http://www.gmtruckcentral.com/articles/oilfilterstudy.html
This is a great recent oil filter study. The fellow did a lot of work and spent some $$$.
This is a great recent oil filter study. The fellow did a lot of work and spent some $$$.
New Oil Filter Study
- Thread starter Boomer
- Start date
- Status
wow - thanks for the post/link.
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2010
- Messages
- 1,663
Very interesting and very exspensive test. College project maybe? not sure. Great info though. Its amazing how construction varies on oil filters. I mean cardboard and felt end caps??
Thats CRAZY!!!
Thats CRAZY!!!
Very nice, thanks
The Fram Extended Guard got the highest score, beating the M1 as well as the Amsoil filter, but only because pricing was a factor.
The Fram Extended Guard got the highest score, beating the M1 as well as the Amsoil filter, but only because pricing was a factor.
nice test, will buy only m1 filters from now. (use to buy them a lot before)
The Royal Purple was a bit of a surprise to me- nice filtering performance but a little short on surface area compared to, say, a P1.
M1- once again, I have to ask myself why on earth anyone would pay more for an M1 than a Wix or Purolator. Its not *bad*, but its nothing special.
M1- once again, I have to ask myself why on earth anyone would pay more for an M1 than a Wix or Purolator. Its not *bad*, but its nothing special.
Originally Posted By: hate2work
Very nice, thanks
The Fram Extended Guard got the highest score, beating the M1 as well as the Amsoil filter, but only because pricing was a factor.
I wouldn't say "only" because of pricing... the XG 30 micron filter paper looks as clean as virtually any other except the Amsoil and RP filters. Its a good filter, and quite probably the best bang for the buck.
Very nice, thanks
The Fram Extended Guard got the highest score, beating the M1 as well as the Amsoil filter, but only because pricing was a factor.
I wouldn't say "only" because of pricing... the XG 30 micron filter paper looks as clean as virtually any other except the Amsoil and RP filters. Its a good filter, and quite probably the best bang for the buck.
This test is garbage because his arbitrary grades in no way correlate to the results of his experiment. They're listed here by the result of the experiment, the grade he assigns each's "filtering ability" is also there for your amusement.
I will say, the experiment was great, my assumption is there was much less difference between filters than he (she?) expected and was therefore forced to make a subjective assumption on filtering ability. The problem I have is acting like your subjective opinion is based on fact when your published facts don't really back up your published opinions.
DG5 Fram 0.24 DG5 C+
1060 Napa 0.24 1060 C+
PF1218 ACDelco 0.241 PF1218 F
LF3679 Fleetguard 0.242 LF3679 C
PG4631 Premium guard 0.242 PG4631 D+
XG5 Fram 0.243 XG5 A-
HP-3002 K&N 0.245 HP-3002 B
HM5 Fram 0.246 HM5 B-
L34631 Purolator 0.248 L34631 B
EaO24 Amsoil 0.249 EaO24 A
PL34631 Purolator 0.25 PL34631 C-
PH5 Fram 0.254 PH5 D+
30-1218 Royal Purple 0.256 30-1218 A
B1428 Baldwin 0.26 B1428 D
HP4 Fram 0.26 HP4 C-
B4361 Carquest 0.27 B4361 D
FL12A Motorcraft 0.27 FL12A D+
OPH1218 Full 0.274 OPH1218 D
ML1011 Mann 0.274 ML1011 B-
DL5 Fram 0.278 DL5 C
S5 STP 0.278 S5 F
PH1218 Luberfiner 0.28 PH1218 C-
M1-302 Mobil 1 0.28 M1-302 B
51060 Wix 0.281 51060 C
21060 Napa 0.282 21060 C+
TG5 Fram 0.286 TG5 C-
MGL9100 Microgard 0.287 MGL9100 B-
3510 Bosch 0.29 3510 C
PPL34631 Proline 0.29 PPL34631 D
PO4011 Pronto 0.29 PO4011 C+
S17 Shell 0.291 S17 F
I will say, the experiment was great, my assumption is there was much less difference between filters than he (she?) expected and was therefore forced to make a subjective assumption on filtering ability. The problem I have is acting like your subjective opinion is based on fact when your published facts don't really back up your published opinions.
DG5 Fram 0.24 DG5 C+
1060 Napa 0.24 1060 C+
PF1218 ACDelco 0.241 PF1218 F
LF3679 Fleetguard 0.242 LF3679 C
PG4631 Premium guard 0.242 PG4631 D+
XG5 Fram 0.243 XG5 A-
HP-3002 K&N 0.245 HP-3002 B
HM5 Fram 0.246 HM5 B-
L34631 Purolator 0.248 L34631 B
EaO24 Amsoil 0.249 EaO24 A
PL34631 Purolator 0.25 PL34631 C-
PH5 Fram 0.254 PH5 D+
30-1218 Royal Purple 0.256 30-1218 A
B1428 Baldwin 0.26 B1428 D
HP4 Fram 0.26 HP4 C-
B4361 Carquest 0.27 B4361 D
FL12A Motorcraft 0.27 FL12A D+
OPH1218 Full 0.274 OPH1218 D
ML1011 Mann 0.274 ML1011 B-
DL5 Fram 0.278 DL5 C
S5 STP 0.278 S5 F
PH1218 Luberfiner 0.28 PH1218 C-
M1-302 Mobil 1 0.28 M1-302 B
51060 Wix 0.281 51060 C
21060 Napa 0.282 21060 C+
TG5 Fram 0.286 TG5 C-
MGL9100 Microgard 0.287 MGL9100 B-
3510 Bosch 0.29 3510 C
PPL34631 Proline 0.29 PPL34631 D
PO4011 Pronto 0.29 PO4011 C+
S17 Shell 0.291 S17 F
Last edited:
The Fram EG seems to be the bargain of the group.
Amsoil EA, Fram XG, K&N, Mobil 1, & Royal Purple look to be the best of the best. I wish he included a Bosch Distance Plus filter in his study but he did a great job regardless.
It's nice to see an oil filter study where someone put a good deal of thought into it and put some scientific data in it to show which was best.
It's nice to see an oil filter study where someone put a good deal of thought into it and put some scientific data in it to show which was best.
Interesting study. Not sure why he wasted his time and money testing the two Fram gimmick filters, Double Guard(discontinued) and High Mileage.
Thought he graded the P1 down on the 30um test a tad unreasonably. It was only .002g difference than the Classic, yet that dropped it from a B to a C-. That said, surprised the Classic showed better than, or close to the P1 at all, in that test. Perhaps more media area of the P1 would make a difference. Puzzling.
As for some prices, many of those would have to be shipped, which would involve a shipping charge, not included. But, the XG would only be ~$1 more everyday at Wally with no shipping.
And as mentioned, no Bosch DP, though I'm certain everyday price would have knocked it down.
Thought he graded the P1 down on the 30um test a tad unreasonably. It was only .002g difference than the Classic, yet that dropped it from a B to a C-. That said, surprised the Classic showed better than, or close to the P1 at all, in that test. Perhaps more media area of the P1 would make a difference. Puzzling.
As for some prices, many of those would have to be shipped, which would involve a shipping charge, not included. But, the XG would only be ~$1 more everyday at Wally with no shipping.
And as mentioned, no Bosch DP, though I'm certain everyday price would have knocked it down.
Originally Posted By: bepperb
This test is garbage because his arbitrary grades in no way correlate to the results of his experiment. They're listed here by the result of the experiment, the grade he assigns each's "filtering ability" is also there for your amusement.
I will say, the experiment was great, my assumption is there was much less difference between filters than he (she?) expected and was therefore forced to make a subjective assumption on filtering ability. The problem I have is acting like your subjective opinion is based on fact when your published facts don't really back up your published opinions.
I think your post is spot on. How is he arriving at the grades based on the contaminant masses? I just compared two filters but your list pretty much show his subjectivity, with the grades not based on the masses from best to worst.
I think you nailed it.
This test is garbage because his arbitrary grades in no way correlate to the results of his experiment. They're listed here by the result of the experiment, the grade he assigns each's "filtering ability" is also there for your amusement.
I will say, the experiment was great, my assumption is there was much less difference between filters than he (she?) expected and was therefore forced to make a subjective assumption on filtering ability. The problem I have is acting like your subjective opinion is based on fact when your published facts don't really back up your published opinions.
I think your post is spot on. How is he arriving at the grades based on the contaminant masses? I just compared two filters but your list pretty much show his subjectivity, with the grades not based on the masses from best to worst.
I think you nailed it.
Close to what I'd expect, honestly, though as with any 'testing' it's really hard to say anything conclusive. I use the products 'rated' with a final grade of just under 3, but don't have to pay for the 3+ grade prices. Though, the Xtended Guard Fram surprised me in the scope of this person's test.
I found it kind of odd that the Purolator Classic 34631 seemed to filter better than the PureOne 34631.
http://www.gmtruckcentral.com/articles/oilfilter/comparison.html
http://www.gmtruckcentral.com/articles/oilfilter/comparison.html
thanks for posting.
Am I the only one who finds it hard to believe the puro classic filters better than the P1?
despite some of the negativity this is one of the better "filter studies" to my knowledge.
Am I the only one who finds it hard to believe the puro classic filters better than the P1?
despite some of the negativity this is one of the better "filter studies" to my knowledge.
Last edited:
I have a Fram Extended Guard running on my Tundra now, and will be performing a UOA with particle counts when I reach the 5,000 mile mark. I will be posting the complete spreadsheet of results to compare it with many of the filters covered in this study - Mobil 1, Amsoil, Royal Purple, and Pure One.
- Status
