Napa Platinum 4100290 - updated PF64 replacement

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Apr 1, 2008
Messages
272
Location
MN
Picked up a couple of these tonight at my local Napa. I paid $10.79 ($11.99 list) a piece. Notice the thread end bypass, which I prefer. This has the updated 22 psi bypass rating as well. This will get installed within a week or so.

Whats interesting is that the Wix equivalent (WL10290XP) is selling at O'reilly for $27.99.

N71Rg59l.jpg


uyV0mhkl.jpg


UcW078Xl.jpg


4xI6Ua0l.jpg
 
Pretty soon they'll be over 10 million oil filter model numbers, and the sticker will be a partially attached 8.5x11 paper with the entire part number spelled out.

Seriously... 7 digit filter numbers should not be a necessary thing?!?
 
Its nice to see the traditional holes instead of louvers as well.
 
Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies
Too bad the Platinum & XP (same) have awful 4548-12 efficiencies. Otherwise they are decent filters.

Originally Posted By: Snagglefoot
Thanks for the post. Is the 22 psi bypass rating written some where? Thanks.
http://www.wixfilters.com/Lookup/Exactmatch.aspx?PartNo=PF64


FYI, I got a message back from Motorking and it appears Fram is going to release an Ultra with the 22psi spec for this application 'soon'. I responded asking for more details on the timeline.
 
Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies
Too bad the Platinum & XP (same) have awful 4548-12 efficiencies. Otherwise they are decent filters.

Originally Posted By: Snagglefoot
Thanks for the post. Is the 22 psi bypass rating written some where? Thanks.
http://www.wixfilters.com/Lookup/Exactmatch.aspx?PartNo=PF64


I was wondering that after I read the fine print on the Fram website under the XG7317...what exactly is the rating AT 20 microns then...? This may have already been discussed on other threads but it got me wondering.

†Fram Group testing of average filter efficiency of PH8A, 3387A, and 4967 or equivalent FRAM TG or EG models under ISO 4548-12 for particles greater than 20 microns

*Fram Group mulitpass testing of representative sampling of average filter capacity of comparable competitive retail products based on ISO4548-12 for XG8A and XG3387A.
 
This has been discussed many times. 20.0001 microns is greater than 20, so might as well say "at 20 microns".

The ISO 4548-12 efficiency test actually defines the measured particle sizes cut-offs as ">x microns" ... not "@x microns". So this could be why Fram uses the "greater than" (more representative of ISO 4548-12 format) instead of "at".

As this example graph shows, the red dot is at "50% efficiency at 21.3 microns". It would basically be correct to say either "50% @ 21.3 microns" or "50% >21.3 microns". Saying "greater than" basically defines everything shown by the green line on the graph.

This filter could also be described at "96% @ 40 microns" or "96% >40 microns".

 
That Platinum is a nice looking filter and a very reasonable price for the construction and what you get. Good for Fram to get an Ultra update for the popular PF64, should be a good seller.

20 as a number is perfect, no plus no minus. Where can one find a 20 micron particle? So they say greater than 20 which is actually more accurate since there is no 20 micron particle anywhere. When they say at 20 it would refer to the 20 mark on a graph.
 
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
This has been discussed many times. 20.0001 microns is greater than 20, so might as well say "at 20 microns".

The ISO 4548-12 efficiency test actually defines the measured particle sizes cut-offs as ">x microns" ... not "@x microns". So this could be why Fram uses the "greater than" (more representative of ISO 4548-12 format) instead of "at".

As this example graph shows, the red dot is at "50% efficiency at 21.3 microns". It would basically be correct to say either "50% @ 21.3 microns" or "50% >21.3 microns". Saying "greater than" basically defines everything shown by the green line on the graph.

This filter could also be described at "96% @ 40 microns" or "96% >40 microns".




Thanks Z, much appreciated.
 
Originally Posted By: JustinH
What on earth vehicle takes a $13 filter, or a $27 filter?

Is it some kind of a dump truck, or a mercedes SUV?


Whats interesting is that the same PF64 that's specified for my Malibu (2.5L Ecotec 4 banger) is specified for the new Corvette...
 
Originally Posted By: JustinH
What on earth vehicle takes a $13 filter, or a $27 filter?

Is it some kind of a dump truck, or a mercedes SUV?


IMO it's a rip off. Like Fram Ultra's up here in Canada. At Canadian Tire they want about $13-17 per filter when not on sale. I bought a few from Rockauto recently. Paid around $9 and ordered 6 filters so shipping is under $2 per filter.

You need to be educated about prices and how to reduce filter prices.
 
Originally Posted By: webfors
FYI, I got a message back from Motorking and it appears Fram is going to release an Ultra with the 22psi spec for this application 'soon'. I responded asking for more details on the timeline.

Great news. Late, and it will take a long time to be sure one gets new-stock. Maybe even need a build date code to be sure its not old shelf stock, for a while.
I've noticed the 4" long PBL22500 Boss has a 22 psi bypass. Fits where a PF63E does. Can fit in some PF64 applications (like mine, '18 GM 1.5T LYX Equionox) where there is room for the 0.7" extra length, while diameter is the same.
This Boss might be a good choice instead of a Wix or Wix XP or Napa equivalents. XP/Platinums have poor efficiency. The Boss isn't as good as an Ultra, but it should be sturdy enough at least. Bosses have around 90% at 20 microns or so from what little info is available on bitog about it. Not stellar great like Ultra, but better than XP-Platinums...
 
Originally Posted By: JC1
Originally Posted By: JustinH
What on earth vehicle takes a $13 filter, or a $27 filter?

Is it some kind of a dump truck, or a mercedes SUV?


IMO it's a rip off. Like Fram Ultra's up here in Canada. At Canadian Tire they want about $13-17 per filter when not on sale. I bought a few from Rockauto recently. Paid around $9 and ordered 6 filters so shipping is under $2 per filter.

You need to be educated about prices and how to reduce filter prices.


On sale about $11. If you run them for two OCIs, which they are designed for, they are cost effective.
 
Looking at $10 versus $5 over a years time is looking at money like it is 1950. Just means nothing today. I go to the grocery and $5 is nothing. You get a beefier filter in the Platinum for the money.

Since they are made largely of steel, and steel is going up, it will be interesting to see if the filter makers can hold their prices as now. Either they take less profit or raise the prices of oil filters.
 
Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies

Great news. Late, and it will take a long time to be sure one gets new-stock. Maybe even need a build date code to be sure its not old shelf stock, for a while.


I bet they will probably give it a completely new part number just like they've done with these new Wix and NAPA offerings with the 22psi bypass.
 
Originally Posted By: webfors
Originally Posted By: JC1
Originally Posted By: JustinH
What on earth vehicle takes a $13 filter, or a $27 filter?

Is it some kind of a dump truck, or a mercedes SUV?


IMO it's a rip off. Like Fram Ultra's up here in Canada. At Canadian Tire they want about $13-17 per filter when not on sale. I bought a few from Rockauto recently. Paid around $9 and ordered 6 filters so shipping is under $2 per filter.

You need to be educated about prices and how to reduce filter prices.


On sale about $11. If you run them for two OCIs, which they are designed for, they are cost effective.


At $27 they are a ripoff...at $11 they are well worth it IMO. To each their own
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top