Looking on the purolator where it fits guide, i don't see any Suburu under the TG 7317, not sure why it was even mentioned?
Alternatives to the OEM filter for Subarus??
- Thread starter Blue_Goose
- Start date
- Status
The Impreza engine is the same as the Crosstrek. Anything specd for the Impreza will work on the Crosstrek
http://www.purolatorautofilters.net/reso...317&page=18
No Subaru listed under either the 7317 Fram part numbers, why was it mentioned or is the Purolator guide wrong?
No Subaru listed under either the 7317 Fram part numbers, why was it mentioned or is the Purolator guide wrong?
Does Wix 57712 have better filtration efficiency than Wix 57830 for Subaru FB 2.0l?
- 57712: nominal micron rating 21u, beta: 2/20=2/20 (from another source: 2/20=6/20) , (but: 300 psi, 23psi)
- 57830: nominal micron rating 35u(!), beta: 2/20/75/26/>50/>50, (but: 332psi, 28 psi)
- 57712: nominal micron rating 21u, beta: 2/20=2/20 (from another source: 2/20=6/20) , (but: 300 psi, 23psi)
- 57830: nominal micron rating 35u(!), beta: 2/20/75/26/>50/>50, (but: 332psi, 28 psi)
Originally Posted By: Izb
Does Wix 57712 have better filtration efficiency than Wix 57830 for Subaru FB 2.0l?
- 57712: nominal micron rating 21u, beta: 2/20=2/20 (from another source: 2/20=6/20) , (but: 300 psi, 23psi)
- 57830: nominal micron rating 35u(!), beta: 2/20/75/26/>50/>50, (but: 332psi, 28 psi)
Nominal micron ratings only tell a part of the picture. It's not a chemical filter (like home water filtration) where maximum efficiency would be when it's brand new. An oil filter is supposed to get more efficient as it loads up, although I understand that some trapped contaminants can loosen and escape. Certainly with air filters, it's well known that the poorest efficiency is immediately after a new one is installed.
Does Wix 57712 have better filtration efficiency than Wix 57830 for Subaru FB 2.0l?
- 57712: nominal micron rating 21u, beta: 2/20=2/20 (from another source: 2/20=6/20) , (but: 300 psi, 23psi)
- 57830: nominal micron rating 35u(!), beta: 2/20/75/26/>50/>50, (but: 332psi, 28 psi)
Nominal micron ratings only tell a part of the picture. It's not a chemical filter (like home water filtration) where maximum efficiency would be when it's brand new. An oil filter is supposed to get more efficient as it loads up, although I understand that some trapped contaminants can loosen and escape. Certainly with air filters, it's well known that the poorest efficiency is immediately after a new one is installed.
Originally Posted By: Izb
Does Wix 57712 have better filtration efficiency than Wix 57830 for Subaru FB 2.0l?
- 57712: nominal micron rating 21u, beta: 2/20=2/20 (from another source: 2/20=6/20) , (but: 300 psi, 23psi)
- 57830: nominal micron rating 35u(!), beta: 2/20/75/26/>50/>50, (but: 332psi, 28 psi)
57712 beta:
2/20=2/20 --> Means: 50% @ 2 microns, 95% @ 20 microns
2/20=6/20 --> Means: 50% @ 6 microns, 95% @ 20 microns
57830 beta:
2/20/75=26/>50/>50
Means:
50% @ 26 microns
95% @ > 50 microns
98.7% @ > 50 microns
Obviously, the 57712 is more efficient based on those beta numbers.
Does Wix 57712 have better filtration efficiency than Wix 57830 for Subaru FB 2.0l?
- 57712: nominal micron rating 21u, beta: 2/20=2/20 (from another source: 2/20=6/20) , (but: 300 psi, 23psi)
- 57830: nominal micron rating 35u(!), beta: 2/20/75/26/>50/>50, (but: 332psi, 28 psi)
57712 beta:
2/20=2/20 --> Means: 50% @ 2 microns, 95% @ 20 microns
2/20=6/20 --> Means: 50% @ 6 microns, 95% @ 20 microns
57830 beta:
2/20/75=26/>50/>50
Means:
50% @ 26 microns
95% @ > 50 microns
98.7% @ > 50 microns
Obviously, the 57712 is more efficient based on those beta numbers.
57712 - only for EJ engines !!!
57830 - for FB engines
(different location of bypass valve)
57830 - for FB engines
(different location of bypass valve)
- Status