[Cut Open] Harley Davidson Super Premium 5 (63731-99A)
- Thread starter DuckRyder
- Start date
- Status
I wonder who makes it for them. 5 micron nominal? She sure is a clean filter. Are those smudges from the disassembly process, or was it like that?
And linked is what the chrome version looks like after ~3500 miles of use. Harley Davidson Super Premium5 cut open/pics.
The unused one won't win any aesthetic awards for uniformity/straightness of the seam pleat. The linked used one looked much better and for their cost I'd expect that to be the case.
As for the nominal rating, generally implies at 50%. But as topic'd/discussed here in the past, unlike an ISO spec, that can be open to interpretation.
The unused one won't win any aesthetic awards for uniformity/straightness of the seam pleat. The linked used one looked much better and for their cost I'd expect that to be the case.
As for the nominal rating, generally implies at 50%. But as topic'd/discussed here in the past, unlike an ISO spec, that can be open to interpretation.
Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
I wonder who makes it for them.
Me too, I'm guessing the line around the center of the element is from a string used during assembly which would seem to indicate Champion Labs.
Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
5 micron nominal?
I've been meaning to investigate further.
Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
She sure is a clean filter. Are those smudges from the disassembly process, or was it like that?
It was like that. It appears to be potting material and it is very securely stuck...
I wonder who makes it for them.
Me too, I'm guessing the line around the center of the element is from a string used during assembly which would seem to indicate Champion Labs.
Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
5 micron nominal?
I've been meaning to investigate further.
Originally Posted By: DoubleWasp
She sure is a clean filter. Are those smudges from the disassembly process, or was it like that?
It was like that. It appears to be potting material and it is very securely stuck...
I help my son change the oil on his HD and we use this black filter, he buys it at the local dealer for $8.00 ($10.00 for chrome) and I think thats a great price! The filter quality is excellent.
He runs AMSOIL 20W 50 at 5,000 miles we change the oil filer and top the oil off then do a complete oil and filer chage at 10,000 miles that is what we prefer I know others have their own opinion but this works great for us.
TOTO.
He runs AMSOIL 20W 50 at 5,000 miles we change the oil filer and top the oil off then do a complete oil and filer chage at 10,000 miles that is what we prefer I know others have their own opinion but this works great for us.
TOTO.
I like the nominal rating right on the box, no efficiency marketing mumbo jumbo. I think nominal means about, or something like that, or expected. Still it should filter everything to about 5 microns or less and how many passes through the media it takes to do that maybe isn't so critical in real life use, IMO.
Originally Posted By: SJohnson
The seams looks a little shabby to me. Hard to tell from the pics. How does it look in real life?
It looks not straight and well sealed.
Could it be prettier? Yes.
I don't think it would be anything other than prettier though.
Originally Posted By: SJohnson
Got any pics of the filter/potting interface?
The seams looks a little shabby to me. Hard to tell from the pics. How does it look in real life?
It looks not straight and well sealed.
Could it be prettier? Yes.
I don't think it would be anything other than prettier though.
Originally Posted By: SJohnson
Got any pics of the filter/potting interface?
Originally Posted By: goodtimes
I like the nominal rating right on the box, no efficiency marketing mumbo jumbo. I think nominal means about, or something like that, or expected. Still it should filter everything to about 5 microns or less and how many passes through the media it takes to do that maybe isn't so critical in real life use, IMO.
In the filter world, "nominal" usually means @ 50% efficiency.
"The two most popular reported media ratings are a nominal micron rating (50%) and an absolute micron rating (98.7%). A nominal rating usually means the filter's media can capture a given percentage of particles of a stated size. For example, a filter might be said to have a nominal rating of 50% for particles 10 micrometers in size or larger."
Reference Source
I like the nominal rating right on the box, no efficiency marketing mumbo jumbo. I think nominal means about, or something like that, or expected. Still it should filter everything to about 5 microns or less and how many passes through the media it takes to do that maybe isn't so critical in real life use, IMO.
In the filter world, "nominal" usually means @ 50% efficiency.
"The two most popular reported media ratings are a nominal micron rating (50%) and an absolute micron rating (98.7%). A nominal rating usually means the filter's media can capture a given percentage of particles of a stated size. For example, a filter might be said to have a nominal rating of 50% for particles 10 micrometers in size or larger."
Reference Source
I only run the Amsoil EAO134C on my FLHX, but the Harley filter specs are impressive if it removes 98.5% at 5 microns.
Maybe someone can do a cut-open side by side comparison between the two filters, so we can see how much better the Amsoil is constructed. I believe Amsoil uses a wire backed two ply synthetic media filter. Doesn't look like the Harley filter is similar to the Amsoil internals.
Maybe someone can do a cut-open side by side comparison between the two filters, so we can see how much better the Amsoil is constructed. I believe Amsoil uses a wire backed two ply synthetic media filter. Doesn't look like the Harley filter is similar to the Amsoil internals.
Last edited:
IMO, the gatewayharley efficiency link graphic doesn't pass the smell test. I believe they (gateway) are confusing the nominal rating with an absolute efficiency rating. As noted earlier, nominal rating is 'generally' considered to be 50%, which in this case is @5um.
Otoh, absolute efficiency is in the ~98.5% range. The HD SP5 box says nominal rating (~50%) and only the gateway blog posts that graphic using 98.5%. I'll go by what the HD SP5 box information says.
Not saying it's not a solid filter, but the gatewayharley graphic is in direct conflict with the HD Super Prem box information. And doing a search it is the only place I was able to find that graphic information spec.
For more on nomimal rating vs absolute rating see the link below for a prior discussion of difference between the two.
Nominal vs Absolute Micron Rating.
Otoh, absolute efficiency is in the ~98.5% range. The HD SP5 box says nominal rating (~50%) and only the gateway blog posts that graphic using 98.5%. I'll go by what the HD SP5 box information says.
Not saying it's not a solid filter, but the gatewayharley graphic is in direct conflict with the HD Super Prem box information. And doing a search it is the only place I was able to find that graphic information spec.
For more on nomimal rating vs absolute rating see the link below for a prior discussion of difference between the two.
Nominal vs Absolute Micron Rating.
Originally Posted By: GM4LIFE
I only run the Amsoil EAO134C on my FLHX, but the Harley filter specs are impressive if it removes 98.5% at 5 microns.
Maybe someone can do a cut-open side by side comparison between the two filters, so we can see how much better the Amsoil is constructed. ...
I'll cut and post if someone wants to send me one - PM me.
Originally Posted By: sayjac
..And doing a search it is the only place I was find that graphic information spec.
...
Me either...
In fact I found that graphic a while back and saved it, I had to find the actual page again today.
Using a google image search I only found 4 instances of that image. 3 of them are clearly Gateway Harley, the other is simply an image repository of some sort...
Additionally if you look up the filter on Harley-Davidson.com several folks have directly asked what the rating method is and have not gotten an answer.
I have a printed P&A catalog or two around here I will check as well...
If it really is 98.5% @ 5 microns the MoCo is silly for not putting that in the biggest letters that will fit on the box...
Curious though that apparently no other filter manufacturer has sought to challenge the Gateway Harley Blog/Twitter/ETC.
I still think it is a solid filter and the black ones cost about what an Ultra does. Not a bad deal...
I'm sure he probably can't due to NDA, but it would be nice if Jay could confirm or deny the graphic.
I only run the Amsoil EAO134C on my FLHX, but the Harley filter specs are impressive if it removes 98.5% at 5 microns.
Maybe someone can do a cut-open side by side comparison between the two filters, so we can see how much better the Amsoil is constructed. ...
I'll cut and post if someone wants to send me one - PM me.
Originally Posted By: sayjac
..And doing a search it is the only place I was find that graphic information spec.
...
Me either...
In fact I found that graphic a while back and saved it, I had to find the actual page again today.
Using a google image search I only found 4 instances of that image. 3 of them are clearly Gateway Harley, the other is simply an image repository of some sort...
Additionally if you look up the filter on Harley-Davidson.com several folks have directly asked what the rating method is and have not gotten an answer.
I have a printed P&A catalog or two around here I will check as well...
If it really is 98.5% @ 5 microns the MoCo is silly for not putting that in the biggest letters that will fit on the box...
Curious though that apparently no other filter manufacturer has sought to challenge the Gateway Harley Blog/Twitter/ETC.
I still think it is a solid filter and the black ones cost about what an Ultra does. Not a bad deal...
I'm sure he probably can't due to NDA, but it would be nice if Jay could confirm or deny the graphic.
http://hastingsfilters.com/TechTips201403.html
This link is very informative reading concerning micron ratings.
TOTO.
This link is very informative reading concerning micron ratings.
TOTO.
Originally Posted By: sayjac
IMO, the gatewayharley efficiency link graphic doesn't pass the smell test. I believe they (gateway) are confusing the nominal rating with an absolute efficiency rating. As noted earlier, nominal rating is 'generally' considered to be 50%, which in this case is @5um.
+1 ... I was thinking the same thing. They've mixed up the "absolute" and "nominal" terminology. 98.5% efficiency at 5 microns is unheard of in oil filters for public vehicles.
As shown in sajac's link to another thread where I linked the following, I think I'd trust the explanation from the Filter Manufacturers Council.
Filter Manufacturers Council, Nominal vs Absolute Efficiency
IMO, the gatewayharley efficiency link graphic doesn't pass the smell test. I believe they (gateway) are confusing the nominal rating with an absolute efficiency rating. As noted earlier, nominal rating is 'generally' considered to be 50%, which in this case is @5um.
+1 ... I was thinking the same thing. They've mixed up the "absolute" and "nominal" terminology. 98.5% efficiency at 5 microns is unheard of in oil filters for public vehicles.
As shown in sajac's link to another thread where I linked the following, I think I'd trust the explanation from the Filter Manufacturers Council.
Filter Manufacturers Council, Nominal vs Absolute Efficiency
Originally Posted By: webfors
That's one ugly seam. ...
It was not coming apart until I sliced through it and pulled on the wire mesh.
That's one ugly seam. ...
It was not coming apart until I sliced through it and pulled on the wire mesh.
- Status
Similar threads
