter. I have a FS2500 on my 98 Dodge Cummins and am hoping to be able to use a spin on for the 2004 Cummins as it is mostly a daily driver for my dad. What are some of the concerns that I should be aware of when trying to create a good bypass oil system for a light use vehicle that is a daily driver.


What are your goals? The Cummins has a 6month OCI up to 15k miles on approved conventional oil w/o bypass filtration. A bypass would enable you to break out of those confines somewhat. The soot production will tend to depend on the fuel consumed. Your full flow will snag the big stuff and your oil will suspend the smaller stuff. If you're dumping it soon enough, you don't have to worry about the smaller stuff. That said, any diesel that I had would have a bypass filter on it. I would tend to be running the sump out to somewhere near limits though.

As far as concerns, outside of economic reasoning, I don't see too many. Most manage to regulate their flow limits. It tends to be a dual requirement with pleated type filters (Amsoil being one) You have to only tax so much flow and it tends to be an integrated part of the higher efficiency levels. You don't want to return anywhere where the oil flow might get to the intake naturally

Quote:
Also are there any other recommendations that you would make for a bypass system that I am piecing together from common parts.



What's your common parts list?

 

[srtdiesel]

I am using:
- 1/2" flared fittings and hose
- Donaldson filter base LPS04 (Hydraulic filter base)p561131
- Donaldson indicator gauge p563298
- Donaldson filter p551553 25 micron
(Thinking of using a p564967 6 micron
- Return through oil cap using custom barb fitting in original cap.
I hope that this gives you a picture of what I am trying to use. It is a low cost, removable system that my dad can monitor and keep going without me having to track it every week for service. I am hoping to be able to service his once every six months instead of every two. There is no restriction in the system to my knowledge and the 25 micron filter isn't what I was expecting. I was confused by the Donaldson web site and now realize that something more is needed to do what I want it to do. It is a nice little system, I just need to know if I should install something to regulate the flow/pressure and what filter would work for the current system. I would be willing to replace the filter head if there is a better filter that is in the twenty dollar range to replace. Thanks again for the help with this matter as I am no expert with these matters.

 

[Gary Allan]

I had a long post ..but ..hmm.

More edits than you can shake a stick at. I'm trying to keep this cheap.

You may install an upstream choke (not hard to do) and then your gauge will work up to 15psi(d). Then you can leave the in mount bypass intact. When your dad sees 15psi(d) after warm up, it's about time to change the filter.

I'm unsure of the filter life. The choke will tend to increase their efficiency, so the 25um will be better ..and the 6um (3um listed on the Donaldson site for that part number) will probably also improve in overall performance.

Hydraulic applications are very clean compared to engine sumps that are subjected constantly to combustion byproducts. This filter and mount would be more suited to the automatic trans if so equipped.

 

[Gary Allan]

btw..and just for future reference- here's a hydraulic mount and filter for $20+S&H. I don't know the bypass rating in it. It's a 1-12 thread deal like most of your low pressure setups.

Item# 4020

I have an email into NT to see if it has one and what setting it might be at if so equipped.

 

[deeter16317]

Originally Posted By: Gary Allan

While the restrictor is somewhat novel (I found it a neat adaptation

) in the B50, it's as proprietary as Amsoil's offerings with the oddball thread.

while I understand that there's something special about this 2004.5 thingie with the Cummins...

do you mean to tell me that these are 3 distinctive units:

2004
2004.5
2005

That is, for whatever reason, there was a unique brief run of this 2004.5 that mostly just appeared and then disappeared? It existed for a maximum of 6 months in production?

which of the following is true?

They ran out something that the stop gap measure ended up being a banging feature.

They fixed a defect that was already slated for obsolescence at the 2005 model year but otherwise the 2004 had some advantage over the 2005 model otherwise.

If you have the 2004, you've got a known issue that needs to be fixed at some point.



I don't follow your first comment about the proprietary restriction in the filter...the Wix equivalent also has the restriction built in, as do many others???

2004.5 was a engine "change" for emissions...you have either a 2003-2004 or a 2004.5 to 2007. With the introduction of the 2004.5, they met emissions by using an "in cylinder head" EGR...they simply added a 3rd injection event as the exhaust valve was opening. This leads to a huge increase in soot production (in the oil)...a 2004 might not turn oil black for 5000 miles whereas a 2004.5 will turn oil black in less than 100 miles. This change-thing is common throughout Dodge's CTD history...91.5 (intro of the aftercooler), 94 (added a cat), 98.5 (intro of the 24-valve, electronic controlled engine and lost the cat), 2002.5 (intro of the common rail, 47-state compliant), 2004.5 (different programming for the 5.9L common rail, 48-state compliant and got a cat again), and 2007.5 (intro of the 6.7L common rail with its EGR and DPF). I lost track after 2007...and these are just the big changes that I remember.

With that said, if I had a 2004, I wouldn't even consider adding a bypass unless it was A) going to be kept forever or B) heavily modified (BOMB'd). But that's just me...I plan on keeping my 2004.5 a long time, knowing full well they will run a million miles on regular oil changes.

 

[Gary Allan]

Quote:
I don't follow your first comment about the proprietary restriction in the filter...the Wix equivalent also has the restriction built in, as do many others???


Poor choice of words. The B50 and it's cousins/clones are used for no other purpose than bypass filtration. They can't be used for full flow filtration. All filters with the same thread are bypass filters. The mount has no other purpose beyond bypass filtration. Amsoil puts restrictors in the mounts or fittings for the mounts (dedicated bypass units).

They're inverted twins ..so to speak. You have no full flow filters to use on your unrestricted mounts. I can't use my restricted mounts for full flow filtration (stand alone bypass).

I have no issue with your setup.


Thanks for the explanation about the 2004.5 issue. I can see now why it's important.

Here's the holding capacity from the Amsoil techline:

Gary;



The EABP90 has 95 Grams.



The EABP100 has 100 Grams.



The EABP110 has 160 Grams.

 

[deeter16317]

I can sort of see why they used a unique thread...to prevent people from using a non-bypass filter on the mount that would A) potentially starve the engine of oil and B) provide no benefit over the existing full-flow filter. As Steve S pointed out, they are a holdover from a long time ago...probably there were only one or two other thread sizes used at all.

 

[Gary Allan]

Yes ..you and SteveS are correct. The part numbers in the specialty catalog (the yellow button down and to the left on the Wix filter look up page) offer it as a spin-on alternative to the canister/cartridge filters and suggesting it as an add on bypass system. If you hit the "all applications" and google a few of the engine name/numbers you'll take a trip back in time on most of them.

 

[srtdiesel]

Gary,
you mentioned this:
"You may install an upstream choke (not hard to do) and then your gauge will work up to 15psi(d). Then you can leave the in mount bypass intact. When your dad sees 15psi(d) after warm up, it's about time to change the filter."
I am wondering what kind of adapter you use as an upstream choke. i am also considering using the northern base in the future but am looking to get this system going first and then move the donaldson base on the auto trans as you suggested. Thanks for all the help with this.

 

[Gary Allan]

Find a metering valve on ebay. 350244930371 put that number into the search engine. I'm pretty sure that the O ring's are nitrile buna rubber (NBR on the spec sheet) which should work.


http://www.chemoilproducts.com/PDF/valves/COP86254.pdf

There may be some trial and error. If you've got a decent gauge on the engine, I'd warm the engine and open it to a any flow where the supply isn't taxed. I would think a quart a minute would be plenty ..or whatever gave you near zero on the filter guage. Then it's survey time to see how quickly you develop 15psi in service.

I dunno how this will work out economically with hydraulic filters ..but that's how I'd set it up if that is what I was using.

 

[deeter16317]

With nearly 12k on the oil, I have a reported 0.7% soot using Schaeffer's analytical lab. You can see my UOAs in the Diesel UOA section. Before, with the GCF, I had 0.4% and "trace" insoluables, but that was using Blackstone.

So there's not really that much difference, and may simply be variance between equipment and labs. At least the results were within the same order of magnitude, and still well within the acceptable range.

Overall I'm pleased.

 

[Gary Allan]

That's what counts.

 

[AlaskaMike]

Steve, what kind of interval did you use when you had the GCF? I looked in the UOA section but didn't notice if you mentioned it there.

 

[deeter16317]

Originally Posted By: AlaskaMike
Steve, what kind of interval did you use when you had the GCF? I looked in the UOA section but didn't notice if you mentioned it there.





Based on UOAs, I was changing the GCF element and primary oil filter every 10k (or so) and adding make-up oil...I believe the longest I ran the oil was 30k, following the 10k FCI.

Generally I tried to keep to a 10k OCI as recommended by Gulf Coast.

You could sort of tell if the element was soot loaded...if you leave it drain for a few days, the roll will be hard and crunchy if it has a lot of soot from what I remember.

 

[deeter16317]

Well, put 17.5k on the oil...didn't get to take a UOA, but the filter was clean...nothing in it. I'll probably run it longer next time...change the oil and full-flow, leave the bypass in place.

 

[Gary Allan]

Maybe next round you'll get a sample. It can take a while to dial in what's optimal.