I put a napa platinum on my work truck assuming it was good given all the Napa gold love here. Was planning to leave it on for 2x 10k oil changes. However, I've been reading about the not so great efficiency (50% @ 20microns) and now I'm a little concerned. Should I swap it out for something else?
Napa platinum no good?
- Thread starter dbeau
- Start date
- Status
They're fine filters and I'd use them with confidence.
It seems that most vehicles will last to 150 - 200K miles without an oil / filter related failure providing the oil is changed on time. Having said that, next go around I would recommend the Fram Ultra. It is far more efficient and is had at a better price than the Napa.
No problem at all, its a good well built filter. The best thing for keeping particles out the oil in the first place is a good air filter.
Platinum gives up a tiny bit of efficiency for excellent flow and excellent holding capacity. Its custom designed for extended intervals.
The overall performance of the Platinum is absolutly excellent.
The overall performance of the Platinum is absolutly excellent.
Originally Posted By: gfh77665
Platinum gives up a tiny bit of efficiency for excellent flow and excellent holding capacity. Its custom designed for extended intervals.
The overall performance of the Platinum is absolutly excellent.
Really and what's its efficiency at 20 microns?
Platinum gives up a tiny bit of efficiency for excellent flow and excellent holding capacity. Its custom designed for extended intervals.
The overall performance of the Platinum is absolutly excellent.
Really and what's its efficiency at 20 microns?
Originally Posted By: Trav
The best thing for keeping particles out the oil in the first place is a good air filter.
What's even better is an efficient air filter combined with an efficient oil filter. Both play a role in keeping oil clean.
The best thing for keeping particles out the oil in the first place is a good air filter.
What's even better is an efficient air filter combined with an efficient oil filter. Both play a role in keeping oil clean.
Triple_Se7en
$50 Site Donor 2024
Originally Posted By: dbeau
I put a napa platinum on my work truck assuming it was good given all the Napa gold love here. Was planning to leave it on for 2x 10k oil changes. However, I've been reading about the not so great efficiency (50% @ 20microns) and now I'm a little concerned. Should I swap it out for something else?
NAPA offers two premium filters. One for trapping and one for flow. The Gold is for trapping. I prefer the Platinum Nov-April. May-Oct is when install more trapping efficiency filters..
I put a napa platinum on my work truck assuming it was good given all the Napa gold love here. Was planning to leave it on for 2x 10k oil changes. However, I've been reading about the not so great efficiency (50% @ 20microns) and now I'm a little concerned. Should I swap it out for something else?
NAPA offers two premium filters. One for trapping and one for flow. The Gold is for trapping. I prefer the Platinum Nov-April. May-Oct is when install more trapping efficiency filters..
I wouldn't worry about it, but I wouldn't run it 2 10k oil changes either without cutting it open halfway first to make sure it's holding up alright. Is it a company truck or a personal work truck? I wouldn't get too excited about it either way if it's a company vehicle, lol! Use the cheapest thing you can find on sale in that case.
Triple_Se7en
$50 Site Donor 2024
Originally Posted By: jongies3
I wouldn't worry about it, but I wouldn't run it 2 10k oil changes either without cutting it open halfway first to make sure it's holding up alright. Is it a company truck or a personal work truck? I wouldn't get too excited about it either way if it's a company vehicle, lol! Use the cheapest thing you can find on sale in that case.
Agree
I won't run any filter for 20K. Longest I ever went was 12-13K and never more than a couple times per vehicle. That's how they last a couple decades of daily, workhorse ownership.
I wouldn't worry about it, but I wouldn't run it 2 10k oil changes either without cutting it open halfway first to make sure it's holding up alright. Is it a company truck or a personal work truck? I wouldn't get too excited about it either way if it's a company vehicle, lol! Use the cheapest thing you can find on sale in that case.
Agree
I won't run any filter for 20K. Longest I ever went was 12-13K and never more than a couple times per vehicle. That's how they last a couple decades of daily, workhorse ownership.
Originally Posted By: Triple_Se7en
NAPA offers two premium filters. One for trapping and one for flow. The Gold is for trapping. I prefer the Platinum Nov-April. May-Oct is when install more trapping efficiency filters..
I'd bet the flow vs delta-p curve between them isn't different enough to make any difference to a road car - probably less than 2 PSI diffetence at full redline flow from the oil pump.
The purpose of the XP/Platinum is longer OCI use and more holding capacity with the use of full synthetic media.
NAPA offers two premium filters. One for trapping and one for flow. The Gold is for trapping. I prefer the Platinum Nov-April. May-Oct is when install more trapping efficiency filters..
I'd bet the flow vs delta-p curve between them isn't different enough to make any difference to a road car - probably less than 2 PSI diffetence at full redline flow from the oil pump.
The purpose of the XP/Platinum is longer OCI use and more holding capacity with the use of full synthetic media.
Patman
Staff member
Originally Posted By: Trav
No problem at all, its a good well built filter. The best thing for keeping particles out the oil in the first place is a good air filter.
That's only going to help keep the outside particles from getting into your oil, but what about the wear metals from the engine? We need to keep those from circulating through the engine over and over again, and that's where having an efficient oil filter is important.
No problem at all, its a good well built filter. The best thing for keeping particles out the oil in the first place is a good air filter.
That's only going to help keep the outside particles from getting into your oil, but what about the wear metals from the engine? We need to keep those from circulating through the engine over and over again, and that's where having an efficient oil filter is important.
Napa Platinum (aka Wix XP) is a great filter that can handle an extended OCI with ease. Plus, it's on sale this month for $8.99 for the spin-on cans, $13.99 for most cartridges.
If the engine is shedding that much metal you better get it seen to pronto. Toyota has been criticized on this site for low efficiency filters yet their engines are some of the longest lasting in the industry.
Once the engine is broken in there should be very very little metal being shed.
Does the efficiency of the platinum increase over time? I guess engines that use no oil filters and only screens like the old bug engines should have torn themselves to pieces in no time but in fact bearing and crank wear was not a real issue with them it was crank end play issues and jug wear from heat as they were getting on in life from being air cooled not a lube failure.
OPE engines many of which go decades with no bore scoring or lube failures and no filter at all?
Once the engine is broken in there should be very very little metal being shed.
Does the efficiency of the platinum increase over time? I guess engines that use no oil filters and only screens like the old bug engines should have torn themselves to pieces in no time but in fact bearing and crank wear was not a real issue with them it was crank end play issues and jug wear from heat as they were getting on in life from being air cooled not a lube failure.
OPE engines many of which go decades with no bore scoring or lube failures and no filter at all?
Originally Posted By: Trav
Does the efficiency of the platinum increase over time?
According to research by Purolator/Mann+Hummel, oil filters usually don't get more efficient with loading. As the filter loads up, the increasing delta-p causes some of the captured debris to continually shed. The way the ISO efficiency test is ran, the resulting efficiency number is the average efficiency measured from new to near fully loaded. That means a filter with a low ISO efficiency is probably a bigger shedder with delta-p (on top of inefficient media capturing performance) than a filter with high efficiency.
Originally Posted By: Trav
I guess engines that use no oil filters and only screens like the old bug engines should have torn themselves to pieces in no time but in fact bearing and crank wear was not a real issue with them it was crank end play issues and jug wear from heat as they were getting on in life from being air cooled not a lube failure.
Those old VW Bugs were lucky to hit 100k miles without a rebuild. The ones that lasted the longest had very frequent oil changes. Aftermarket oil filter kits came out for them for a reason. Jug wear was probably more due to extreme oil temps around the ring pack due to bad jug air cooling, and oil with not enough HTHS and anti-wear performance to keep the ring & cylinder wear under control.
Does the efficiency of the platinum increase over time?
According to research by Purolator/Mann+Hummel, oil filters usually don't get more efficient with loading. As the filter loads up, the increasing delta-p causes some of the captured debris to continually shed. The way the ISO efficiency test is ran, the resulting efficiency number is the average efficiency measured from new to near fully loaded. That means a filter with a low ISO efficiency is probably a bigger shedder with delta-p (on top of inefficient media capturing performance) than a filter with high efficiency.
Originally Posted By: Trav
I guess engines that use no oil filters and only screens like the old bug engines should have torn themselves to pieces in no time but in fact bearing and crank wear was not a real issue with them it was crank end play issues and jug wear from heat as they were getting on in life from being air cooled not a lube failure.
Those old VW Bugs were lucky to hit 100k miles without a rebuild. The ones that lasted the longest had very frequent oil changes. Aftermarket oil filter kits came out for them for a reason. Jug wear was probably more due to extreme oil temps around the ring pack due to bad jug air cooling, and oil with not enough HTHS and anti-wear performance to keep the ring & cylinder wear under control.
Originally Posted By: Trav
If the engine is shedding that much metal you better get it seen to pronto. Toyota has been criticized on this site for low efficiency filters yet their engines are some of the longest lasting in the industry.
Once the engine is broken in there should be very very little metal being shed. ...
Right. Without using a microscope, I couldn't find a single particle of metal in the filter used about 17.5k miles in my Toyota. Filters (except the first) off the Mazda weren't much different. Neither was the first filter I ever dissected, off my parents' Dodge 318 long ago.
If the engine is shedding that much metal you better get it seen to pronto. Toyota has been criticized on this site for low efficiency filters yet their engines are some of the longest lasting in the industry.
Once the engine is broken in there should be very very little metal being shed. ...
Right. Without using a microscope, I couldn't find a single particle of metal in the filter used about 17.5k miles in my Toyota. Filters (except the first) off the Mazda weren't much different. Neither was the first filter I ever dissected, off my parents' Dodge 318 long ago.
I’m with Trav on this one.
I’d run the filter without worry.
I’d run the filter without worry.
Just asking, why would any of you run an XP instead of Ultra? Ultra always costs less at 8.99 retail, is 99%@20 microns, and has 20k capacity. Pressure drop when new is less than 2psi. Flow from a typical Ultra is more than 10gpm and our LS based race car only flows 5.7gpm at 7500rpm.
XP- They wont release efficiency at 20 microns because it's dismal. They cost more. WIX makes no claims as to how many miles it will go to full capacity. They are in fact redesigning it now because well, nobody is buying them. Honestly do not care what you use just curious as to why?
XP- They wont release efficiency at 20 microns because it's dismal. They cost more. WIX makes no claims as to how many miles it will go to full capacity. They are in fact redesigning it now because well, nobody is buying them. Honestly do not care what you use just curious as to why?
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: Trav
Does the efficiency of the platinum increase over time?
According to research by Purolator/Mann+Hummel, oil filters usually don't get more efficient with loading. As the filter loads up, the increasing delta-p causes some of the captured debris to continually shed. The way the ISO efficiency test is ran, the resulting efficiency number is the average efficiency measured from new to near fully loaded. That means a filter with a low ISO efficiency is probably a bigger shedder with delta-p (on top of inefficient media capturing performance) than a filter with high efficiency.
Originally Posted By: Trav
I guess engines that use no oil filters and only screens like the old bug engines should have torn themselves to pieces in no time but in fact bearing and crank wear was not a real issue with them it was crank end play issues and jug wear from heat as they were getting on in life from being air cooled not a lube failure.
Those old VW Bugs were lucky to hit 100k miles without a rebuild. The ones that lasted the longest had very frequent oil changes. Aftermarket oil filter kits came out for them for a reason. Jug wear was probably more due to extreme oil temps around the ring pack due to bad jug air cooling, and oil with not enough HTHS and anti-wear performance to keep the ring & cylinder wear under control.
You still don't address the fact that main and rod bearing were was not any more of an issue than engines with oil filters.
Most engines of that era were well worn or worn out at 100K oil filter or not, I know for a fact I learned my trade in that era.
Jug wear was universally bad on all engines in those days water and air cooled, so bad in fact they made in the car boring bars (not hones) for cylinder reboring.
Why did water cooled engines with filters have so many bearing failures? The oil in that era was garbage that's why, people putting filters on old bugs were convinced by marketing they needed to installed one pretty much like they put catch cans on today.
I had a 66 bug that had no filter and it ran perfectly fine, with very little wear as shown by the couple of UOA's I did long before UOA's were popular.
Why is it that when people do UOA's and higher than normal silicon is found wear PPM is usually increased? Why didn't the oil filter high efficiency or otherwise catch it? The first suspect is always unfiltered air ingress due to a leaking filter housing or leaking PCV system.
Hey I have nothing against FU, platinum or any oil filter that doesn't tear, they are all doing something but IMHO they end result of one over the other is way overblown with the exception of diesels which produce an enormous amount of soot and carbon that really foul the oil badly very quickly.
Most engine damaging particles are below 16 micron so those particles are going right past the FU also with its 20 micron 99% rating also. For the most damaging steel particles a magnet is much much more efficient than a full flow filter.
http://ecomicrofilters.com/whareclpacs.html
I am not going through this whole business with you again, leave it at that, other posters can draw their own conclusions.
Originally Posted By: Trav
Does the efficiency of the platinum increase over time?
According to research by Purolator/Mann+Hummel, oil filters usually don't get more efficient with loading. As the filter loads up, the increasing delta-p causes some of the captured debris to continually shed. The way the ISO efficiency test is ran, the resulting efficiency number is the average efficiency measured from new to near fully loaded. That means a filter with a low ISO efficiency is probably a bigger shedder with delta-p (on top of inefficient media capturing performance) than a filter with high efficiency.
Originally Posted By: Trav
I guess engines that use no oil filters and only screens like the old bug engines should have torn themselves to pieces in no time but in fact bearing and crank wear was not a real issue with them it was crank end play issues and jug wear from heat as they were getting on in life from being air cooled not a lube failure.
Those old VW Bugs were lucky to hit 100k miles without a rebuild. The ones that lasted the longest had very frequent oil changes. Aftermarket oil filter kits came out for them for a reason. Jug wear was probably more due to extreme oil temps around the ring pack due to bad jug air cooling, and oil with not enough HTHS and anti-wear performance to keep the ring & cylinder wear under control.
You still don't address the fact that main and rod bearing were was not any more of an issue than engines with oil filters.
Most engines of that era were well worn or worn out at 100K oil filter or not, I know for a fact I learned my trade in that era.
Jug wear was universally bad on all engines in those days water and air cooled, so bad in fact they made in the car boring bars (not hones) for cylinder reboring.
Why did water cooled engines with filters have so many bearing failures? The oil in that era was garbage that's why, people putting filters on old bugs were convinced by marketing they needed to installed one pretty much like they put catch cans on today.
I had a 66 bug that had no filter and it ran perfectly fine, with very little wear as shown by the couple of UOA's I did long before UOA's were popular.
Why is it that when people do UOA's and higher than normal silicon is found wear PPM is usually increased? Why didn't the oil filter high efficiency or otherwise catch it? The first suspect is always unfiltered air ingress due to a leaking filter housing or leaking PCV system.
Hey I have nothing against FU, platinum or any oil filter that doesn't tear, they are all doing something but IMHO they end result of one over the other is way overblown with the exception of diesels which produce an enormous amount of soot and carbon that really foul the oil badly very quickly.
Most engine damaging particles are below 16 micron so those particles are going right past the FU also with its 20 micron 99% rating also. For the most damaging steel particles a magnet is much much more efficient than a full flow filter.
http://ecomicrofilters.com/whareclpacs.html
I am not going through this whole business with you again, leave it at that, other posters can draw their own conclusions.
- Status
