Duramax Oil Filter Data (cut open 12 new filters)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Mar 9, 2019
Messages
101
Location
over yonder
I collected a bunch of data on 12 oil filters for the 2001-present Duramax platform, and sharing for everyone else that has an interest. This is not meant as a "this is better than that" argument. Just a collection of data, across 12 filters, using money from my own pocket. All of these filters were opened new and unused. I still have all of the filters, so if there's any other measurements someone is interested in I should still be able to collect it.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...2xVJJTeKonMPxa5jC44QGUjJaw__OzX7/pubhtml
 
interesting that Mobile 1 Filter Material is listed as Cellulose, when their advertising lists the filter as SYNTHETIC....any chance the report has a typo or something....also, I didn't see any Hastings or Amsoil filters ????? Thanks for putting in the long and laborious time to compile and publish...much appreciated
 
Originally Posted by wIngsmk
interesting that Mobile 1 Filter Material is listed as Cellulose, when their advertising lists the filter as SYNTHETIC....any chance the report has a typo or something...

All of their marketing material says synthetic blend. Where do you see anything else?

https://mobiloil.com/en/oil-filters
 
The mobil 1 filter was definitely not a full synthetic. It could have been a hybrid or synthetic blend, it has a slightly darker color compared to the other non-synthetics. I mentioned in the notes I listed the blends as cellulose, mainly because I wasn't sure and didn't go by advertised values for this table. I could always update the table to report the advertised material if that is considered more complete.

Amsoil and other brands weren't purposely excluded, I just decided to stop at 12 filters. These are either all the filters available off the shelf in my area, or are ones I considered using on my truck and purchased online.
 
Last edited:
Not a shock that the Frams were all tied for thinnest can thickness-usually that's their ONE weakness. Interesting spreadsheet, now to run them all and cut them open to see how they did in real life, along with particle counts...
28.gif
 
Originally Posted by bullwinkle
... now to run them all and cut them open to see how they did in real life, along with particle counts...
28.gif


I'll take sponsors if you want to fund that
wink.gif


I do actually have a plan to do basic filter tests against quantitative filter paper, but that's mostly anecdotal and to give me a "visual feel good" about each filter. It'd be in no way comparative to particle counts or testing standards.
 
Last edited:
What a ton of effort, for nothing. Price, Micron Rating, and Efficiency are the 3 biggest parameters when shopping for any filter and these parameters were not included.
 
Originally Posted by LMLowner
What a ton of effort, for nothing. Price, Micron Rating, and Efficiency are the 3 biggest parameters when shopping for any filter and these parameters were not included.


Price is location and vendor dependent. Micron rating and efficiency are usually advertised, and if not requires expensive tests. Not something individuals can do with reasonable accuracy or precision in their home.

Are you saying you truly don't find any worth in knowing the total filter area of the media? Or pleat depth? Or the inlet area between the filter cap and canister walls? Or thickness of the filter media, both relaxed and compressed? If not, a toilet paper filter might interest you.
 
This spread sheet has nothing of real value..... like if the center tube is punched with holes or louvers. I'm surprized you did not add a line to record the paint color.

Not even something like the country of origin is noted.

You state you still have all the filter parts. You need to revise your spreadsheet.
 
Originally Posted by LMLowner
This spread sheet has nothing of real value..... like if the center tube is punched with holes or louvers. I'm surprized you did not add a line to record the paint color.

Not even something like the country of origin is noted.

You state you still have all the filter parts. You need to revise your spreadsheet.

So good you just joined for these two posts.
 
Originally Posted by LMLowner
This spread sheet has nothing of real value..... like if the center tube is punched with holes or louvers. I'm surprized you did not add a line to record the paint color.

Not even something like the country of origin is noted.

You state you still have all the filter parts. You need to revise your spreadsheet.


It's unfortunate you see it that way. What, in your opinion, is worth knowing that can be obtained by a DIY-er at their home, and without an online search?
As mentioned, micron/efficiency ratings are usually advertised, and if not, they need extensive/expensive tests. Country of origin is mostly superficial (IMO), and for the most part found online. The country of origin can change based on the application, even across the same manufacturer and filter. I've seen the CH10246 Fram filter stamped with Made in USA and China, wouldn't surprise me if there was a third or fourth country too.

I assume you just have your preset opinions on what constitutes "good to know". My opinion on "good to know" doesn't involve something that can be found online, advertisements, or discovered by a 2 second glance at the box while at the store.
 
Good work. One suggestion is on can thickness get a ball for your micrometer or a ball micrometer.

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Mitutoyo-1-Tube-Micrometer/202797605454?_trkparms=aid%3D1110001%26algo%3DSPLICE.SIM%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D40719%26meid%3D75fea78333764e4ab0fc7bf9d78ec902%26pid%3D100752%26rk%3D2%26rkt%3D12%26sd%3D264444866240%26itm%3D202797605454%26pmt%3D0%26noa%3D1%26pg%3D2047675&_trksid=p2047675.c100752.m1982

The .4mm on Fram is too high, it's more in the range of .013-.014 inches. On the standard car filters at least.
One way to get some first hand data on efficiency may be like these guys did. Although if the particle counts are close it may be due to sampling errors. Still it seems feasible to me to run a filter on a diesel to oil change time, do a particle count, leave the oil in, swap the filter for another, run 200 miles, do another particle count.

https://www.frantzfilters.com/science/
 
Originally Posted by kschachn

you just joined for these two posts.


I guess when you joined, you brought 8,000 of your posts with you.... huh?
 
Originally Posted by LMLowner
Originally Posted by kschachn

you just joined for these two posts.
I guess when you joined, you brought 8,000 of your posts with you.... huh?

No clue what you mean, but from what I've seen so far I'm sure things will catch up with you in a short while.
 
Originally Posted by Farnsworth
The .4mm on Fram is too high, it's more in the range of .013-.014 inches. On the standard car filters at least.


0.4mm is 0.0157 in, so basically hair splitting. How many reports of failed cans due to the thickness have you seen here regardless of brand under all your handles in the last 10 years?
 
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by Farnsworth
The .4mm on Fram is too high, it's more in the range of .013-.014 inches. On the standard car filters at least.


0.4mm is 0.0157 in, so basically hair splitting. How many reports of failed cans due to the thickness have you seen here regardless of brand under all your handles in the last 10 years?



As sheet gets thinner each .001 inch means more. If have a .001 sheet and a .002. the .002 is twice as thick. If have ,350 and ,351 it is nothing. Fram sheet gauge is 29 or 30 on this chart while a Toyota filter is two or three gauges thicker 26 or 27. Huge difference actually. Cleaning the paint off too would tell more exactly.

http://www.custompartnet.com/sheet-metal-gauge
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top