FS 2500

[TiredTrucker]

Anyone have much experience with the Filtration Solutions FS2500 bypass filter set up? They make some pretty heavy claims and compare theirs to Amsoil Bypass, Gulf Coast, OPS-1, etc.

Just wondering if anyone had any real world experience with this unit and how it truly worked out for them.

Thanks!

 

[GordoW]

I cannot see how you could go wrong with these - it would be interesting to know the cost of the replacement elements. The video on their website showing how their filter cleaned the "contaminated" oil is very impressive, although I am quite sure that a toilet paper filter would do the same.

 

[Gary Allan]

I don't think that there's much new under the sun with bypass filtration. While some filters are surely tighter than others (especially tighter than OEM), you're always going to be in a balance of efficiency, holding capacity/longevity, and cost of replacement filters. A centrifuge is the next step up.

 

[dnewton3]

First, I don't run a bypass system; that is relevant for you to know so that you understand I don't have a bias for one brand over another.

After almost 60 UOA's comparing/contrasting data logged for UOAs and bypass systems, I can tell you that there is precious little difference in actual performance when looking at UOA results. All the big brand names (Amsoil, FS2500, OilGuard, Gulf Coast, etc) do a fabulous job. They all get contamination down to a point (well below 3um, in general) that the argument between which one is "best" is a moot point. They all work that well.

Particle count analysis might show some disparity between brands, but I don't have a wealth of data to look at in this regard, so I'll leave that to someone else.

Overall, I'd select a brand based upon ease of installation, ease of service, and cost of replacement elements that best fits your desires.

 

[LateArrivalforLSU]

dnewton pretty much hit the el nailo on the heado. I'd lean to ease of service myself, because they are all gonna filter much better than the stocker.

The FS-2500 is changed out by loosening a hex bolt on top of the filter assembly, then the bowl is dropped down. Pretty straight forward. The only one out there that looks to be messy to change out would be the Gulf Coast.

Maybe sdeeter can chime in as he's run one for a number of miles on his truck.

 

[deeter16317]

The Gulf Coast holds about a quart of oil between the lid and the element...makes for an interesting change out.

If you notice the pictures on their site, it shows the filter oriented vertically on a big truck, mine is horizontal under the bed...I could not imagine the mess if it was vertical.

Comparing the results *visually*, the Gulf Coast definitely keeps the oil *visibly* cleaner for a lot longer than the EaBP110 I had previously...but you're also talking two different types of filtering (radial versus depth).

 

[Gary Allan]

The old Be-110 was a depth "disc" type media. The newer EaBp are a pleated arrangement. I believe that your tp/pt filters do a finer job at the sacrifice of longevity. In bypass filtration, given the absolute nature of it, it's very hard to trump the filtration triangle. That is, I think if I had a MG behind an EaBp .. I would expect the tp element to take longer to saturate.

 

[deeter16317]

Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
The old Be-110 was a depth "disc" type media. The newer EaBp are a pleated arrangement. I believe that your tp/pt filters do a finer job at the sacrifice of longevity.



I acquired some BE-90s when I bought the original Amsoil head, they worked very well...I was less than impressed when I switched to the "better" EaBP-series...and I wasn't the only one who noticed the difference. That was the primary reason for the move to the GCF.

There was a guy on a diesel forum who was running a Frantz behind a EaBP-110. Last I heard, he was running almost as many miles on a single roll of TP as I was a roll of paper towels.

 

[Gary Allan]

I too didn't necessarily see the sense to the change ..but ..what do I know

That would be my ideal setup ..a tp "polishing" filter after an EaBp filter. I think you could get real longevity out of the tp that way. Naturally you're up against the standard cost:benefit limits on any of the stuff, .but if performance with the least service hassle was your goal ...

 

[deeter16317]

It also gets down to physical size...this GCF I have is a monster, and would be too big for most applications under that of a full size truck. That's just one of those things that needs considered, and where I see some folks go wrong by buying the filter and then trying to find a place to mount it.

The guy with the Frantz/Amsoil setup gets the same service interval as I do, but he's paying more for his elements on the EaBPs. And he's probably only getting a marginal benefit doing so...

Any bypass is "better" than no bypass...scrutinizing which bypass is better is not realistic to do. I would focus on these parameters for buying a bypass (in this order): size, ease of service, filter life, initial cost, element cost, and filtration (as long as you know its a reputable bypass already).

 

[Gary Allan]

That would be a beatch ..buying and not being able to mount it ..or wishing you hadn't bought it at all with where you had to mount it.

 

[dnewton3]

I'll take issue with this comment; "Any bypass is "better" than no bypass..."

For a person who can't get past a 5k mile OCI without convulsing from OCI OCD, and won't put more than 150k miles on a vehicle before they dump it in favor of the next best thing ... A bypass is a waste of time and money.

If you study the OilGuard website, which I believe to be very informational and factual in most of it's claims, you'll notice that once oil contamination gets down below 7um or so, the life expectancy of equipment becomes nearly infitine. Since the reputable bypass systems all filter well below that size, the question of which one is "better/best" is totally moot. 2um, 1um, sub-micro; who the heck cares when you're debating the infinite?

I do concur that the bypass characteristics and costs should be the determining factors in deciding which to purchase. I don't know that I agree with the order stated, but it is a comprehensive list of things to consider; it expands upon my first post in better detail.

As to whether any bypass is better than no bypass, well, that's a different debate all together.

 

[deeter16317]

Originally Posted By: dnewton3
I'll take issue with this comment; "Any bypass is "better" than no bypass..."

For a person who can't get past a 5k mile OCI without convulsing from OCI OCD, and won't put more than 150k miles on a vehicle before they dump it in favor of the next best thing ... A bypass is a waste of time and money.

If you study the OilGuard website, which I believe to be very informational and factual in most of it's claims, you'll notice that once oil contamination gets down below 7um or so, the life expectancy of equipment becomes nearly infitine. Since the reputable bypass systems all filter well below that size, the question of which one is "better/best" is totally moot. 2um, 1um, sub-micro; who the heck cares when you're debating the infinite?

I do concur that the bypass characteristics and costs should be the determining factors in deciding which to purchase. I don't know that I agree with the order stated, but it is a comprehensive list of things to consider; it expands upon my first post in better detail.

As to whether any bypass is better than no bypass, well, that's a different debate all together.



And in the context of this thread, we are talking about one bypass versus another, which (to me) indicates the OP has already decided that "any" bypass is better than "no" bypass.

Thank you very much...

 

[TiredTrucker]

Thanks for the feedback and the lively discussion. Since whatever I decide on a bypass is going on a Cummins ISX, the issue of whether to put one on is settled. I was siding with the FS 2500 because of ease of installation (kit already pre made with all lines, adapters, etc for my particular engine/vehicle combo), the ease of changing the elements, the relatively moderate cost of the elements, and the ease of getting an oil sample from the unit.

Wasn't totally committed to the FS 2500 until I bounced it off the people here to see what, if any, issues there were with it. Since I plan to run this truck WELL beyond the 1 million mile mark, I was convinced that bypass would be a darn good idea, especially since this is an EGR engine.

I ran a previous N-14 Cummins up to 1.4 million without a bypass and doing 30K miles oil changes using Kendall 15w40 and Baldwin filters. It still was in pretty good shape for its age when I got out of it. Used about a gallon of oil in 10-12 thousand miles and still got over 7 mpg. Not bad for a high mileage engine that still was used as an OTR truck. Only repairs were a head gasket and a couple of injectors. No other major repair issues.

Not that comfortable with the EGR engines though without bypass. Seems like a no brainer to put on something to cut down on the soot and such.

Thanks again for the feed back.

 

[deeter16317]

With something that size, you may find your options more limited...

I have a couple recommendations:

Gulf Coast Filter (uses paper towels)...these are rated for use in big truck applications. You can get these that hold two rolls of paper towels and have information on their site about trucks doing over 1 million without appreciable wear.

Amsoil dual bypass head and EaBP 110s...they should give you enough filter for that engine. I believe they give engine size specifications on their site.

I believe OilGuard makes a larger size version...which are the same as the Racor IIRC.

And one not usually thought of in a *passenger car* application due to size, the LuberFiner LFP9750 and base LMB. They are the LuberFiner ZGard.

 

[Gary Allan]

We now have EaBp 120 ..bigger than the 110

Width = 5.35 in.
Length = 12.12 in.
Height = 17.5 in.

I have an email into them for the thread details. I've got this funny feeling that they pulled another "just out of reach" thing here. They don't say you can put the EaBp120 on the regular BMK22 ..this leads me to believe that instead of just making a bigger filter, they changed the thread too. Sometimes I want to take a trip to Wisconsin with my camshaft in hand .....

 

[DocB]

The FS-2500 has a very heavy, sturdy bowl/cannister that is held on by a bolt over the filter cartridge. I like this aspect of its design because it is mounted under the truck(F-350) and affords protection. Also, the mfg. claims that the filter element removes moisture from the oil. It is a well designed and constructed unit.
I happen to have a very tight, clean and efficient running 7.3L PSD. Breaking it in right also probably helped. I get 21.8 MPG now, but still have some fuel economy work to do. My UOAs have always been excellent, but are even better with this BPF.
My second choice was the Amsoil unit.
The goal is to extend OCIs out to at least 10K, sleep at night, and see 750K on the engine.

 

[dnewton3]

TiredTrucker -
In your scenario, the bypass, and also premium fluids (synthetics), will pay you back big dividends if you extend your drain intervals. OTR trucking is a great application for bypass/synthetics because the mileage accumulation compliments the concept. It increases uptime. It decreases fluid/filter costs compared to "conventional" routines. The fiscal aspects are very sound if managed correctly.

 

[deeter16317]

Originally Posted By: DocB
The FS-2500 has a very heavy, sturdy bowl/cannister that is held on by a bolt over the filter cartridge. I like this aspect of its design because it is mounted under the truck(F-350) and affords protection. Also, the mfg. claims that the filter element removes moisture from the oil. It is a well designed and constructed unit.



While this is true, the unit may not be physically capable of keeping up with the demands of an engine of this size...from what I have read, the FS2500 was designed to target the light truck market, not the OTR truck fleet business.

Running an undersized filter will cause excessive element changes and/or poor performance because the filter simply can't keep up.

 

[daves66nova]

so, out of all these brands, which is the most inexpensive bypass setup?