Toyota OEM Oil Filter Efficiency

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Sep 18, 2002
Messages
6,056
Location
VA
Well, I am gonna open up a can of worms. I may be criticized and made fun of but that's ok. Check out what I found out about Toyota's OEM filter efficiency.

I have access to an Engineer at Toyota as he comes to my church when he is in town. He works in US and has been to Japan several times. I asked him to find out why Toyota OEM filters have such "poor" efficiency ratings based on what I know. I have no proof but I read where a lot of peoples say their micron efficiency is so much less than what we can by from Fram, Mobil, Amsoil, etc.

He's said he would try and find out. It has been over 2 months and he has been to service twice in that time. Last Sunday he came and apologized as he has been unable to get anyone to tell him why. He said I do have one other avenue to approach and he promised to let me know. Well, guess what? He finally got someone to talk with him off the record.

Here is the direct quote of his text to me:

Well, probably not the answer you wanted to hear but I've gathered the reason why Toyota use "subpar" filtration is it's cheaper, they've evaluated it and determined that is doesn't pose a risk to the longevity of the engine.



How is this supposed to make me feel?
 
Why would you think Toyotas filters are subpar? There is a probleM here with letting preconcieved notions get in the way of facts! While the fancy filters aren't that expensive so why not use them, is there any one on this board that can besides regurgitate marketing clains prove their engines lasted longer with the premium filters . This is considering the fact that properly maintained engines usually out last the bodies and trannies.
 
Manufacturers want their cars to last as long as their warranty, after that, they don't really care.

Will having a filter that is 60% @ 20 microns vs 99% @ 20 microns make a difference in 40,000 miles, no.
Not even in 100,000 miles more than likely.
But when you start getting into the 200,000 mile range, if a higher filtration filter was used, you will have less wear on the engine, and many more miles left on it (from an oil standpoint).

Does that mean a motor with OEM filters used for life will not last 200,000 miles. No, but I would rather have one with less wear bu using a higher efficiency filter.
 
Toyota filters work fine and the engine longevity and reputation is proof that there's nothing wrong with the filters that Toyota provides.

I pay $3.85 for the Toyota cartridge filters for the Corolla and Camry that I maintain for my neighbors and that is as inexpensive as they come. WalMart sells their brand for about $3.00 but I'm not convinced that there is any savings to be noticed by using a no-name branded filter. If I needed to buy one on the spur of the moment then maybe I'd consider the cheapy WalMart product. Otherwise I stick to OEM provided quality.
 
My cousin’s neighbor’s son-in-law’s former roommate said NEVER use Toyota OEM oil filters. Your engine will be in eminent danger of seizing and/or exploding.
smirk.gif
 
Originally Posted By: Gebo


Here is the direct quote of his text to me:

Well, probably not the answer you wanted to hear but I've gathered the reason why Toyota use "subpar" filtration is it's cheaper, they've evaluated it and determined that is doesn't pose a risk to the longevity of the engine.



How is this supposed to make me feel?


A) Like Toyota make a superior product

and

B) You want to find a better filtering filter!
 
Millions of Toyota engines have run untold millions of miles, even billions on Toyota OEM filters. If there was a problem we would know it by now.

This topic is really hitting this forum in various threads. You will find that there is no one answer to satisfy everyone here.
 
I do recall a few conversations on here where it is stated that we probably don't really need an oil filter....

VW beetles used screens. I never understood why they sold replacement screens. there was never anything wrong with the screen - nor nothing in it.
I believe there is also a reference to an experiment from Bob which seemed to indicate that oil filter efficiency was not very important
 
And my 2012 V6 has a 10,000 mile OCI without so much as an OLM. These Toyota OE cartridge filters are tiny.
But, after 75,000 miles, it doesn’t burn ONE DROP between OCs and the oil maintains its golden color. Think about that. Can you say that about any other engine? None that I’ve seen.

Toyota designed this engine to be low stressed. It is torquey and mated to an efficient six speed tranny. It rarely sees 3000 rpm. They are telling us that oil isn’t all that important to the engines they design. Just keep something on the dipstick and it will go 300,000+.
 
Originally Posted By: Tony10s
DENSO
smile.gif



lol.gif
... Tony, are you going proxy for the DENSO man?
 
Originally Posted By: PimTac
This topic is really hitting this forum in various threads. You will find that there is no one answer to satisfy everyone here.


My concision is using a higher efficiency oil filter helps if you're running longer OCIs. I think Toyota recommends (or at least they use to) a pretty short OCI schedule, so if you're dumping the sump relatively often (say 5K miles vs 10K miles) then you can get away with a less efficient oil filter. Engine wear is all about the cumulative number of wear particles that have collected in the sump and have flowed round-and-round throughout the engine over the length of the OCI.

In other words, the cumulative wear over a 5K OCI with a 50% @ 20u filter will probably be about the same as the cumulative wear over a 10K OCI with a 99% @ 20u filter.
 
Toyota put an expensive Japan made Denso filter on mine. After that one, they didn't buy any more for me. This is the part of the comment I agree with, "and determined that is (it) doesn't pose a risk to the longevity of the engine." There you go, Toyota has tested engine longevity and found no difference. Finally they answer the question asked a million times.
laugh.gif
 
Technically, any engine wear that stays withing the FSM dimensional specs is not 'worn out'. Toyota or any other vehicle manufacturer would not warranty any engine that was still within FSM dimensional specs. Even if after 500K miles, if an engine part was on the ragged end of a FSM spec it's still not technically 'worn out'.

But if much more efficient oil filters were used over the life of the engine would those parts be farther away from the ragged edge of being worn out per the FSM? That's the whole argument with low efficiency vs high efficiency oil filters. Just because an engine made it to 500K miles doesn't mean it didn't wear out some, and the level of wear could never be attributed to the use of the oil filter by comparing engine parts dimensions to FSM specs unless you ran some pretty sophisticated wear tests to flush out the effect of the filter.

Besides, people never keep vehicles long enough to really care anyway, as long as it didn't blow-up they are happy.
 
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
... Even if after 500K miles, if an engine part was on the ragged end of a FSM spec it's still not technically 'worn out'.

But if much more efficient oil filters were used over the life of the engine would those parts be farther away from the ragged edge of being worn out per the FSM? That's the whole argument with low efficiency vs high efficiency oil filters. Just because an engine made it to 500K miles doesn't mean it didn't wear out some, and the level of wear could never be attributed to the use of the oil filter by comparing engine parts dimensions to FSM specs unless you ran some pretty sophisticated wear tests to flush out the effect of the filter.

Besides, people never keep vehicles long enough to really care anyway, as long as it didn't blow-up they are happy.
I kept a vehicle (see below) well past 500K on cheap (mostly Purolator) filters, and it not only didn't "blow up," it never had any problem that could reasonably be blamed on wear of oily engine parts. Admittedly, I performed no "pretty sophisticated wear test," but it had no discernable ridge at the tops of the cylinder walls (which the "FSM" ironically implied was to be expected). Whether this would've been possible with filter media like Toyota's, I wonder.

Howcum nobody talks as much about the efficiency of Toyota (or other) air filters, which are so much more critical to engine life?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top