64 registered members (adams355, alarmguy, ARB1977, A_A_G, 97K15004WD, Bailes1992, 7 invisible),
1,362
guests, and 54
spiders. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
Forums67
Topics298,356
Posts5,133,663
Members70,043
|
Most Online3,589 Nov 2nd, 2019
|
|
|
Re: Why hasn't someone made a more efficient filter?
[Re: Patman]
#5108012
05/17/19 07:29 PM
|
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 22,096
ZeeOSix
|
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 22,096 |
When you look at a particle count of used oil, even with a good oil filter on a clean healthy engine, there are 50,000 to 100,000 particles 4 microns and larger in every mL of oil. I'm sure it would many times more than that if no oil filter was ran.
|
|
|
Re: Why hasn't someone made a more efficient filter?
[Re: Quattro Pete]
#5108060
05/17/19 08:28 PM
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 14,385
tig1
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 14,385 |
Is more filtration really needed? Do engines fail because existing filters don't filter enough? Will more efficient filters restrict flow too much?
No. Engines typically fail due to maintenance abuse or simply running the engine beyond it's intended performance level.
Last edited by tig1; 05/17/19 08:29 PM.
2007 Ford Fusion 250,000 miles M1 5-20HM 2017 Ford Fusion 83K M1 0-20EP 10,000 mile OCIs on both engines M1 ATF and Valvoline LV M1 10-30 in all OPE MC filters
|
|
|
Re: Why hasn't someone made a more efficient filter?
[Re: Patman]
#5108158
05/18/19 12:01 AM
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,024
rrounds
|
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 1,024 |
Late to this post(on vacation) Donaldson makes filters(full flow) that filter down to [email protected] and [email protected] micron. I adapted my S2000 to take one. Did this because I wanted to, nothing more. The Honda filter for the S2000 is a rock catcher, lucky to hit 85%@40 microns. Rod
'06 S2000 '00 SSEi sold at 252k miles '08 Ford F53 V10 '13 Jeep Sahara 2 door
|
|
|
Re: Why hasn't someone made a more efficient filter?
[Re: DGXR]
#5108224
05/18/19 05:39 AM
|
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,192
krismoriah72
|
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,192 |
Easy answer: Because there isn't an economic case for someone to make money doing so. If there were, someone would already be doing it.
Sure, maybe there is a media that would increase filtering dramatically without changing the package requirements to meet flow rates, bpyass pressures, etc... But if it costs a boatload more, are people willing to spend enough money on it for the manufacturer to break even? Make money?
Or, if the package has to be redesigned due to needing more filter media that doesn't fit in the original package size, who's going to spend the design dollars on it? Recoup the cost and testing to see if the redesigned package actually fits in all of its usual applications?
Whether it is a benefit to the end user doesn't matter if the manufacturer can't price it at a price point to make money and actually have people buy it.
And that's where the bypass stuff finds its niche - it fits multiple applications, making a one size fits all program much more cost effective for those who want it...
IMO this is about the best answer we are going to get on this topic. I think semi truck filters have lower micron filters but I don't know. I'm a trucker but don't get into the oil change side of it as there's paid mechanics that deal with that. But I believe one of them mentioned having 8 or 10 micron oil filters. Maybe that's why a highway diesel can last a million miles and passenger car engines can't? Who knows. Diesel tractor engines go millions of miles for several reasons: 1) diesel fuel is actually a light oil so the whole top end and cylinders are super-lubricated 2) diesel tractors are run for dozens of hours on end so everything gets nice and toasty, where engines (and lubricants) like to live 3) diesel tractors are driven 10-20 times more miles per year than the average passenger car, so the miles rack up fast before rust or other problems have a chance to set in 4) diesel rigs are usually very well maintained by the owner (no truck=no income) 5) probably many more reasons I can't think of right now 6) Oil Coolers 7) Oil capacity 15 Gallons 8) Develop most power at 1200 RPM Fleetguard LF14000NN for the Cummins ISX15 is 98.7%@ 4 microns
|
|
|
Re: Why hasn't someone made a more efficient filter?
[Re: Patman]
#5108245
05/18/19 06:23 AM
|
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,408
alarmguy
|
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 3,408 |
I'm curious as to why no manufacturers out there have made an oil filter than is even more efficient than what we currently have, let's just say something that's 99% efficient down to 10 or 15 microns instead of the current best which seems to be around 99% at 20 microns. Surely the technology must exist. Because you do not need more protection or the expense of it. As it is, with normal scheduled maintenance an engine will far outlast the vehicle its in. Its not the oil or filters that determine the life of the engine, its the engine design that determines its life, oil and filters do not change that fact.
14 Road King (current) 08 VStar 1300 Tourer 07 Suzuki C50
|
|
|
Re: Why hasn't someone made a more efficient filter?
[Re: Patman]
#5108973
05/19/19 12:20 AM
|
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 3,418
SubieRubyRoo
|
Joined: May 2012
Posts: 3,418 |
So Zee, the chart you posted means I need to change my Fram Ultra every hour of engine operation if I don’t want the 20 micron efficiency to drop somewhere into the low 80%- high 70% efficiency range?
|
|
|
Re: Why hasn't someone made a more efficient filter?
[Re: Patman]
#5108977
05/19/19 12:36 AM
|
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 182
OnTheRocks
|
Joined: May 2019
Posts: 182 |
Quite the conundrum. What does that do to flow rate? Isn't that just about the same argument with air filters? The better the filtration, the lower the flow rate?
|
|
|
Re: Why hasn't someone made a more efficient filter?
[Re: SubieRubyRoo]
#5108995
05/19/19 02:22 AM
|
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 22,096
ZeeOSix
|
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 22,096 |
So Zee, the chart you posted means I need to change my Fram Ultra every hour of engine operation if I don’t want the 20 micron efficiency to drop somewhere into the low 80%- high 70% efficiency range? Go back and read what I said about the ISO 4548-12 efficiency rating calculation, and how a high efficiency filter couldn't have a drop in efficiency like shown on that graph in order to achieve a 99% @ 20μ ISO efficiency.
|
|
|
Re: Why hasn't someone made a more efficient filter?
[Re: OnTheRocks]
#5108997
05/19/19 02:26 AM
|
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 22,096
ZeeOSix
|
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 22,096 |
Quite the conundrum. What does that do to flow rate? Isn't that just about the same argument with air filters? The better the filtration, the lower the flow rate? Engines use positive displacement oil pumps. Engine oiling systems are not analogies to your house water system, which is a contant pressure source. When a filter loads up, the flow stays the same from the PD pump, and the delta-p across the filter just goes up a few PSI. Flow can still be very good on high efficiency filters, it all depends on the media design and media area. https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/5104536/1
|
|
|
Re: Why hasn't someone made a more efficient filter?
[Re: MolaKule]
#5109706
05/19/19 10:04 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 28,128
Garak
|
Joined: Dec 2009
Posts: 28,128 |
I thought that was what By-pass filters were made for. There is a trade-off between particle filtering capabilities and cost.  I would agree with that. My biggest concern these days is ensuring I don't get something with closed louvers or media prone to tearing and have some reasonable construction quality, without spending a fortune.
Plain, simple Garak.
2008 Infiniti G37 - Shell ROTELLA T6 Multi-Vehicle 5w-30, Wix 57356 1984 F-150 4.9L - Quaker State GB 10w-30, Wix 51515
|
|
|
Re: Why hasn't someone made a more efficient filter?
[Re: Patman]
#5109851
05/20/19 05:26 AM
|
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 8,259
dnewton3
Global Moderator
|
Global Moderator
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 8,259 |
Just why would we need filters to be any tighter than 99% at 20um? The need for filtration has to be taken in context of not only the ultimate mileage goal, but also the OCI. Here's a million mile Chevy; he ran normal oil and filters every 4k miles or so. Not one premium filter and no syn lubes. Just 4k mile OFCIs. (Oddly, he touts the money he saved with the K&N air filter, but didn't use BP filtration ....) https://www.knfilters.com/million/default.htmHere's one of my favorites; a million mile Ford. https://www.bing.com/videos/search?...3259FEA528923CC055153259FE&FORM=VIREActually, this truck had over THREE MILLION MILES. I was curious about this truck, so I called that service center in Palm City, FL and got the story directly from the service manager. This truck was serviced almost exclusviely with Havoline dino 10w-40 and jobber filters it's whole life, with OFCIs anywhere between 7-10k miles. Here's the actual story of the truck: - went it's first 100k miles and the 5.4L died; they sourced a used 5.4L from a junkyard because they guy has to be on the road non-stop (no time for a rebuild of the original engine) - the first 5.4L replacement motor went around 1 million miles! then it died, so they sourced another 5.4L from a salvage yard - the second 5.4L replacement motor went more than 1 million miles! then it also died; sourced a third used motor with low miles - the third 5.4L used motor went more than a million miles, and the truck was totaled in a wreck - the guy bought a used Ford SD diesel and was still running dogs when I last heard of him, several years ago Summary; first engine died at 100k miles; next three engines all last 1M miles! All on the same service schedule and dino oils and normal filters. My Point? You don't need super duper syn lubes or extra premium filters to make an engine last a long time. There is more than one means to an end. Because contamination is low early in an OCI, then you don't need premium products; "normal" oils and filters will keep the engine clean enough to last a LONG time. If you choose to extend your OCIs as a fiscal savings tool, then syns and BP filtration are important to keep the sump clean for really long OCIs. I have seen no proof whatsoever, nor has anyone here ever shown any evidence, that super-duper lubes and filters are the exclusive means to long equipment life. The VAST MAJORITY of data shows that wear rates trend down, even out to 15k miles of the OFCI, regardless of what products are used. This is true of every darn engine series I've studied. And there is ZERO correlation that allows us to conclude that low wear is the exclusive result of premium products. Even "normal" oils and filters exhibit this phenomenon. Because both normal products AND premium products both experience the downward trend of wear out to 15k miles, it's clear that neither is the controlling factor of wear. What has been proven to be a controlling factor is the TCB in normal OFCIs. I have not seen any proof that is credible (in today's applications for normal OFCIs) that proves we need "more" filtration or "better" oils. Your car is FAR, FAR more likely to be totaled in a wreck, or rusted to oblivious, or traded out from sheer boredom, long before the engine dies, as long as you practice a sensible OFCI program with normal products. So, the reason there's not a mass market filter that's "more" efficient is because it's not needed. It might be wanted, but it's not needed.
Last edited by dnewton3; 05/20/19 05:27 AM.
The act of preventative maintenance, in and of itself, is FAR MORE important than brand/grade/base choices among lubes and filters. - under maintaining something is akin to abuse/neglect; that can kill equipment by shortening the lifespan - over maintaining something has never been proven to be anything but a waste of time and money
|
|
|
Re: Why hasn't someone made a more efficient filter?
[Re: Patman]
#5110297
05/20/19 02:03 PM
|
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 22,096
ZeeOSix
|
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 22,096 |
Just another way to measure flow resistance, but it's not a standard for oil filters. WIX likes to make up many of their own specs. No way to put that into flow vs delta-p with oil flowing through the filter. https://www.google.com/search?q=Frazier+airflow+test
|
|
|
Re: Why hasn't someone made a more efficient filter?
[Re: dnewton3]
#5110311
05/20/19 02:26 PM
|
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 22,096
ZeeOSix
|
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 22,096 |
I have seen no proof whatsoever, nor has anyone here ever shown any evidence, that super-duper lubes and filters are the exclusive means to long equipment life. Granted, super high efficiency oil bypass filters are primary used in heavy duty diesel engine applications where OCIs are super long, and there have been lots of studies done showing that cleaner oil resulted in less engine wear. I think this was posted by someone here at some point but worth showing again.
|
|
|
Re: Why hasn't someone made a more efficient filter?
[Re: ZeeOSix]
#5110467
05/20/19 05:07 PM
|
Joined: Dec 2018
Posts: 469
Farnsworth
|
Joined: Dec 2018
Posts: 469 |
Just another way to measure flow resistance, but it's not a standard for oil filters. WIX likes to make up many of their own specs. No way to put that into flow vs delta-p with oil flowing through the filter. https://www.google.com/search?q=Frazier+airflow+testIt is used for manufacturing oil filter media, judging porosity, and they can't use flowing oil for that. I have wondered about media manufacturing, and using resin as a binder, how they do that. To have consistent efficiency numbers the manufacturing has to be consistent, the resin consistent. Quality is important and why I never have trusted odd ball brands just to save a dollar. I think, not going to spend time reading all the ... on Frazier number. My dad had a Frazier car which burned up as we escaped from it. Too bad you probably say. http://www.frazierinstrument.com/products/fap/fap-faq.html#Air Permeability - Frazier Number
|
|
|
|