2.7 tacoma filter

[mobilaltima]

friends 2002 tacoma, 2.7 four cyl, 95k miles. specs a Napa Gold 1348, but can I use a Gold 1516 or Motorcraft FL-400S without a problem? im pretty sure theyre the correct oversized filters. Reason i ask is I work at a local Napa, and one of the owners builds racing engines, currently building a 900hp big block Chevy. He knows his stuff, so I asked him if it wld be ok to use the longer filter, and he said no, because the longer filter lacks a certain valve, idk if he was referring to the ADV or the bypass valve.

 

[Chris142]

The fl400 size filter is the longer version of the short filter but I don't think it will fit. IIRC a longer filter will hit the front crossmember

 

[SuperDave456]

I've tried many over-sized filters on a number of vehicles.

You have to be careful due to how the engine moves while revving and impacts from below.
Also, mind the rock guards on off-road vehicles.

I'd buy one and check it out. When or If you return it tell them what you were up to. Or donate it to someone who could use it.

 

[dnewton3]

The 51516 is just a longer version of the 51348; correct. Spec's (other than physical size) are similar/same for burst, efficiency, flow, gasket, etc. Your knowledgeable source at your Napa is wrong; there is no difference in "valves" between those two filters. They both have a silicone ADBV, and also have the same bypass pressure rating, as of this morning.

You can most certainly use the larger filter. You won't gain any tangible measureable wear reduction, but if you sleep better at night (or it's beneficial by commonizing garage stock) then by all means, go for it.

BTW - Wix and other companies will not generally warrant filters used in "non-stock" applications. While warranty of your 10 year old car is not in play, the Wix coverage might be. You can check with them, but I'll be a spoiler and tell you they will not support the off-standard practice. So you're on your own in that regard.



Side topic, but directly related this this thread ...

Wix is constantly messing with their data on their site. These two filters (1348 and 1356) have been the easy swap for years. And a few years ago, there was clear reason to "upgrade" to the larger filter because the 1356 had a "better" beta ratio. The old "nominal" ratings were the same. But the "beta" data has been whitewashed on many filters to simply read "2/20 = 6/20" on more than 1/2 their catalog listings, and it's ever creeping in. But this morning, I noticed that the 1348 now has a "nominal" rating of 15um, where the 1356 has a nominal of 21um. First of all, the "nominal" ratings are pretty much meaningless, and the beta data is better. But when they "whitewash" the beta data across the board, it becomes meaningless too.

So, according to their site, as of today, the two filters have the same flow (7-9gpm), the same burst (275psi), the same bypass delta (8-11psi), and same gasket. Only the nominal is different, and it actually favors the smaller filter .... Go figure.

Also makes one ponder if you couldn't actually use Wix data against them. Think about this for a moment. The two filters are rated the same for all pertinenet info (nominal is worthless when you understand it). So, why could I not pick ANY Wix filter that would be the "same" as the OEM application? After all, if Wix own website states that the 1356 and 1348 have the same burst, bypass and efficiency, then what is the real tangible difference? How could they state that a 51348 is the ONLY acceptable filter when the 51356 is listed with the exact same performance criteria? How could they deny a warranty claim that the 51516 is "invalid" for this engine (or my Fusion 2.5L that also takes the 51348) when the 51516 is identical (according to their own data) except for length? Discounting any physical contact that would damage the filter, the two filters are IDENTICAL according to their own data. Therefore EITHER should be acceptable! How can they state that the 275psi burst rating of the 51348 is OK, but the same 275 burst rating of the 51356 is not? How could they rationally state that the 8-11psi delta P is correct for the 51348, but the 8-11psi delta P for the 51356 is not? How can they claim the beta 6/20 for the 51348 is superior to the same 6/20 rating for the 51516?

IMO, they are actually encouraging people to experiement, because they are publically taking away any differentiation of their products. If it fits, and has the same ratings, then they would be equal, if physical barriers are not an issue.

Food for thought ...

 

[RF Overlord]

dnewton3, you're prolly right on the money...

...but...

(and I don't mean to single out WIX...I bet all large companies do this)

...whether the filter in question is functionally identical to the "recommended" one would be irrelevant in a court-room setting. All they have to say is: "We don't recommend using that filter for that application, so we will not warranty the failure." and the customer is SOL.

 

[dnewton3]

Yeah - I would not be willing to bet large money on any case argument, but it might depend (as do all cases) what jury or arbitrator you got.

In some manner, would it not be hard for them to defend how "same" is "different" ... ???

Depending on the failure mode of the filter that would cause some undesirable engine problem, it would be hard for them to satisfy. Say the 51516 burst open and causes immediate pressure drop and galled bearings. How could they say this:
Your Honor, the reason the 51516 failed is because it's 275psi burst rating is different than the 51348 275psi burst rating.
Or ...
The bypass setting of 8-11 psi in the 51348 is different than the 51516 at 8-11 psi ...

What they can say is that "We don't test all filters in all applications; we are application specific". But what we also know is that Wix basically will "reverse engineer" their filters. They take the OEM filters and test them. They come up with test criteria and meet/exceed the OEM specs. We see that in marketing languange and warranty provisions all the time; "Meets/Exceeds OEM specs". So, they don't "test" all their filters in every application; they run OEM product testing and fit find the filter in their catalog that meets/exceeds the OEM performance criteria.

The 51348 is a perfect example. Look at the Wix "fits this application" claim. Many, many car engines, motorcycle engines, diesel engines, gasser engines, air-cooled engines, liquid-cooled engines, etc, etc, etc. I am supposed to believe that they took cases of 51348 filter, and installed them on fleets of all these (hundreds) of applications? No way in Hades.

They are playing both sides of the fence. They reverse engineer into applications, and then tell us we cannot take their specs and do the same.

Would you want to afford the time/money/grief in a lawsuit? Probably not. But I think it's more favorable for us than one might think. After all, with the M/M act, they have to prove that the application you choose was so grossly negligent that their product could have never been expected to survive. How are they going to play that angle when the burst pressure, bypass pressure, beta ratio, and gasket size are ALL identical between 51348 and 51516? They would have to show that your choice of their filter was so out of whack, so skewed, that the choice you made was the reason the filter failed. And how can that be proven with identical specs??????????

 

[vssjim]

I think if I remember correctly that to go even bigger than the others listed you could use a 51085 or a step up 51515 also space available