Recent Topics
Early Christmas present to me! Air Compressor
by dnewton3. 10/17/18 10:37 AM
Rock Auto 5% off code.
by Sayjac. 10/17/18 09:53 AM
Canada - Marijuana now legal
by Smokescreen. 10/17/18 09:51 AM
Proper sampling
by BigShug681. 10/17/18 09:36 AM
Snow Driving - Engineering Explained
by StevieC. 10/17/18 09:36 AM
Friendly Inspection
by Zee09. 10/17/18 09:33 AM
Shell V-Power NITRO VS "Cheaper" fuel
by Datarock. 10/17/18 09:02 AM
Cut open used Fram Ultra & Subaru OEM
by MrWideTires. 10/17/18 08:31 AM
Cruze diesel oil filter, which one?
by Rat407. 10/17/18 07:17 AM
Kagayaki rice breed???
by RyanHeo. 10/17/18 06:24 AM
Small engine oils
by NHRATA. 10/17/18 12:46 AM
"OEM" Brand Hyundai Coolant/Anti-Freeze
by Gannet167. 10/16/18 11:45 PM
Pentosin Pentofrost A2 vs Peak OET Asian
by tony1679. 10/16/18 11:40 PM
The Youtube Blackout
by Warstud. 10/16/18 09:28 PM
Mobil 1 annual protection
by dbvettez061. 10/16/18 09:27 PM
Oil recommendations please
by Mccull. 10/16/18 09:22 PM
Removing O2 sensor
by Spetz. 10/16/18 09:14 PM
Newest Members
jimmy154, DizzyFrog, Tomcat58, Totes, Ambo87
66233 Registered Users
Who's Online Now
117 registered members (Anthony, ArrestMeRedZ, ammolab, Andy636, Alfred_B, 16 invisible), 1,978 guests, and 47 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Forum Statistics
Forums67
Topics292,086
Posts4,873,757
Members66,233
Most Online2,449
Oct 16th, 2018
Donate to BITOG
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Hop To
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4
Lowest efficiency? #4776793
06/04/18 12:41 AM
06/04/18 12:41 AM
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,924
Southeast Texas
gfh77665 Offline OP
gfh77665  Offline OP
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,924
Southeast Texas
Aside from jokes about tears in the media, what filters have the LOWEST efficiency? Any noteworthy to mention?

Re: Lowest efficiency? [Re: gfh77665] #4776794
06/04/18 12:43 AM
06/04/18 12:43 AM
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,870
North Carolina
rooflessVW Online content
rooflessVW  Online Content
Joined: Dec 2011
Posts: 4,870
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."
Re: Lowest efficiency? [Re: rooflessVW] #4776804
06/04/18 01:28 AM
06/04/18 01:28 AM
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 534
San Antonio, TX
das_peikko Offline
das_peikko  Offline
Joined: Jan 2018
Posts: 534
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.

Re: Lowest efficiency? [Re: das_peikko] #4776811
06/04/18 02:16 AM
06/04/18 02:16 AM
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 868
MA USA
andrewp1998 Offline
andrewp1998  Offline
Joined: Oct 2008
Posts: 868
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,232k+
Re: Lowest efficiency? [Re: rooflessVW] #4776837
06/04/18 04:25 AM
06/04/18 04:25 AM
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 5,092
Virginia
bbhero Offline
bbhero  Offline
Joined: Mar 2015
Posts: 5,092
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
Quaker State High Mileage 5w30 Purolator Boss 14610
"Treat your family like your friends and treat your friends like your family."
Re: Lowest efficiency? [Re: gfh77665] #4777088
06/04/18 10:27 AM
06/04/18 10:27 AM
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,703
Katy, Republic of Texas
blupupher Offline
blupupher  Offline
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 4,703
Katy, Republic of Texas
Seems I read many OEM are the worst as far as numbers (Toyota I think?, the whole flow over filtration).


2012 Scion xB: QSUD 0w-20/CQ Blue/5k OCI
2002 Ford F150: GTX HM 5w-20/EcoGard Syn/1yr OCI
1994 Honda VT1100: Peak 15w-40/PSL/2500 mile OCI

Re: Lowest efficiency? [Re: blupupher] #4777213
06/04/18 12:36 PM
06/04/18 12:36 PM
Joined: Jul 2016
Posts: 41
USA
Macgyver452 Offline
Macgyver452  Offline
Joined: Jul 2016
Posts: 41
USA
I'm pretty sure you could put sand in a Toyota's engine oil and it would still last over 100k miles.

Re: Lowest efficiency? [Re: Macgyver452] #4777223
06/04/18 12:40 PM
06/04/18 12:40 PM
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 1,369
toronto
PeterPolyol Offline
PeterPolyol  Offline
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 1,369
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


"Nobody else has responded to you. Nobody has defended your position. Perhaps that's a clue"
Re: Lowest efficiency? [Re: Macgyver452] #4777247
06/04/18 01:04 PM
06/04/18 01:04 PM
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 1,465
Western S.C. since 1996
CR94 Offline
CR94  Offline
Joined: Mar 2016
Posts: 1,465
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 93K
1981 Mazda GLC (323) retired at 606K
1972 Subaru DL retired at 190K
1954 Chevrolet retired at 121K
Re: Lowest efficiency? [Re: CR94] #4777256
06/04/18 01:15 PM
06/04/18 01:15 PM
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 3,717
Columbus,Nebraska
Yah-Tah-Hey Offline
Yah-Tah-Hey  Offline
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 3,717
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.

Re: Lowest efficiency? [Re: gfh77665] #4777260
06/04/18 01:19 PM
06/04/18 01:19 PM
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,006
Las Vegas
ArrestMeRedZ Online content
ArrestMeRedZ  Online Content
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,006
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.

Re: Lowest efficiency? [Re: gfh77665] #4777287
06/04/18 02:07 PM
06/04/18 02:07 PM
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,075
Tennessee
goodtimes Offline
goodtimes  Offline
Joined: Dec 2010
Posts: 3,075
Tennessee
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.

Re: Lowest efficiency? [Re: gfh77665] #4777324
06/04/18 03:01 PM
06/04/18 03:01 PM
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,924
Southeast Texas
gfh77665 Offline OP
gfh77665  Offline OP
Joined: Sep 2008
Posts: 3,924
Southeast Texas
So, does anyone have any answers to the question, other than Toyota?

Re: Lowest efficiency? [Re: gfh77665] #4777337
06/04/18 03:16 PM
06/04/18 03:16 PM
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 9,998
Upper Midwest
kschachn Offline
kschachn  Offline
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 9,998
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, 231K
1996 Honda Accord, 263K
1999 Toyota Sienna, 402K
2000 Toyota ECHO, 272K
Re: Lowest efficiency? [Re: goodtimes] #4777510
06/04/18 06:12 PM
06/04/18 06:12 PM
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 18,941
PNW
ZeeOSix Offline
ZeeOSix  Offline
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 18,941
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.

Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 4

BOB IS THE OIL GUY® Powered by UBB.threads™