Spin-On TP?

[oldman]

I let my MotorGuard sit overnight and then I do the same as rugerman and have a plastic bag ready and just a few drops fall. I bought a box of disposable rubber gloves and that makes everything easier. It is so much better than changing the oil and spin on filter.

 

[msparks]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Tommy:
If TP really is the ideal bypass filter media, why not a spin-on TP bypass filter?

---

Exactly who told you that TP is the Ideal by-pass filter?

Wouldn't there be a variety of factors to consider? Would not the ideal by-pass filter be different for different folks, situations, and equipment?

Isn't the Ford F150 the ideal vehicle on the street?

 

[RJCorazza]

quote:

---

Exactly who told you that TP is the Ideal by-pass filter?

---

I didn't, but now that you are asking... they are the ideal filter element.

quote:

---

Isn't the Ford F150 the ideal vehicle on the street?

---

My 97 F150 is in fact the ideal vehicle also. I've got all the bases covered!

To more directly address Tommy's question, Filter manufacturers (particularly bypass) put all manner of material in their filter cannisters. I used to think there was something special or almost mystical about filtration material. Cannister type filters can have newspaper, string, cardboard, wood chips, cellulose, cotton, even recycled trash. Probably why you won't see a TP element in a disposable cannister is that they have a shorter service life than cannister type bypass filters like Amsoil's unit. Replacing a TP cannister every 3k miles would be expensive. As it is, TP vs Amsoil bypass filtration is about a wash monetarily all things considered. The Amsoil bypass filter is certainly easier to change and is changed (much) less often.

 

[rugerman1]

quote:

---

As it is, TP vs Amsoil bypass filtration is about a wash monetarily all things considered.

---

For me,a Frantz or a Gulf Coast is way cheaper.
Total Cost Involved: Upfront costs of a Amsoil(single),Frantz,& Gulf Coast O1-jr are roughly the same.Since I like cheap oil,I run dino or a blend.A buck a quart dino(or a $2/qt blend) plus a 79¢ TP element every 2000 or 3000 miles.Add the cost of a couple ounces of Lube Control,and it's still pretty cheap.

quote:

---

The Amsoil bypass filter is certainly easier to change and is changed (much) less often.

---

Both my bypass filters are located on the fender well,inside my engine compartment.Changing the filter element is very easy.

 

[RJCorazza]

Your points are well taken. In my case, however, it's a wash since I use synthetic. I ran the numbers last year and as I recall the Motorguard TP was slightly cheaper in operation than the Amsoil bypass filter. I have (5) Motorguards in use on (2) vehicles & my tractor. I also use a parallel Motoguard setup to do off-line hydraulic filtration of a 10 gallon sump - now that saves some money!

 

[Tommy]

I have to admit, with all this talk about TP bypass filters, I am warming up to the idea but.....I really detest the idea of playing with sloppy, oil-soaked TP rolls etc. If TP really is the ideal bypass filter media, why not a spin-on TP bypass filter?

 

[rugerman1]

quote:

---

...sloppy, oil-soaked TP rolls...

---

When i change the TP in either my Frantz ot the Gulf Coast O1-jr,I wait about a half hour before I remove the element.At the most,you'll get a couple drops fall before you put the TP element into a plastic bag.The used TP element is compacted from use and is very stoudt.
The Gulf Coast O1-jr drips more because the return line is elevated above the exit port of the canister.The Frantz is located above the pressure and return lines,very little drippage.

 

[msparks]

I wasn't just trying to say the the Amsoil or the Motorguard was ideal.

Since there are at least 10 different manufactures of by-pass filters. Do you not think that each one has it's place.

Filtration Solutions
OilGuard
NTZ (that comes OEM on Ford HD transmissions)
Amsoil
Frantz
Puradyn

These are just off the top of my head. They are serve a purpose and have advantages that others don't.

If my ideal filter is one that I have to mess with every 2000 miles, then so be it. If my ideal is to find the most cost effecive filter for my personal application then so be it.

The spin-on TP filter sounds like a great idea. Since there isn't one, why don't you go out and invent it. I bet there are some folks (especially on here) that would love the convenience of a spin-on. If you could get the price to $5-6 they could chance it in a few seconds every 2-3 thousand miles with much less hassle.

 

[Gary Allan]

quote:

---

I did not say that it was ideal either, but if it was, (as many here believe) why has this not been done yet?

---

It just wouldn't make any sense to do it. The stuff can't last long enough to justify jacking the costs from less than $0.50 per change to over $10 for the sake of a can and threaded end. You may buy it ..and a few others as well ..but for any producer ..it would be a major loser. You can't get enough utility out of it to justify the cost.

TP is the most cost effective way to reach that level of "fine" filtration. That's its primary selling feature. If you could get TP to last 10k without changing it ...sure..there would be a fair market for a spin-on version to be manufactured. That can't work due to the confines of the TP roll's limited cross section and our typical combustion engine's particle ejecta. So ..you're trapped to around 3k TP changes. Any longer interval requires a detuning of filtration. You sacrifice the really fine fitration for something less.

In that realm ..there are a mulitude of bypass filters available in a spin-on configuration. They all, for one market reason or another, usually end up at about the same user cost when balanced for their level of effectiveness.

 

[Tommy]

Yes, you are probably right, it does get down to money in the end. Do you know of any other depth-media spin-on bypass filters, other than Amsoil's?

 

[trynew]

I would also like to see a filter with a combination full flow, through pleated paper, and a small roll of toilet paper in the end that works as a bypass filter, all in a throw away can.

Car manufacturers are putting tiny filters on engines today and claim it is sufficient, so why not lengthen the filter and put some toilet paper in the end? If it plugs up before the filter gets changed, so what? At least that much contamination has been removed from the oil, which is more than the full flow would remove by itself.

I would buy this filter, and I think a lot of others would that can't find space under their hood for a remote filter, and are not comfortable having all the hoses and connections that a remote filter requires.

This sounds like a good project for Amsoil to take on.

 

[4.8 Silverado]

Here is a screw on B.P. filter. http://trasko-usa.com/

 

[Tommy]

quote:

---

I would also like to see a filter with a combination full flow, through pleated paper, and a small roll of toilet paper in the end that works as a bypass filter, all in a throw away

---

Fleetguard makes just such a filter - their LF3000 (and upgrades) are exactly this way, pleated Stratapore media for the full-flow section, depth-media for the bypass section in the bottom of the filter can - it is a little large for passenger car applications however.

 

[Tommy]

quote:

---

Here is a screw on B.P. filter. http://trasko-usa.com/

---

I do not think the Trasko is a spin-on bypass filter - in their FAQ they talk about changing the TP roll.........but you must use their patented TP rolls! Holy man, maybe this stuff would be more efficient in the Loo as well!

 

[Gary Allan]

The Trasko is about as close as you'll get in a spin-on. There are lots of bypass filters and combo filters out there. They also tend to be designed for heavy duty diesels and probably aren't as good as an Amsoil. You can find all the numbers in WIX, NAPA, Baldwin, etc if you look enough. They all come in odd threads and have their own filter mounts.

Even with the Trasko, you'll have to physically change out the TP yourself.

I'm sorry ..but there is no "silver bullet" on this matter. Physical surface area/depth dicates the confines of effectiveness. If you've got a thimble size filter ..odds are you don't have the room for one that would fit a TP roll of any size worthwhile added to it.

quote:

---

I would buy this filter, and I think a lot of others would that can't find space under their hood for a remote filter, and are not comfortable having all the hoses and connections that a remote filter requires.

---

I understand. This is something that confronts many. I think that it's possible to fit a remote/bypass setup under just about any hood. As far as the intimidation of having hoses (and the potential leaks that can occur) strung around the engine bay ...well, that's a phobia that I can relate to ..but it's just not justified. Amsoil offers a fine and inexpensive mount (I can never remember the part number) that will give you relatively fine filtration over a long duration. You won't have to mess with leaking O rings or whatnot and you won't have to change it for about a year. Naturally, if you have to employ a professional to install it, you're going to increase your initial costs a good bit.

 

[Gary - K7GLD]

I fully appreciate the LOW COST replacement of the TP element in my '02 Dodge/Cummins - swapping the element, plus a replacement quart of Delo 440 costs less than a spin-on alone!

As was pointed out above, I change my TP element after the truck has been sitting - usually overnight - and it's very unusual to lose/spill even a DROP of oil. Of course, I use the same method for the full-flow spin as well, who in their right mind wants to be working on a hot engine and filter, if it is avoidable?

The same is true of my Frantz diesel fuel filter as well. When out on the road on RV trips, I usually carry a spare filter canister ready to use in a plastic bag, and can quickly swap out an element first thing of a morning before hitting the road, and use the plastic bag to contain the used eelement.

It's also pretty nice to be able to visually inspect the "dirty" end of the used filter as a spot-check for unusual accumulations - sure beats cutting a spin-on apart!

Here's a pic of my Frantz setup - the fuel filter is mounted on the other side of the engine bay in the same manner:

 

[trynew]

The Trasko is close to being a top choice for a spin-on bypass filter, but it has a couple of weeknesses, aside from having to handle the oil-soaked toilet paper, replacing seals and screwing the filter together correctly.

It currently does not have an anti-drainback valve, so if your filter does not hang down, the oil will drain out after sitting for several hours. This can cause more noise from the engine at startup once or twice a day.

Also, as far as I can tell, the filter will not completely bypass the filtering mechanisms if the screen plugs up like a spin on does. If that screen plugs, your engine gets no oil, or less oil than it needs. I realize this is probably a very rare occurance, though the thought crossed my mind when I saw how much crud was in my cut-up spin on filter after an Auto-RX rinse phase.

I think Trasko is still developing the filter, and maybe soon will have the ideal spin-on bypass, I hope.

 

[4.8 Silverado]

I`m using the Trasco on my Chevy 4.8 right now.It works good for this engine because the oil filter hangs straight down and the engine block has a built in internal oil bypass.Those issues could be a problem on other motors though.I stopped using the Trasco filter media and started using regular T.P.with no adverse effects.You do have to crawl under the vehicle and you do lose a quart of oil when you do a filter change.You will not be able to run the oil as long as a true bypass with the filter being so small,but it does make extended drain intervals much easier to achieve.It works better than a full flow but not as good as a true bypass.It only takes a couple of minutes to change out the T.P. and reinstall.The unit is very straight forward as far as the design goes.Its not for everyone but does a Good job for my situation,Chris.

 

[Tommy]

I did not say that it was ideal either, but if it was, (as many here believe) why has this not been done yet? Just think, superior filtration with all the benefits of an Amsoil bypass filter - no looking for just that right brand of *** -wipe, no waiting for oil to drain back, no leaky o-rings etc. If you really want to inspect media, you can still cut it open.