Recent Topics
When you help someone and its time to walk away
by RazorsEdge
06/20/18 07:09 PM
Sightly overfilled oil..ok or drain?
by flinter
06/20/18 07:08 PM
Wheel says 50 mph max
by pda1122
06/20/18 06:54 PM
15w40 Maxlife in Motorcycle
by Brian553
06/20/18 06:39 PM
BITOGer in Ottawa/Orleans Canada area ? ...
by Papa Bear
06/20/18 06:36 PM
Old Engine SOUND
by MasterSolenoid
06/20/18 06:06 PM
ProMotive PH 2500 CUT OPEN
by car51
06/20/18 04:54 PM
go green or Dexcool?
by umungus1122
06/20/18 04:50 PM
Latest info on ExxonMobil synthetic base stocks
by Gokhan
06/20/18 04:49 PM
Pennzoil Platinum 5w30 - $3.21/qt Amazon
by SnowmanCO
06/20/18 04:37 PM
What Is Dexos Oil?
by mx5miata
06/20/18 04:27 PM
Hail damage means newer vehicle time!
by ZZman
06/20/18 03:39 PM
Trouble with Grease Gun
by tc1446
06/20/18 02:30 PM
Toyota brand conventional (TGMO)
by Jaha24k
06/20/18 01:45 PM
Any synthetic oil rebates currently or soon?
by 07Piloteer
06/20/18 01:32 PM
2018 Hyundai elantra motor oil
by kapama
06/20/18 01:00 PM
SN Plus on shelves
by 03s
06/20/18 12:23 PM
Group 90 Battery - 45 vs 60aH rating
by The Critic
06/20/18 12:19 PM
Tire on Church 15 Passenger Van
by Gebo
06/20/18 11:58 AM
Battery Disconnect Switch?
by Pike51
06/20/18 11:35 AM
Newest Members
Ilia, nmac9, Theraven, battleman13, Shassis
65278 Registered Users
Who's Online
96 registered (92saturnsl2, 01rangerxl, andyd, 4ever4d, 2003f7, 9050lx, 10 invisible), 1608 Guests and 74 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Stats
65278 Members
67 Forums
285668 Topics
4767443 Posts

Max Online: 3590 @ 01/24/17 08:07 PM
Donate to BITOG
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 >
Topic Options
#4776793 - 06/04/18 12:41 AM Lowest efficiency?
gfh77665 Offline


Registered: 09/01/08
Posts: 3793
Loc: Southeast Texas
Aside from jokes about tears in the media, what filters have the LOWEST efficiency? Any noteworthy to mention?

Top
#4776794 - 06/04/18 12:43 AM Re: Lowest efficiency? [Re: gfh77665]
rooflessVW Online   content


Registered: 12/24/11
Posts: 4041
Loc: North Carolina
Think it's Wix. Specifically their XP line, but their standard filters aren't king of the heap either.

They do, however, have consistent and rock-solid construction.
_________________________
"Zed's dead baby, Zed's dead."

Top
#4776804 - 06/04/18 01:28 AM Re: Lowest efficiency? [Re: rooflessVW]
das_peikko Offline


Registered: 01/01/18
Posts: 503
Loc: San Antonio, TX
Originally Posted By: rooflessVW
Think it's Wix. Specifically their XP line, but their standard filters aren't king of the heap either.

They do, however, have consistent and rock-solid construction.


That's all I care about right there.

Top
#4776811 - 06/04/18 02:16 AM Re: Lowest efficiency? [Re: das_peikko]
andrewp1998 Offline


Registered: 10/18/08
Posts: 853
Loc: MA USA
Originally Posted By: das_peikko
Originally Posted By: rooflessVW
Think it's Wix. Specifically their XP line, but their standard filters aren't king of the heap either.

They do, however, have consistent and rock-solid construction.

approved approved approved
That's all I care about right there.
_________________________
2001 Honda civic HX vtecE- 5 spd,230k+

Top
#4776837 - 06/04/18 04:25 AM Re: Lowest efficiency? [Re: rooflessVW]
bbhero Online   content


Registered: 03/20/15
Posts: 4620
Loc: Virginia
Their regular filters are 95% at 20 microns which is actually pretty good. Not 99.9999999999999999% at 20 microns but hey... Who's counting anyhow LOL
_________________________
Nissan Altima 3.5 Coupe Valvoline Advanced Full Synthetic 5w30 Federated Auto 4612ex
"Treat your family like your friends and treat your friends like your family."

Top
#4777088 - 06/04/18 10:27 AM Re: Lowest efficiency? [Re: gfh77665]
blupupher Offline


Registered: 08/27/04
Posts: 4421
Loc: Katy, Republic of Texas
Seems I read many OEM are the worst as far as numbers (Toyota I think?, the whole flow over filtration).
_________________________
1994 Honda VT1100C: Peak 15w-40/TG/2500 mile OCI
2002 Ford F150: GTX HM 5w-20/EcoGard Syn/1yr OCI
2012 Scion xB: QSUD 0w-20/CQ Blue/5k OCI


Top
#4777213 - 06/04/18 12:36 PM Re: Lowest efficiency? [Re: blupupher]
Macgyver452 Offline


Registered: 07/19/16
Posts: 41
Loc: USA
I'm pretty sure you could put sand in a Toyota's engine oil and it would still last over 100k miles.

Top
#4777223 - 06/04/18 12:40 PM Re: Lowest efficiency? [Re: Macgyver452]
PeterPolyol Offline


Registered: 03/06/16
Posts: 1345
Loc: toronto
Originally Posted By: Macgyver452
I'm pretty sure you could put sand in a Toyota's engine oil and it would still last over 100k miles.
LOL bringing out the greatest hits

Top
#4777247 - 06/04/18 01:04 PM Re: Lowest efficiency? [Re: Macgyver452]
CR94 Offline


Registered: 03/20/16
Posts: 1120
Loc: Western S.C. since 1996
Originally Posted By: Macgyver452
I'm pretty sure you could put sand in a Toyota's engine oil and it would still last over 100k miles.
That might depend on whether your sand grains were large enough to be captured by their filter.

Of cartridge filters I've examined, Toyota's easily gets my vote as the best constructed, least likely to allow some oil to bypass the media. There's limited point in having more efficient media if, for example, the media is allowed to collapse inward, or if faulty geometry allows unfiltered oil to bypass around the ends.
_________________________
2011 Toyota Prius now at 88K
1981 Mazda GLC (323) retired at 606K
1972 Subaru DL retired at 190K
1954 Chevrolet retired at 121K

Top
#4777256 - 06/04/18 01:15 PM Re: Lowest efficiency? [Re: CR94]
Yah-Tah-Hey Offline


Registered: 05/26/14
Posts: 3398
Loc: Columbus,Nebraska
Originally Posted By: CR94
Originally Posted By: Macgyver452
I'm pretty sure you could put sand in a Toyota's engine oil and it would still last over 100k miles.
That might depend on whether your sand grains were large enough to be captured by their filter.

Of cartridge filters I've examined, Toyota's easily gets my vote as the best constructed, least likely to allow some oil to bypass the media. There's limited point in having more efficient media if, for example, the media is allowed to collapse inward, or if faulty geometry allows unfiltered oil to bypass around the ends.
Right you are CR94. Been using them for years. If they are good enough for the largest manufacturer of vehicles in the world, they are good enough for me.

Top
#4777260 - 06/04/18 01:19 PM Re: Lowest efficiency? [Re: gfh77665]
ArrestMeRedZ Online   content


Registered: 11/11/08
Posts: 933
Loc: Las Vegas
I'm not even sure you need oil in a Toyota for it to last 100k miles. My dear wife managed to run hers almost out 3 times, and it didn't seem to affect it.

Top
#4777287 - 06/04/18 02:07 PM Re: Lowest efficiency? [Re: gfh77665]
goodtimes Offline


Registered: 12/08/10
Posts: 2853
Loc: california
Efficiency doesn't mean the multi pass efficiency test alone. But as time goes on that false notion is being adopted. The standard lab test is done in four hours, or about 200 miles on the road, until the filter is full. In real life, that's instead about 10,000 miles, figuring Motorking's one gram of dirt made per thousand miles and a 10 gram load capacity. (low capacity to be even more fair)

To get a lab test showing real life efficiency in my example the test would have to be spread to 200 hours. They likely don't have the money to do that, and I don't think equipment can even measure such small amounts to make an accurate efficiency graph.

There have been some high quality tests done that show a no name oil filter beat the Fram Ultra in particle filtering, and another showed a Fram Ultra with a not so clean ISO score IMO.

The Toyota filter was claimed to be 51% @ 20 microns by Amsoil in 2011, apparently testing one small filter. They still list no lab source or data to this day on that claim. It's just them saying it, and it was seven years ago. So on that one I would say it is unknown multipass test efficiency on current filters. I put the Amsoil oil filter test table in the same category as Synlubes filter claims on another thread today. Amsoil writing Chevrolet as an oil filter instead of Delco gives a lot of pause as to who made the table and what they really were doing there. Someone copying lab results on actual tested oil filters doesn't change Delco to Chevrolet.

Top
#4777324 - 06/04/18 03:01 PM Re: Lowest efficiency? [Re: gfh77665]
gfh77665 Offline


Registered: 09/01/08
Posts: 3793
Loc: Southeast Texas
So, does anyone have any answers to the question, other than Toyota?

Top
#4777337 - 06/04/18 03:16 PM Re: Lowest efficiency? [Re: gfh77665]
kschachn Offline


Registered: 12/26/05
Posts: 9393
Loc: Upper Midwest
Originally Posted By: gfh77665
So, does anyone have any answers to the question, other than Toyota?

How would you know when none of the OEMs publish values for their filters?
_________________________
1994 BMW 530i, 227K
1996 Honda Accord, 262K
1999 Toyota Sienna, 394K
2000 Toyota ECHO, 267K

Top
#4777510 - 06/04/18 06:12 PM Re: Lowest efficiency? [Re: goodtimes]
ZeeOSix Offline


Registered: 07/22/10
Posts: 17772
Loc: PNW
Originally Posted By: goodtimes
Efficiency doesn't mean the multi pass efficiency test alone. But as time goes on that false notion is being adopted. The standard lab test is done in four hours, or about 200 miles on the road, until the filter is full. In real life, that's instead about 10,000 miles, figuring Motorking's one gram of dirt made per thousand miles and a 10 gram load capacity. (low capacity to be even more fair)

To get a lab test showing real life efficiency in my example the test would have to be spread to 200 hours. They likely don't have the money to do that, and I don't think equipment can even measure such small amounts to make an accurate efficiency graph.


I don't think it's a "false notion" ... especially since nobody can prove that a filter that tests lower in efficiency in the lab out performs a filter in the field that test higher in efficiency in the lab - with a controlled experiment.

Here's a real world controlled experiment done via SAE channels (SAE Paper 902238 - LINK ). No surprise that the most efficient filter tested in the lab was also the one that resulted in the cleanest particle count of the engine oil from the field samples. Filters B&C clearly outperform filters A&D in the field UOA particle counts. Filter D was not shown in Figure 2, but if it was it would be way above the Filter A curve (much higher particle count).







Related BITOG thread: https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/4442189/1

Originally Posted By: goodtimes
There have been some high quality tests done that show a no name oil filter beat the Fram Ultra in particle filtering, and another showed a Fram Ultra with a not so clean ISO score IMO.


A data point of 1 ... which could have been a fluke due to sample contamination. Show information from a long thought out controlled experiment, and it might be more believable.

Top
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4 >