Fram Xg3682 for ISO 32 🛠

Joined
May 6, 2015
Messages
895
Location
California
Hi,

I'm looking into buying a Champion 27ton Log Splitter from Home Depot. I would buy it in the box and assemble it myself. Always wanting "better" I was trying to upgrade the hydraulic filter. With the filters listed in the manual (pictured below) would the Fram Xg3682 (specs below) be the "best" filter to use? I've never dealt with hydraulic fluid and would appreciate your opinions and recommendations.

Thanks in advance! ...

20200405_094246.jpg


Screenshot_20200405-094443.jpg
 
I'd probably stick with what it recommends since it's a filter in a hydraulic system that probably has rather particular requirements, that being said the specified Wix filter has microglass filter media and is rated at a nominal 11 microns, so it's probably pretty similar to the Fram Ultra but is spec'd for this application, so I'd use it.

[Linked Image]
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted by blufeb95
I'd probably stick with what it recommends since it's a filter in a hydraulic system that probably has rather particular requirements, that being said the specified Wix filter has microglass filter media and is rated at a nominal 11 microns, so it's probably pretty similar to the Fram Ultra but is spec'd for this application, so I'd use it.

[Linked Image]



51361 is specified, not 51631.
 
Originally Posted by SavagePatch
With the filters listed in the manual (pictured below) would the Fram Xg3682 (specs below) be the "best" filter to use? I've never dealt with hydraulic fluid and would appreciate your opinions and recommendations.


WIX 51361 crosses over to the Fram XG3682 on Fram's website.

[Linked Image]
 
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by blufeb95
I'd probably stick with what it recommends since it's a filter in a hydraulic system that probably has rather particular requirements, that being said the specified Wix filter has microglass filter media and is rated at a nominal 11 microns, so it's probably pretty similar to the Fram Ultra but is spec'd for this application, so I'd use it.

[Linked Image]



51361 is specified, not 51631.

Oops, I transposed the digits.
 
Back
Top