2011 Oil Filter Study 31 Filters Ever See this?

Status
Not open for further replies.
C

cadchris

Joined
Jul 3, 2011
Messages
101
Location
Florida
Hey Guys,

I just found this "Oil Filter Study of 31 Filters" that were tested in Jan. 2011 on a site called GM Truck Central. Click here for the "Study"... 2011 FILTER STUDY

Has anyone here ever heard of this study?

Is it a valid study to compare filters?

I'm surprised Royal Purple looks to be the best, then the Amsoil EAO filter.

I found it here OffShore Forum when researching old AMSOIL EAO Filter numbers that were once rated at 15 microns. Amsoil's new filters are now rated at 20 microns, but I don't know if they've also changed the test criteria. I think I heard that the old EAO filters were better.

By the way, is there a way to subscribe to different threads on this forum and be automatically notified by e-mail when a new post gets posted like other forums?

Regards,
Chris
 
Last edited:
By the way, I had an old Amsoil EAO25 I think, filter that I installed and it says on the outside: "98.7% Efficient "Absolute" at 15 Microns Per ISO 4548-12".

I took a photo, but I don't see a tool to attach it directly from my computer. Looks like I can only post a link to a website that I download the photo to.

Anyone have a new Amsoil Filter to look at what it says on the outside?
 
Last edited:
By the way, just in case you missed the link on that page to their dicussion on that GM Truck Central Forum, here's the 10 page discussion link! GM Forum Discussion!
 
Last edited:
Looking at the filter grade sheet, the Fram Ultra did better than the RP or AMS.

Too subscribe, just click the topic options, then click add topic to your watched topics.
 
Thankyou so much for posting the results of this study I'm printing it out and keeping a copy. I think it should be intereting to note that the best filters on the list have the lowest grades for price indicating basically that with auto parts "you get what you pay for" (at least most of the time) If you go to Framcatalog.com they have a comprehensive comparison list of practically every filter ever made-and it stretches on and on,,,it's huge
 
Originally Posted By: crashtestdummy
Looking at the filter grade sheet, the Fram Ultra did better than the RP or AMS.

Too subscribe, just click the topic options, then click add topic to your watched topics.


Where are you seeing that? The OP's link shows RP & AMS blowing Wix away, and you are saying the Ultra beats them??
 
Discussed several times here if you go back and look. The methodology in the test is suspect and not comparable to industry standard testing. I can also find too much "opinion" in it.

I know the guy tried but overall I really don't like seeing stuff like that. It just serves to provide uneducated fodder for urination contests in forums. Harsh? Yes. Like I said, the guy who did the testing went to a lot of effort and did it for a laudable cause... but, unfortunately, it's almost useless beyond grouping a large number of filters together for visual comparison.

One glaring error that struck me it is the way he measures and evaluates media area, comparing full synthetic pleated depth-loaded media with cellulose surface loaded media.

GM Central has posted some very good tests in the past, the Spicer air filter test being one. It compared a large number of filters for one application but the testing was done by an accredited test facility using industry standard tests. Awesome comparison and very educational. Unfortunately, Arlen Spicer and a number of donors had to fork over thousands of dollars to get the tests run.... something not practical for most of us. That's why we continue to see the internet comparisons that run from biased and evil to well-meaning but amateurish and not particularly useful.

My advice... if you are interesting in particular filters, write or e-mail the individual companies and get their latest filter info. USUALLY, you can get most of the important data for comparison. Since specs change regularly, what you find on the web, posted by other who did that, may or may not be current.
 
Originally Posted By: Jim Allen
Discussed several times here if you go back and look. The methodology in the test is suspect and not comparable to industry standard testing. I can also find too much "opinion" in it.

I know the guy tried but overall I really don't like seeing stuff like that. It just serves to provide uneducated fodder for urination contests in forums. Harsh? Yes. Like I said, the guy who did the testing went to a lot of effort and did it for a laudable cause... but, unfortunately, it's almost useless beyond grouping a large number of filters together for visual comparison.

One glaring error that struck me it is the way he measures and evaluates media area, comparing full synthetic pleated depth-loaded media with cellulose surface loaded media.

GM Central has posted some very good tests in the past, the Spicer air filter test being one. It compared a large number of filters for one application but the testing was done by an accredited test facility using industry standard tests. Awesome comparison and very educational. Unfortunately, Arlen Spicer and a number of donors had to fork over thousands of dollars to get the tests run.... something not practical for most of us. That's why we continue to see the internet comparisons that run from biased and evil to well-meaning but amateurish and not particularly useful.

My advice... if you are interesting in particular filters, write or e-mail the individual companies and get their latest filter info. USUALLY, you can get most of the important data for comparison. Since specs change regularly, what you find on the web, posted by other who did that, may or may not be current.



Big time Yup x2.

I say this because even engineers and scientists get mired down in the minutia of "studies", and often common folks don't understand what was included and how, let alone what is left out and why. It only gets worse with a poorly designed experiment by a fledgling wanna-be who dabbles in "testing" for the sake of a "study". When there is no decently defined DOE, it's all downhill from there (and not in a good way).
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Nightmare
Grades for cost etc, media area... not really accurate IMO. I'll take a RP or AMS over a fram anyday.


Sure. If you want to overlook better media volume, media area, same build quality and material at about half the price, go for it.

Also, agree with the senior posters the study is flawed.
 
Last edited:
One thing of interest I did find in the study is that Wix and Napa Gold are apparently not the same filters. It would appear that the Napa Gold has notably less media than the same Wix.
 
As Ralphie from A Christmas Story would say: "Aw Fuuuudge".....and I thought I was posting some "Earth Shattering" information here on the forum!

I figured there were a lot of flaws in that study. Did you guys go to that forum and see that other Toyota Tundra Filter Study?
Toyota Tundra Oil Filter Study

In post#2, I mentioned the earlier Amsoil Filters having a 15 micron rating and now they are 20 micron. Does Amsoil have the same ISO 4548-12 Test for their new 20 micron oil filters?

I'm sure the earlier Amsoil Oil Filters are the ones to try and find from their dealer network if anyone still has them in stock since I guess they are more efficient than the new oil filters....right?

I think I remember some mention about the "Spicer Report". The link is now dead but I found the entire report posted again here on this site with graphs:
SPICER AIR FILTER REPORT/TEST

Maybe this should be made as a STICKY!

Here it the orig. info in the dead link recovered by an archive internet service called WAYBACK MACHINE that takes snapshots of old dead webpages and I use often:
Spicer Report Archived. Limited Data.


So I guess the Amsoil filter (TS123) tested was an older "Oiled Foam" filter. I wonder how their new EAO Air Filters would perform?

I know that major media mfgs. in the HVAC industry have emmerged with impressive technology in HEPA media's with very low pressure drops and static pressures so I'm sure that Amsoil's and any others have integrated those raw media's into their auto filter lines. Just a logical thought..........

After reading that older report, and reading this very funny thread who totally trashed the K&N Tech who joined their forum, I'm so upset with K&N that I'm getting them out of all my cars ASAP! It now makes sense that I've always have had high silicate values on my Oil Analysis! "Fudg'in" dirt passing through the K&N all these years on my Cadillac's.....wonderful, "Thanks K&N"!

K&N Corp. Tech Guy gets Trashed on this Forum

Having experience in the HVAC and Indoor Air Quality industry, I've always had a deep down feeling that a car's air intake should be treated similarly like high efficiency filtered air within a dwellings HVAC system to filter out mold spores ect., of course not at sub-micron levels for an engine, but the the thought had occurred more than once with me of how the K&N really performs.


So then.....would this be a more current and/or valid Air Filter Study??? Maybe it should be made as a STICKY.
Current Air Filter Study March 2012



Regards,
Chris
 
Originally Posted By: cadchris
I think I remember some mention about the "Spicer Report". The link is now dead but I found the entire report posted again here on this site with graphs:
SPICER AIR FILTER REPORT/TEST

Maybe this should be made as a STICKY!

So then.....would this be a more current and/or valid Air Filter Study??? Maybe it should be made as a STICKY.
Current Air Filter Study March 2012


Not sure why all the AIR filter tests are being brought up in the oil filter forum.
shocked.gif
 
Originally Posted By: cadchris


I figured there were a lot of flaws in that study. Did you guys go to that forum and see that other Toyota Tundra Filter Study?
Toyota Tundra Oil Filter Study



Commenting on the Tundra filter study, it's another largely worthless comparison and commentary on visual aspects. The visuals do play a part in showing quality, or lack thereof, but pleat spacing or media thickness, etc, aren't the end-all, be-all. Especially if you don't talk about the media itself... is it cellulose, syn or a blend? What's the efficiency? What's the capacity? Had the presenters taken the time, they could have researched and obtained at least some of the filter specs for the comparison. It's possibly they didn't deliberately, since OEM Toyota filter are notorious for their low efficiency and wouldn't compare well. At least they do state that it's a "relative and incomplete" study in the text but it still serves to fuel the fires of debate on the wrong topics.

The visuals get top billing in these types of things because that's really as far as you can go with a "stare-and-compare" fest. Sometimes, the presenters get carried away in the effort to fill the space and spend too much time commenting on things that really have little bearing on whether a filter is "good" or "bad." My take on these things is that if they guy shows the visual stuff in his "comparison" but also puts some effort into presenting the operational data (efficiency/capacity at least) along with it, he'll get a kinder review from me.
 
A study that shows engine wear rates vs air and oil filter micron ratings seems like the best way to go. I assume some industrial firms have had something like this done in the past? Proprietary info?
For consumers, most people do not run their vehicles long enough to find any difference and routinely switch between brands (ie efficiency ratings), so good luck proving anything beyond a mind exercise.

Change the filters as needed and drive on
19.gif
 
As said, posted here many times before, originally in link below. Conclusions debunked then and since. Beyond the dissections pics which are decent, not much to see. Both the oil and air filter test, also posted previously on the AF board, patch test results show little or no correlation to manufacturer's ISO lab testing of many filters shown. Pics are worth a look for reference purposes. Tundra posting much the same, except conclusions rely on appearance only. But it was "cooked up in the Olathe Toyota parts department."

http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2168298
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

T
Oil Filter Study - Mileage vs Clogging
Replies
16
Views
3K
twX
T
Oil Filter Media Efficiency Spec's
Replies
15
Views
3K
RagnarokCamaro
T
Oil Filter Bypassing or Media Tearing - Do They Actually Matter?
Replies
6
Views
3K
twX
S
How to choose an oil filter - IMHO
2
Replies
35
Views
5K
bullwinkle
dnewton3
Fram XG9972 and CH9972 oil filters contrasted
2
Replies
23
Views
2K
Bellavita
Back
Top