Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
Originally Posted by newtoncd8
I am new to this PC and don't see very much to compare the results to, but what are the chances that the 2011 Amsoil filter test is not accurate (or no longer accurate) and the Toyota OEM filter is better than most people report? Or am I not tracking correctly on the ISO code I got?
It's possible the Toyota Denso filter is better than 51% @ 20u per the independent ISO 4548-12 testing Amsoil published back in 2011.
Unless the filter design has changed since the test I sort of doubt it.
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
But here is some PC data I posted from the UOA forum on BITOG, and this is how I'd expect the data to plot out showing a good correlation between the ISO 4548-12 rated efficiency and the PC data.
My problem with this (which you well know) is that if you only plot the data that supports your hypothesis the data will always support your hypothesis.
Originally Posted by ZeeOSix
My theory on why some filters show a bad PC (DuckRyder's XG7317) vs their efficiency rating is because they are probably leaking somewhere past the media due to manufacturing issues (not design), or the methodology of the oil collection and/or test accuracy and repeatability is bad - that's the only things that makes sense. Other Ultras and similar high efficiency filters have shown good PC correlation with their rated efficiency. Open the uploaded PDF file for a better view of the plots.
We've been over all this as well. There were no signs of defects in the filter. No one mentioned seeing any either when it was posted. I believe it would be MUCH more likely that sampling methodology would create a low PC vs high. I did confirming follow up PC on both the Ultra and Hamp. My data is clean, it is at least as good as any other data here. Still, it is only 2 filters on one car, so it only tells us how those particular filters performed on that car.
In order to prove or disprove any correlation we would need much more data collected using a consistent procedure.
Originally Posted by newtoncd8
If I were to take a sample from the current YZZD3 filter I have on our RX330 at 2,500 miles, swap to a Tough Guard and run it for 2,500 miles, send in a sample and get a PC on each, that should be a good apples-to-apples comparison?
The other option is to remove the current filter (it only has about 500 miles on it), install a TG and run it for about 5,000 miles (to make an apples-to-apples for the test I posted above) and then get a PC.
Trying to decide which to implement.
When I originally embarked on the PC counts part of what I wanted to try to figure out was if filters really do get more efficient as miles pass, which seems to be a common belief. You could actually do both, run your Toyota filter for 2500 miles take a sample, change the filter to a TG and sample it at 2500 then again at 5000. The oil should have no problem going 7500.
After going back and looking at your UOA, I notice the Lexus has high mileage, as does the Civic. This is another thing thats been in the back of my head,,, The filter can't catch what the engine doesn't produce. It may be that PC counts from newer engines are going to be inherently lower than those from higher mileage engines... All variable that need to be considered.
![[Linked Image]](https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/attachments/usergals/2019/06/full-869-33877-blackstone_oil_analysis_lexusrx330_245k_jun2019_particlecount.png "[Linked Image]")
