Amsoil vs. Motorguard

[Schultz]

quote:

---

As opposed to the filters like Amsoil where the oil is filtered around the entire ouside of the media you have a lot of surface area, which makes the capacity mucher higher. But the downside is that you don't have 4 inches of meada for the oil to travel through to be cleaned you only have about 1 1/2 inches to 2 inches.

---

I have to start by saying I like both products, so I'm not partial to either, both have advantages and disadvantages.

MSparks: As I understand the Amsoil is a pleated filter, which would give it a high amount of surface area and capacity as you state. Of course, this all depends on how much media they decide to put into the can. However, the oil flow only sees the thickness of the media, and not the length of it, so it probably only travels through about .030-060" of media and not 2".

If you or any other have an AMSoil filter you feel like cutting apart I'll test the media and tell you what pore range it actually is. Just send me a PM.

It's seems Amsoil could have another niche product for the true gear heads on this board and many others out there. As a rep you might want to put in a product request for a finer rated spin-on filter with actual beta ratios backing up it's touted performance. That would definitely raise the bar for the competition and suppress a lot of speculation. It would also allow the customer to know what they are buying. May I suggest a β2 = 1000 which would be a 2µm with 99.9% efficiency. This essentially would end up being a hydraulic filter in your can.

Does the current AMSoil filter have a rated Beta ratio that you can share with us?

 

[RJCorazza]

quote:

---

It's seems Amsoil could have another niche product for the true gear heads on this board and many others out there. As a rep you might want to put in a product request for a finer rated spin-on filter with actual beta ratios backing up it's touted performance. That would definitely raise the bar for the competition and suppress a lot of speculation. It would also allow the customer to know what they are buying. May I suggest a β2 = 1000 which would be a 2µm with 99.9% efficiency. This essentially would end up being a hydraulic filter in your can.

Does the current AMSoil filter have a rated Beta ratio that you can share with us?

---

Amen! That would go a long way in my willingness to pay $9 for the SDF filters as well. I tried to get the Beta numbers for my tractor's hydraulic system and finally discovered the $35 filter is a 60 micron b=60 filter. A porch screen will almost do that (not really, but close). I added a 10 micron b=50 on the return side of the system.

 

[msparks]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Schultz:
I have to start by saying I like both products, so I'm not partial to either, both have advantages and disadvantages.

MSparks: As I understand the Amsoil is a pleated filter, which would give it a high amount of surface area and capacity as you state. Of course, this all depends on how much media they decide to put into the can. However, the oil flow only sees the thickness of the media, and not the length of it, so it probably only travels through about .030-060" of media and not 2".

---

I guess you don't really understand the design of the by-pass filter. Maybe this will "paint" a picture for you.

As far as a beta ratio, I don't think that by-pass filters are tested in that way. They are tested as Nominal and absolute filtrations. Whereas the absolute micron size that is stopped by the filter is around 3 microns. The nominal is where 50% of the particles is around 1 micron.

I really don't see how you got that this filter has pleated media. It looks to me to be pretty solid.

Oh and BTW the width of the meadia that the oil has to travel through is 1 and 1/2", as just measured on my cutaway model.

If you want to compare capacity we can measure the circumfence of the meadia and multiply that by the lenght of the filter(media) that will give you the square inches of surface area. As opposed to the Toilet paper you would have to find the surface area of the TP which is pie r squared. You would have to do this for the entire TP roll then subtract out the hollow center.

 

[msparks]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Schultz:
As a rep you might want to put in a product request for a finer rated spin-on filter with actual beta ratios backing up it's touted performance. That would definitely raise the bar for the competition and suppress a lot of speculation. It would also allow the customer to know what they are buying. May I suggest a β2 = 1000 which would be a 2µm with 99.9% efficiency. This essentially would end up being a hydraulic filter in your can.

Does the current AMSoil filter have a rated Beta ratio that you can share with us?

---

The Amsoil SDF filter (super duty filter) is a regular spin on Full Flow filter with one of the highest beta ratio's for a spin on filter. Most spin on filters can only filter down to 25 microns or so. The Amsoil filter is quite a bit more effecient than that.

 

[plexx]

msparks: When I said that my oil is still clear at 1500 miles using the Motor Guard filter , this was in respect to the same truck that before had the Amsoil bmk-11 installed , and at 1500 miles with the Amsoil bypass filter the oil was much darker. I have been an Amsoil dealer myself since 1996 and I think that Amsoil makes some great products , but also being a mechanic for many years and doing alot of research on filters I feel that the Motor Guard is a better choice for my application.

 

[mjo]

quote:

---

What about the wrong *size* TP, there was talk of having to cut and/or unroll the rolls

---

The biggest thing is to make sure that the inside diameter of the tp cardboard tube matches the outside diameter of the metal tube in the motorguard. You want the TP cardboard tube to be snug with this metal tube so that all the oil flows through the TP. The times I bought TP (Scott 1000 at Target) for it I brought with me a small ruler. It takes a couple of minutes to measure TP and when it is on sale you can get a ton of rolls at the store. No need for paying shipping or waiting for filters to come to your door.

quote:

---

You are also forgetting the price of makeup oil

---

After I put a Frantz on my Saturn, the car didn't burn any oil (engine components seat properly with no oil contaminants). It originally burned a quart every 2k miles or more. Thus the amount of top off oil was actually less than the amount I was burning without a BP filter!
If the fittings are in the right place and allow the filter to drain after the engine is turned off, the Motorguard and Frantz require less than a quart of top off oil. Change the filter after the filter is cold to the touch. Use either a sandwich adapter or drain the filter into the oil pan and have the filter higher in elevation than the point of drain. I use rubber hose and lock the fittings with some black RTV. The RTV works great because it turns into soft rubber. Rubber is great for absorbing vibration and doesn't crumble apart when exposed to oil. Avoid break line and metal line that put too much shear on the fittings when the car is in motion (vibrating).

 

[RalphPWood]

quote:

---

Originally posted by RalphPWood:
I just sent a filter to Canada with tape wrapped around the element but I wrote the Tartan 3590 on the tape. The tape wouldn't allow you to use a full roll of Scott 1000 sheet. I get my elements and tape from
Ralph

---

I'm correcting the wrong spelling of [URL='http://www.vikingop.com']www.vikingop.com and tape number the correct one being 3690 Tartan from my previous post.

Ralph

[ October 16, 2004, 01:35 AM: Message edited by: RalphPWood ]

 

[RalphPWood]

As far as filter change recommendations what one person can get away with another might not. I drove my Subaru 240,000 miles a year. I averaged an oil drain every 60,000 miles. If I had changed the filter every 6 months or 6,000 miles I probably wouldn't have needed to change the oil. I was running a high oil temperature and had some oxidation problems. My Camry has a better cooling system and could probably do better for extended filter change intervals. I made it about 50,000 miles using Amsoil 10-40 AMO before the oil thickened up. Someone in the north can get away with a lot more than someone from Dallas with a marginal cooling system. The first thing you should do when you buy a car in the Dallas area is install an oil cooler. TP is the same as any filter. It will clean the oil until it can't hold any more. I think that most people that buy these filters use their own judgement on what TP to use and how often to change the filter. As a rule of thumb if the oil looks good and feels like the viscosity is as good as new you are doing good. I have to assume that everyone is operating under the most severe conditions.

Ralph

 

[slider]

quote:

---

Originally posted by RalphPWood:
I drove my Subaru 240,000 miles a year.

Ralph

---

Really? That's 658 miles a day 24 hours a day 365 days a year.

Watch out for one sleepy driver!

That's why your engine wear is so minimal --- by never going above 27 mph!

 

[RJCorazza]

quote:

---

The Amsoil SDF filter (super duty filter) is a regular spin on Full Flow filter with one of the highest beta ratio's for a spin on filter. Most spin on filters can only filter down to 25 microns or so. The Amsoil filter is quite a bit more effecient than that.

---

msparks :
I am an Amsoil customer. I have Amsoil fluids in all of my vehicles & equipment. Your quote above does not provide any necessary information to make comparisons. ANY filter will filter 25 micron particles - it's a question of at what efficiency it will filter particles of a stated size. A nominally (old method) rated filter at 25 microns WILL allow particles to pass greater than the size the human eye can detect (100 microns) and some poor units will allow 300+ micron particles to pass & still be nominally rated at 25 microns.
So, what is the particle size and cooresponding beta ration of the SDF filter?

 

[Schultz]

quote:

---

I guess you don't really understand the design of the by-pass filter. Maybe this will "paint" a picture for you.

---

Well I understand bypass, I just didn't realize the AMSoil wasn't pleated. Ok now I see what it is, I hadn't seen that picture before, thanks. I retract my statement about it being a pleated filter.

quote:

---

The Amsoil SDF filter (super duty filter) is a regular spin on Full Flow filter with one of the highest beta ratio's for a spin on filter. Most spin on filters can only filter down to 25 microns or so. The Amsoil filter is quite a bit more efficient than that.

---

Yes, the Amsoil is a very good filter, but it sounds as though it could be better, nothing wrong with continuous improvements. Yes, most spin on automotive filters only go down to 25µm but there are many hydraulic filters that filter to 2.5µm at 99.9% which many would consider an absolute rating. Here is a link to a hydraulic spin on that has a beta 2.5µm =1000 and beta
spin on filtration information
Ok the link didn’t go through. Click on the order information tab under the product description, and right of the default tab, then view table 4. Also, under the specifications tab you can view the other information.

There also many others that make the same type filter as these.

Yes, I know bypass filters typically aren't rated with beta numbers, but I don't know of a reason why they can't be so we can all be informed consumers.

[ October 18, 2004, 11:10 AM: Message edited by: Schultz ]

 

[Tommy]

Schultz,

What you have shown with your link is a full-flow filter - a bit of an apples-to-oranges comparison.

There are two problems with such a filter that immediately come to mind:

Pall filter elements with Ultipor media are very expensive - the last one I bought for a Pall filter on an Allison transmission was over $200!

The capacity of such a filter will not be as great as a depth-media bypass filter element - did you notice that you can get a pressure-differential switch for your Pall? That is to tell you when it is clogged.

 

[Schultz]

quote:

---

What you have shown with your link is a full-flow filter - a bit of an apples-to-oranges comparison.
Pall filter elements with Ultipor media are very expensive - the last one I bought for a Pall filter on an Allison transmission was over $200!
The capacity of such a filter will not be as great as a depth-media bypass filter element - did you notice that you can get a pressure-differential switch for your Pall? That is to tell you when it is clogged.

---

$ 200, wow I didn't realize they could be so expensive. I've seen others like Parker that are more reasonable, also Gary found a no name Pall equivalent from filter mart that was $28 in the 5" can size. It has the same look and specs as Pall, so I believe it to be a Pall without the name on it.

It's hard to say which would have more dirt holding capacity without testing it. The pleated filters have a lot more surface area for spreading the dirt out on, so I'm not so sure which would last longer in service without real test data.

Yep, the intended propose of the filter is full flow, but it and other hydraulic full flow filters could be plumed as a bypass filter with a restrictor orifice for engine oil applications.

I have the pressure switch on mine; there are several flavors of this. Mine is solid state and has three wires, a common, a normally open and a normally closed contact. The switch turns on when 15psid is reached. This would also be a nice addition to the AMSoil filters.

 

[Tommy]

Please do not get me wrong......Pall make excellent filters. I was buying aftermarket filter elements for the application that I mentioned - they were made by Baldwin and were also around $20, but were ordinary pleated paper. The Pall Ultipor element has three different types of media in different layers - if you ever cut one open you will see the quality difference. I agree with you that this filter will work fine as a bypass filter if you happen to own one, but to go and buy what you have is BIG dollars - price out the pressure differential switch alone and you will see what I mean. Another downside I see is the weight of the filter assembly - to mount this unit reliably on sheet metal is likely going to require some serious fabrication.

 

[Gary Allan]

quote:

---

price out the pressure differential switch alone and you will see what I mean.

---

So??

What's a little money if you can have something "kewl"??

(visions of infinitely sophisticated redundant and self regulating lubrication systems - thermostats, exchangers, mulitple filters, DPT data links,

)

Yes, even remote mounts with differential pressure ports are not "consumer" competitive in price. Gauges that measure PSID are strictly industrial/commercial and due to limited distribution and inherent high end reliability/performance, are equally as expensive. Some of us have had the good fortune to secure these items as salvage.

quote:

---

Yep, the intended propose of the filter is full flow, but it and other hydraulic full flow filters could be plumed as a bypass filter with a restrictor orifice for engine oil applications.

---

I think that we can all agree that the function of the filter, whether full flow or bypass, has more to do with application specific norms ..more then its literal "design". That is, a 2 micron absolute filter is a 2 micron absolute filter. The only thing that limits its use as a full flow or bypass is the environement that it encounters (flow demands, viscosity, "insult load" = contamination rate, etc.).

For example you could use Amsoil bypass filters in a full flow application if you ran enough of them in parallel or only filtered fluid that as thin as water at ambient temps (you get the picture). It may very well take 30 of them plumbed in parallel to reduce the impedence (viscosity/temp puts a "reactive" component into the equation) to equal the flow capability of a full flow.

 

[XS650]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gary Allan:


Yes, even remote mounts with differential pressure ports are not "consumer" competitive in price. Gauges that measure PSID are strictly industrial/commercial and due to limited distribution and inherent high end reliability/performance, are equally as expensive. Some of us have had the good fortune to secure these items as salvage.

---

For the determined do-it-yourselfer
Differental pressure sensors

They have an 85C temp limit, but you get around that by using a couple feet of very small diameter pressure line between the pressure souce and the sensor.

 

[Gary Allan]

You've gotta love Yankee (or Dixie, West Coast) ingenutiy. You just can't keep a better mousetrap builder down

 

[LarryL]

I think the answer to Amsoil vs MotorGuard is surface area vs depth. The T.P. just does not have a lot of initial contact surface area. Oil must travel a bit faster through the T.P. initial contact surface then the Amsoil filter for the same conditions. Once there is enough depth you're done. So with T.P. the design is done before you start, hence the 3k changes and makeup oil. The real question, has either manufacturer done something like the J1858 test and published the results along with the name of the lab doing the work? My problem with picking is the question of real testing and analysis. To hear someone say, I've got xxx,xxx miles with no problems and the oil looks pretty, is not useful.

And, finally, what other bypass filters are there to choose from? Do they test....?

 

[msparks]

quote:

---

Originally posted by LarryL:

And, finally, what other bypass filters are there to choose from? Do they test....?

---

Ahh that is the question. Maybe someone should start a new thread with all the different ones. I'm personally not going to list all of my competition, but if someone else does, I'll be glad to shoot them down. Hahaha.

 

[LarryL]

Hey Mr. Amsoil, do you have any test results on your BP filter? And Mr. MotorGuard, anything on your filter? We get the idea that each is a good product, but how good is good? Testing please!