Thin or thick (TGMO 0W-20/M1 0W-40): Final verdict

[Bryanccfshr]

Exactly, it will not decrease, But it does not go up with time as fast if you increase filtration media surface area. A known factor is that with use filters become more efficient, this gain is reduced with a larger filter, inversely a larger filter can be run longer without becoming restrictive.
.
Originally Posted by Gokhan
Originally Posted by Bryanccfshr
Primarily the purpose of doing this is Additional oil capacity. Filtration efficiency goes down, flow goes up all things being equal. In the past (2002-4 timeframe)for example I have run an oversized filter on that 3.4 Toyota engine you have. The Motorcraft FLS400. No damage occurred, but today having a better grasp, I would just run the recommended filter size.
Originally Posted by ka9mnx
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
What's your main goal for running an over sized filter?
Add me to that question. I thought the filter on my 4Runner was a bit small but after seeing the engineering that went into this vehicle, I'll trust the engineers.

Hmm, ZeeOSix says the filtration efficiency does not go down when the filter size increases.

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted by Bryanccfshr
Exactly, it will not decrease, But it does not go up with time as fast if you increase filtration media surface area. A known factor is that with use filters become more efficient, this gain is reduced with a larger filter, inversely a larger filter can be run longer without becoming restrictive.

This was ZeeOSix's take:

Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by 1JZ_E46
I think filter media increases in efficiency with time (as it loads up with contaminants).
Not always - it depends on how well the media retains captured particles when deta-p increases across the media. If you hang out in the oil filter forum I've shown why a few times (Mann+Hummel test data). And if you understand how the ISO 4548-12 test efficiency is defined/calculated, it says by definition that filters that are highly rated must also retain particles well as the delta-p increases across the media.

 

[Gokhan]

Here is the list ordered by the oil-filter volume. The last two columns are the differences in fluid ounces of the filter volumes from the current (YZZF2) and original (13011) OEMs, respectively.

The current Toyota OEM sold in USA is 90915-YZZF2. The original Toyota OEM was 15601-13011. Note that the data for it is not official and may be inaccurate -- I found it from a Chinese aftermarket copy. Purolator's old recommendation was L22821 but it was discontinued. So, XG3600 seems closer to the original Toyota OEM. Note how gigantic L30001 and PH8A are. If XG3600 has enough height clearance, it will be a good size. The only other problem with it and XG3614 is that the gasket and hole-circle diameter are a little large but I think the filter holes would still face inside the flange hole.

PH8A would probably neither fit nor be necessary.

Code
Oil filter W (in) H (in) V (cu in) V-V_YZZF2 (cu in) V-V_13011 (cu in) V-V_YZZF2 (oz) V-V_13011 (oz)



Toyota 90915-YZZF2 2.68 2.83 15.96 0.00 -16.98 0.00 -9.41

RP 10-2840 2.68 2.90 16.36 0.39 -16.58 0.22 -9.19

Amsoil EA15K09 2.68 2.90 16.36 0.39 -16.58 0.22 -9.19

PH4967 2.69 2.92 16.60 0.63 -16.34 0.35 -9.06

L14476 2.69 2.93 16.65 0.69 -16.29 0.38 -9.03

Wix 51394 2.69 2.98 16.94 0.97 -16.00 0.54 -8.87

PH4386 2.69 3.47 19.72 3.76 -13.22 2.08 -7.32

L14477 2.69 3.52 20.00 4.04 -12.93 2.24 -7.17

Bosch 3330 2.91 3.31 22.01 6.05 -10.93 3.35 -6.05

Wix 51348 2.92 3.40 22.77 6.80 -10.17 3.77 -5.64

Amsoil EA15K51 2.96 3.40 23.40 7.43 -9.54 4.12 -5.29

L10241 2.98 3.36 23.43 7.47 -9.50 4.14 -5.27

RP 10-2835 2.98 3.40 23.71 7.75 -9.23 4.29 -5.11

PH3614 2.98 3.43 23.92 7.96 -9.02 4.41 -5.00

PH7575 2.98 3.43 23.92 7.96 -9.02 4.41 -5.00

PH2951 3.02 3.36 24.07 8.10 -8.87 4.49 -4.92

L35098 3.01 4.10 29.17 13.21 -3.77 7.32 -2.09

L22821 3.15 3.94 30.70 14.74 -2.23 8.17 -1.24

Toyota 15601-13011 3.23 4.02 32.94 16.98 0.00 9.41 0.00

XG3600 2.98 4.92 34.32 18.35 1.38 10.17 0.76

L30001 3.78 5.14 57.68 41.72 24.74 23.12 13.71

PH8A 3.80 5.14 58.29 42.33 25.35 23.46 14.05

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted by Gokhan
Hmm, ZeeOSix says the filtration efficiency does not go down when the filter size increases.


From all the stuff I've seen about oil filters over the last 10 years, it's the larger filters are a bit more efficient than a smaller one with the same media. That's because the delta-p across a filter with more surface area is lower, which means less chance of dislodging already captured particles. Most people don't realize that one factor in the overall efficiency performance rating of the oil filter is the ability to retain the captured particles as delta-p increases across the media. Like already mentioned, pick a filter that has a high ISO 4548-12 efficiency rating, because it can't come out rated that high (by how the efficiency is calculated by the ISO test) if the media dislodged particles at a high rate.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted by Gokhan
Fram Ultra XG3614 will be delivered tomorrow and it's one or two sizes larger than the OEM but yet should fit perfectly.


Good choice, should work out well. Very good efficiency and low delta-p vs flow.

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by Gokhan
Fram Ultra XG3614 will be delivered tomorrow and it's one or two sizes larger than the OEM but yet should fit perfectly.
Good choice, should work out well. Very good efficiency and low delta-p vs flow.

How does it compare to XG3600?

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted by Gokhan
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by Gokhan
Fram Ultra XG3614 will be delivered tomorrow and it's one or two sizes larger than the OEM but yet should fit perfectly.
Good choice, should work out well. Very good efficiency and low delta-p vs flow.

How does it compare to XG3600?


The 3600 looks to be longer, but the 3614 is still going to give essentialy the same efficiency and flow performance (difference too small to matter) on that engine. If the 3600 fits, then it's another option. I run the XG3600 on my Tacoma 4.0L V6 and its a ptetty big oil filter.

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by Gokhan
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by Gokhan
Fram Ultra XG3614 will be delivered tomorrow and it's one or two sizes larger than the OEM but yet should fit perfectly.
Good choice, should work out well. Very good efficiency and low delta-p vs flow.
How does it compare to XG3600?
The 3600 looks to be longer, but the 3614 is still going to give essentialy the same efficiency and flow performance (difference too small to matter) on that engine. If the 3600 fits, then it's another option. I run the XG3600 on my Tacoma 4.0L V6 and its a ptetty big oil filter.

I made a template for XG3600 (why didn't I think about that before?) and here is how it looks like:

Compared to the tiny M1-103, recommended filter by Mobil 1:

There is only about 3/4 in clearance from the A/C fan shroud, which means I probably can't use a cap wrench to remove it (I always install them by hand). It also seems to barely clear the A/C pipe. It should probably fit though, other than the need to use a clamp wrench to remove it.

The large surface area of the filter and proximity to the A/C fan shroud should also make it function like an oil cooler. In addition, it would increase the oil-sump capacity by about 1/4 qt (about 6%) or so (10 oz larger can than the Toyota 90915-YZZF2).

 

[demarpaint]

^^ That looks like it is going to be just fine.

 

[Shannow]

A filter, after the oil pump does NOT effectively increase sump capacity.

Think about it a little...once filled and primed, exactly the same leak will have you pumping bubbles regardless of how big your filter is.

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted by Shannow
A filter, after the oil pump does NOT effectively increase sump capacity.

Think about it a little...once filled and primed, exactly the same leak will have you pumping bubbles regardless of how big your filter is.

I mean the system oil capacity.

 

[Shannow]

But it's like putting a bigger pipe in...doesn't change the behaviour at the terminal points.
If it was an accumulator, there's be some effect, but being a fixed volume, between the oil pump and the engine, achieves nothing with respect to "active" volume. Maybe a little more surface area for cooling, but the increased oil volume is meaningless.

 

[Gokhan]

Originally Posted by Shannow
But it's like putting a bigger pipe in...doesn't change the behaviour at the terminal points.
If it was an accumulator, there's be some effect, but being a fixed volume, between the oil pump and the engine, achieves nothing with respect to "active" volume. Maybe a little more surface area for cooling, but the increased oil volume is meaningless.

Doesn't it increase the amount of additive reserves?

In any case, I've been filling the 3.5 qt spec, which is specced for the original OEM Toyota 15601-13011, which has no longer been available in US for a long time. The current OEM Toyota 90915-YZZF2 is much smaller, which has been resulting in about 1/4 qt overfill. XG3600 is only slightly bigger than Toyota 15601-13011, no more than about 2 oz. I will fill 3.5 qt + 2 oz with XG3600 and call it a day, which is only 1.8% more than I normally fill.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Can't hurt to have a bit more oil volume in the system.

 

[edyvw]

Originally Posted by Gokhan
Originally Posted by Shannow
But it's like putting a bigger pipe in...doesn't change the behaviour at the terminal points.
If it was an accumulator, there's be some effect, but being a fixed volume, between the oil pump and the engine, achieves nothing with respect to "active" volume. Maybe a little more surface area for cooling, but the increased oil volume is meaningless.

Doesn't it increase the amount of additive reserves?

In any case, I've been filling the 3.5 qt spec, which is specced for the original OEM Toyota 15601-13011, which has no longer been available in US for a long time. The current OEM Toyota 90915-YZZF2 is much smaller, which has been resulting in about 1/4 qt overfill. XG3600 is only slightly bigger than Toyota 15601-13011, no more than about 2 oz. I will fill 3.5 qt + 2 oz with XG3600 and call it a day, which is only 1.8% more than I normally fill.

The amount of oil is carefully calculated. It is not like Toyota could not increase amount if necessary. There were some screwups, like Toyota 3.0 V6 or VW 1.8T transverse engines (that was more due to wrong recommendation). But, generally companies, especially reputable manufacturers, are good in nailing volume. You have to take into consideration that more oil means longer time for oil to warm up to operating temperature. That increases consumption, wearing during cold mornings etc.
I do not also understand what is point of this on 1985 Corolla that can run on Costco olive oil and use used 7/11 coffee filter to filter it out? Not sure your experiment is applicable to any modern engine, especially those that are turbo charged.

 

[batook]

Originally Posted by Gokhan
[M1 EP 0W-20 is half the price, also mostly PAO-based (at least about 80% or so of the base oil) and has great reserve alkalinity (Ca/Mg mixed detergent with decent initial TBN), which results in low wear rates. Note that EP 0W-20 is the only mostly PAO-based SAE grade, with thicker grades being not.

So, do you think you can reduce wear by going to higher viscosity? Perhaps, instead, you should think about to going to a better base oil (like PAO) and higher initial TBN with Ca/Mg mixed detergent (SN PLUS) that ensures good reserve alkalinity throughout the OCI.


I also like the choice of going with M1 0W-20 EP. I'm planning on switching from M1 0W-20 AFE to EP in the Previa motor at the next oil change as well. I also use the M1-209A or FU XG3600 oversized filters. So, I really like your tests because you are using the same oil and filter I am on a very similar vintage Toyota engine. And like I said earlier, basd on my temp/pressure observations, we are good to go on the lighter 0W-20 oils in these old Toyota 4 bangers--just don't beat the snot out of them for extended periods and they'll be just fine.

 

[Gokhan]

I'm excited to try a PAO-based 0W-20 in this engine. Long time ago, I ran M1 0W-30 SM, which, unlike the current mostly Group III and GTL SN formulation, was PAO-based back then, and I remember the engine sounding differently, as if lubricated better.

Someone recommended the now-defunct German Castrol 0W-30 A3/B4 a while back, but that PAO-based oil came at the expense of performance-robbing high HTHSV and a questionable additive package that didn't always result in pleasant UOAs.

 

[oliveoil]

GC was the golden elixir for many. It provided Amazing UOA's. It also had a sweet smell.

 

[kschachn]

I noticed that GC clogged up the PCV valve on my old 1MZ-FE at a much faster rate than Mobil 1. I bought into it back when it was all the rage but for me it wasn't all that great.

 

[batook]

Originally Posted by Gokhan
BOQI is great! It can distinguish between PAO, GTL, Group III, and Group II. Everyone should benefit from this knowledge. What other magical touchstone can tell you what base oil is inside a motor oil? If you don't believe it, that's fine -- I won't hold it against you.

I'm not too familiar with BOQI and how it can be used to distinguish between the different base oil types. If you wouldn't mind, can you please explain a little further how the BOQI can be used to determine this? Also, how did you find out the BOQI of the M1 0W-20 EP? I don't see it listed on their product data sheet; is it something you have to request from them?