Im cojnfused on that test..the royal purple is showing it had the highest particle counts of all listed microns! following the pureone. The screen name said it debunked the roya purple being the best..arnt the higher numbers better>? confused : x
A comparison of Mobil 1 and Amsoil EaO oil Filters
- Thread starter btanchors
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: Izb
Another interesting UOA: http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2061820&page=3
Semi-synthetic filters seems to be better then full-synthetic filters (RP and Amsoil)?
Full synthetic media typically doesn't filter quite a well. Example: PureOne is rated at 99.9% @ 20 microns, but the Purolator Synthetic is 99% @ 25 microns.
http://www.purolatorautofilters.net/products/oil_filters/Pages/pureoneoilfilters.aspx
http://www.purolatorautofilters.net/products/oil_filters/Pages/SyntheticOilFilters.aspx
Another interesting UOA: http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2061820&page=3
Semi-synthetic filters seems to be better then full-synthetic filters (RP and Amsoil)?
Full synthetic media typically doesn't filter quite a well. Example: PureOne is rated at 99.9% @ 20 microns, but the Purolator Synthetic is 99% @ 25 microns.
http://www.purolatorautofilters.net/products/oil_filters/Pages/pureoneoilfilters.aspx
http://www.purolatorautofilters.net/products/oil_filters/Pages/SyntheticOilFilters.aspx
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: Izb
Another interesting UOA: http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2061820&page=3
Semi-synthetic filters seems to be better then full-synthetic filters (RP and Amsoil)?
Full synthetic media typically doesn't filter quite a well. Example: PureOne is rated at 99.9% @ 20 microns, but the Purolator Synthetic is 99% @ 25 microns.
http://www.purolatorautofilters.net/products/oil_filters/Pages/pureoneoilfilters.aspx
http://www.purolatorautofilters.net/products/oil_filters/Pages/SyntheticOilFilters.aspx
I'm wondering if that's not on purpose. It's marketed to synthetic oil users. They expect the filter to be used for extended OCI's, so they make it filter not quite as fine so it doesn't clog as easily? (Just a guess).
Originally Posted By: Izb
Another interesting UOA: http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2061820&page=3
Semi-synthetic filters seems to be better then full-synthetic filters (RP and Amsoil)?
Full synthetic media typically doesn't filter quite a well. Example: PureOne is rated at 99.9% @ 20 microns, but the Purolator Synthetic is 99% @ 25 microns.
http://www.purolatorautofilters.net/products/oil_filters/Pages/pureoneoilfilters.aspx
http://www.purolatorautofilters.net/products/oil_filters/Pages/SyntheticOilFilters.aspx
I'm wondering if that's not on purpose. It's marketed to synthetic oil users. They expect the filter to be used for extended OCI's, so they make it filter not quite as fine so it doesn't clog as easily? (Just a guess).
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: Izb
Another interesting UOA: http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2061820&page=3
Semi-synthetic filters seems to be better then full-synthetic filters (RP and Amsoil)?
Full synthetic media typically doesn't filter quite a well. Example: PureOne is rated at 99.9% @ 20 microns, but the Purolator Synthetic is 99% @ 25 microns.
http://www.purolatorautofilters.net/products/oil_filters/Pages/pureoneoilfilters.aspx
http://www.purolatorautofilters.net/products/oil_filters/Pages/SyntheticOilFilters.aspx
Depends on who makes it. IIRC, Donaldson had some rather incredible filtration numbers for their SYNTEQ media that I've mentioned on here in the past.
Originally Posted By: Izb
Another interesting UOA: http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2061820&page=3
Semi-synthetic filters seems to be better then full-synthetic filters (RP and Amsoil)?
Full synthetic media typically doesn't filter quite a well. Example: PureOne is rated at 99.9% @ 20 microns, but the Purolator Synthetic is 99% @ 25 microns.
http://www.purolatorautofilters.net/products/oil_filters/Pages/pureoneoilfilters.aspx
http://www.purolatorautofilters.net/products/oil_filters/Pages/SyntheticOilFilters.aspx
Depends on who makes it. IIRC, Donaldson had some rather incredible filtration numbers for their SYNTEQ media that I've mentioned on here in the past.
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: Izb
Another interesting UOA: http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2061820&page=3
Semi-synthetic filters seems to be better then full-synthetic filters (RP and Amsoil)?
Full synthetic media typically doesn't filter quite a well. Example: PureOne is rated at 99.9% @ 20 microns, but the Purolator Synthetic is 99% @ 25 microns.
http://www.purolatorautofilters.net/products/oil_filters/Pages/pureoneoilfilters.aspx
http://www.purolatorautofilters.net/products/oil_filters/Pages/SyntheticOilFilters.aspx
Depends on who makes it. IIRC, Donaldson had some rather incredible filtration numbers for their SYNTEQ media that I've mentioned on here in the past.
True ... it may vary with media manufacturers. I don't recall the threads, but what was the Donaldson Synteq media coming in at for efficiency?
Plus there is the Fram Ultra that has a dual layer setup and comes in at 99% @ 20 microns or greater, which is better than the Purolator synthetic filter.
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: Izb
Another interesting UOA: http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=2061820&page=3
Semi-synthetic filters seems to be better then full-synthetic filters (RP and Amsoil)?
Full synthetic media typically doesn't filter quite a well. Example: PureOne is rated at 99.9% @ 20 microns, but the Purolator Synthetic is 99% @ 25 microns.
http://www.purolatorautofilters.net/products/oil_filters/Pages/pureoneoilfilters.aspx
http://www.purolatorautofilters.net/products/oil_filters/Pages/SyntheticOilFilters.aspx
Depends on who makes it. IIRC, Donaldson had some rather incredible filtration numbers for their SYNTEQ media that I've mentioned on here in the past.
True ... it may vary with media manufacturers. I don't recall the threads, but what was the Donaldson Synteq media coming in at for efficiency?
Plus there is the Fram Ultra that has a dual layer setup and comes in at 99% @ 20 microns or greater, which is better than the Purolator synthetic filter.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Here's one source: http://www.donaldson.com/en/engine/support/datalibrary/070617.pdf
Any of the filters that start with ELF are the Endurance SYNTEQ filters. Efficiency is 99% @ 15 microns.
Any of the filters that start with ELF are the Endurance SYNTEQ filters. Efficiency is 99% @ 15 microns.
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Here's one source: http://www.donaldson.com/en/engine/support/datalibrary/070617.pdf
Any of the filters that start with ELF are the Endurance SYNTEQ filters. Efficiency is 99% @ 15 microns.
All the filters numbers starting with "ELF" are listed at 99% @ 15 microns, which is excellent. But looking at the filters starting with "P" (non-Syntec), the efficiencies are all over the place ... some showing 50% @ 20 microns, which is horrible.
Here's one source: http://www.donaldson.com/en/engine/support/datalibrary/070617.pdf
Any of the filters that start with ELF are the Endurance SYNTEQ filters. Efficiency is 99% @ 15 microns.
All the filters numbers starting with "ELF" are listed at 99% @ 15 microns, which is excellent. But looking at the filters starting with "P" (non-Syntec), the efficiencies are all over the place ... some showing 50% @ 20 microns, which is horrible.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Here's one source: http://www.donaldson.com/en/engine/support/datalibrary/070617.pdf
Any of the filters that start with ELF are the Endurance SYNTEQ filters. Efficiency is 99% @ 15 microns.
All the filters numbers starting with "ELF" are listed at 99% @ 15 microns, which is excellent. But looking at the filters starting with "P" (non-Syntec), the efficiencies are all over the place ... some showing 50% @ 20 microns, which is horrible.
Yup, it would appear for the regular media filters, that the efficiency may be dictated by something else? I mean I otherwise can't see the logic of using such a wide array of medias unless of course there's a flow component dictated by the OEM for a given filter and they need to sacrifice efficiency for flow with the conventional media whilst this isn't the case with the SYNTEQ stuff?
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Here's one source: http://www.donaldson.com/en/engine/support/datalibrary/070617.pdf
Any of the filters that start with ELF are the Endurance SYNTEQ filters. Efficiency is 99% @ 15 microns.
All the filters numbers starting with "ELF" are listed at 99% @ 15 microns, which is excellent. But looking at the filters starting with "P" (non-Syntec), the efficiencies are all over the place ... some showing 50% @ 20 microns, which is horrible.
Yup, it would appear for the regular media filters, that the efficiency may be dictated by something else? I mean I otherwise can't see the logic of using such a wide array of medias unless of course there's a flow component dictated by the OEM for a given filter and they need to sacrifice efficiency for flow with the conventional media whilst this isn't the case with the SYNTEQ stuff?
You can have nearly any level of filtration with nearly any media.
With cellulose, flow can be an issue as efficiency increases. You can compensate to a degree by increasing the amount of media but that only works if you have the room for more media.
Synthetic media (we're talking the wire backed lofted fiber here used in most syn filters) flows better at any efficiency so flow is less an issue at the higher efficiencies seen on primary filters. More or less the same thing applies as above. More media equals more flow but with a syn media you can have the higher efficiency with same flow in a smaller package. If you also increase the amount of media, you can have very high efficiency (eg 99%@15 um) with excellent flow and very high capacity.
Also, UOAs are not an accurate measurement of primary filtering efficiency.
Particle counts might be but in order to be a useful comparison, there has to be some methodology applied... ie an apples to apples test where all the parameters are the same EXCEPT the filter. What is usually presented here are disparate comparisons.
With cellulose, flow can be an issue as efficiency increases. You can compensate to a degree by increasing the amount of media but that only works if you have the room for more media.
Synthetic media (we're talking the wire backed lofted fiber here used in most syn filters) flows better at any efficiency so flow is less an issue at the higher efficiencies seen on primary filters. More or less the same thing applies as above. More media equals more flow but with a syn media you can have the higher efficiency with same flow in a smaller package. If you also increase the amount of media, you can have very high efficiency (eg 99%@15 um) with excellent flow and very high capacity.
Also, UOAs are not an accurate measurement of primary filtering efficiency.
Particle counts might be but in order to be a useful comparison, there has to be some methodology applied... ie an apples to apples test where all the parameters are the same EXCEPT the filter. What is usually presented here are disparate comparisons.
Last edited:
Any thoughts on the TBN or the last viscosity reading?
Looking at average TBN values, one might say the EaO had a substantially lower outcome. Looking at the trend of TBN, it was decreasing at a fast rate, other than the last test result which also had that unusual jump in viscosity.
Looking at average TBN values, one might say the EaO had a substantially lower outcome. Looking at the trend of TBN, it was decreasing at a fast rate, other than the last test result which also had that unusual jump in viscosity.
Ok. Donaldson makes excellent synthetic filters. But there is no synthetic Donaldson filters for many cars...
What do you prefer NOW: synt hetic blend filters(Mobil-1 or Bosch Distance Plus) or synthetic filters(Amsoil or RP Or Purolator synthetic)?
What do you prefer NOW: synt hetic blend filters(Mobil-1 or Bosch Distance Plus) or synthetic filters(Amsoil or RP Or Purolator synthetic)?
Originally Posted By: Izb
Ok. Donaldson makes excellent synthetic filters. But there is no synthetic Donaldson filters for many cars...
What do you prefer NOW: synt hetic blend filters(Mobil-1 or Bosch Distance Plus) or synthetic filters(Amsoil or RP Or Purolator synthetic)?
Fram Ultra - dual layer full synthetic media, wire mesh backing, silicone ADBV, metal end caps, 99% @ 20 microns or larger, 15K OCI capable. What more do you want?
Ok. Donaldson makes excellent synthetic filters. But there is no synthetic Donaldson filters for many cars...
What do you prefer NOW: synt hetic blend filters(Mobil-1 or Bosch Distance Plus) or synthetic filters(Amsoil or RP Or Purolator synthetic)?
Fram Ultra - dual layer full synthetic media, wire mesh backing, silicone ADBV, metal end caps, 99% @ 20 microns or larger, 15K OCI capable. What more do you want?
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: Izb
Ok. Donaldson makes excellent synthetic filters. But there is no synthetic Donaldson filters for many cars...
What do you prefer NOW: synt hetic blend filters(Mobil-1 or Bosch Distance Plus) or synthetic filters(Amsoil or RP Or Purolator synthetic)?
Fram Ultra - dual layer full synthetic media, wire mesh backing, silicone ADBV, metal end caps, 99% @ 20 microns or larger, 15K OCI capable. What more do you want?
I am afraid that full synthetic filter Fram does worse job then semi synthetic filter Mobil1. Like Amsoil does.
Originally Posted By: Izb
Ok. Donaldson makes excellent synthetic filters. But there is no synthetic Donaldson filters for many cars...
What do you prefer NOW: synt hetic blend filters(Mobil-1 or Bosch Distance Plus) or synthetic filters(Amsoil or RP Or Purolator synthetic)?
Fram Ultra - dual layer full synthetic media, wire mesh backing, silicone ADBV, metal end caps, 99% @ 20 microns or larger, 15K OCI capable. What more do you want?
I am afraid that full synthetic filter Fram does worse job then semi synthetic filter Mobil1. Like Amsoil does.
Originally Posted By: Izb
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: Izb
Ok. Donaldson makes excellent synthetic filters. But there is no synthetic Donaldson filters for many cars...
What do you prefer NOW: synt hetic blend filters(Mobil-1 or Bosch Distance Plus) or synthetic filters(Amsoil or RP Or Purolator synthetic)?
Fram Ultra - dual layer full synthetic media, wire mesh backing, silicone ADBV, metal end caps, 99% @ 20 microns or larger, 15K OCI capable. What more do you want?
I am afraid that full synthetic filter Fram does worse job then semi synthetic filter Mobil1. Like Amsoil does.
Worse job at what? It is superior in every way, every piece of performance data says so.
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: Izb
Ok. Donaldson makes excellent synthetic filters. But there is no synthetic Donaldson filters for many cars...
What do you prefer NOW: synt hetic blend filters(Mobil-1 or Bosch Distance Plus) or synthetic filters(Amsoil or RP Or Purolator synthetic)?
Fram Ultra - dual layer full synthetic media, wire mesh backing, silicone ADBV, metal end caps, 99% @ 20 microns or larger, 15K OCI capable. What more do you want?
I am afraid that full synthetic filter Fram does worse job then semi synthetic filter Mobil1. Like Amsoil does.
Worse job at what? It is superior in every way, every piece of performance data says so.
Originally Posted By: Nate1979
Originally Posted By: Izb
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: Izb
Ok. Donaldson makes excellent synthetic filters. But there is no synthetic Donaldson filters for many cars...
What do you prefer NOW: synt hetic blend filters(Mobil-1 or Bosch Distance Plus) or synthetic filters(Amsoil or RP Or Purolator synthetic)?
Fram Ultra - dual layer full synthetic media, wire mesh backing, silicone ADBV, metal end caps, 99% @ 20 microns or larger, 15K OCI capable. What more do you want?
I am afraid that full synthetic filter Fram does worse job then semi synthetic filter Mobil1. Like Amsoil does.
Worse job at what? It is superior in every way, every piece of performance data says so.
+1
Originally Posted By: Izb
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: Izb
Ok. Donaldson makes excellent synthetic filters. But there is no synthetic Donaldson filters for many cars...
What do you prefer NOW: synt hetic blend filters(Mobil-1 or Bosch Distance Plus) or synthetic filters(Amsoil or RP Or Purolator synthetic)?
Fram Ultra - dual layer full synthetic media, wire mesh backing, silicone ADBV, metal end caps, 99% @ 20 microns or larger, 15K OCI capable. What more do you want?
I am afraid that full synthetic filter Fram does worse job then semi synthetic filter Mobil1. Like Amsoil does.
Worse job at what? It is superior in every way, every piece of performance data says so.
+1
Originally Posted By: cordeen
I'll stick with the Amsoil EAO over the Mobil 1 filters after reading problems that possibly occurred due to highly restrictive M1 filter media. Makes sense to me that the more contaminants removed from oil is due to tightly woven media, but this also restricts the flow of lubricants.
The same to me.
I used Amsoil and Fram Ultra oil filters (both 11-12 PSI bypass pressure) on Subaru Forester 2012 (FB20), where stock filter has 23PSI bypass pressure.
And I don't want very rare opening of bypass valve on Mobil-1 filters.
I suppose, that Amsoil and Fram Ultra oil filters (both with small resistances to flow) opened bypass valve about the same cold temperatures as stock Subaru filter 15208AA130.
p.s. According the specification,
Mobil1 M1-104 max flow = 5.8gpm. The same dimensions Fram XG9688 max flow =15gpm
Mobil1 M1-110 max flow = 3 gpm. The same dimensions Fram XG7317 max flow = 12gpm
I'll stick with the Amsoil EAO over the Mobil 1 filters after reading problems that possibly occurred due to highly restrictive M1 filter media. Makes sense to me that the more contaminants removed from oil is due to tightly woven media, but this also restricts the flow of lubricants.
The same to me.
I used Amsoil and Fram Ultra oil filters (both 11-12 PSI bypass pressure) on Subaru Forester 2012 (FB20), where stock filter has 23PSI bypass pressure.
And I don't want very rare opening of bypass valve on Mobil-1 filters.
I suppose, that Amsoil and Fram Ultra oil filters (both with small resistances to flow) opened bypass valve about the same cold temperatures as stock Subaru filter 15208AA130.
p.s. According the specification,
Mobil1 M1-104 max flow = 5.8gpm. The same dimensions Fram XG9688 max flow =15gpm
Mobil1 M1-110 max flow = 3 gpm. The same dimensions Fram XG7317 max flow = 12gpm
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Here's one source: http://www.donaldson.com/en/engine/support/datalibrary/070617.pdf
Any of the filters that start with ELF are the Endurance SYNTEQ filters. Efficiency is 99% @ 15 microns.
That's a broken link, this seems to be the new one:
http://www.rieanpishroco.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/DONALDSON-3.pdf
Here's one source: http://www.donaldson.com/en/engine/support/datalibrary/070617.pdf
Any of the filters that start with ELF are the Endurance SYNTEQ filters. Efficiency is 99% @ 15 microns.
That's a broken link, this seems to be the new one:
http://www.rieanpishroco.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/DONALDSON-3.pdf
Originally Posted By: Linctex
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Here's one source: http://www.donaldson.com/en/engine/support/datalibrary/070617.pdf
Any of the filters that start with ELF are the Endurance SYNTEQ filters. Efficiency is 99% @ 15 microns.
That's a broken link, this seems to be the new one:
http://www.rieanpishroco.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/DONALDSON-3.pdf
Notice they use the full synthetic "Syntec" media on their most efficient, longest OCI filters (ELF series).
Originally Posted By: OVERKILL
Here's one source: http://www.donaldson.com/en/engine/support/datalibrary/070617.pdf
Any of the filters that start with ELF are the Endurance SYNTEQ filters. Efficiency is 99% @ 15 microns.
That's a broken link, this seems to be the new one:
http://www.rieanpishroco.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/DONALDSON-3.pdf
Notice they use the full synthetic "Syntec" media on their most efficient, longest OCI filters (ELF series).
- Status
Similar threads
