Seems a tad overkill but it is their top tier filter. Why not spend $11for great filtering specs? (Cartridge)
Any reason not to use Ultra for 5k
- Thread starter Bettez88
- Start date
Uh what possible downside could you imagine besides being a waste of money?
Like asking if there is a downside to running VW 504 00 oil in my Tiguan for 3000 miles.
Like asking if there is a downside to running VW 504 00 oil in my Tiguan for 3000 miles.
How long does it take you to rack up 5000 miles? If you do a couple (or more) oil changes a year, you could always limit filter changes to every second oil change. That way you get the advantage of the better performing filter, and avoid tossing it early.
I used to be a swap the filter at every service guy. Since trying out the MityVac 2 years ago, I swap the filter at every 2nd or even 3rd service.
It is simply your call. If it makes you feel better, that go ahead and swap. There is certainly no problem doing so.
It is simply your call. If it makes you feel better, that go ahead and swap. There is certainly no problem doing so.
5K seems like a perfectly reasonable interval to me.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2011
- Messages
- 5,053
I was never comfortable with running 2x on Ultra. But 5k? I would use a much cheaper Wix for that 5k. After having a filter cutter and cutting many Ultra's, I'm comfortable with longer runs. If me I would do 10k and feel good as long as the engine is in good shape.
^^^ 10K miles total on a filter with one 10K or two 5K OCIs is basically the same thing to the oil filter, as long as the oil is able to run 10K without breakdown and sludging. And of course, the filter has to be able to handle the 10K miles if ran that long.
Was never one to use an oil filter for multiple oil changes. Then again I used to change the oil on my s10 4.3 every 3k with a tough guard. I usually hit 5k in less than six months usually four months. Mostly back roads going to work 25 miles one way and short trips around town
As per Honda owner’s manual, they indicate to change oil filter every other oil change. Its more of a preference, nothing bad will happen if you run two oil changes with one filter.
How about 4x 5k?
I mean how much do I really save in a year by reusing an oil filter
I also usually put new one, but few times was lazy and did not feel like getting messy …
I remain unconvinced it is any better than a TG... but aside from the cost, no there isn't any reason you can't run it 5000.
Ah yes, all the price of an ultra with less filtration…good choice
The only reason I don’t use tough guard is because it’s so close in price to the ultra
dnewton3
Staff member
Any reason? Consider this ...
- The XGs are generally rated at 99+% efficient; rated 20k miles
- The TGs are generally rated at 99% efficient; rated 15k miles
- The EGs are generally rated at 95% efficient; rated 10k miles
ANY of those filter are far more capable of the task you propose (5k miles).
NONE of those filters are going to be able to produce a result you'd be able to differentiate IN THE REAL WORLD. You will never be able to produce a filtration effect that your engine will see any real difference in cleanliness or wear rates between those three. The capacity of all three is more than you intend to use them for, and even the EG is rated for 2x what you will do. The efffiency of all three are so good that you'll never see any wear rate difference you can truly prove (not theory BS, but really show tangible results).
A "tad overkill" you say? No, sir, that's a massive waste of money that will never give you any discernable ROI. So why pay for a grossly under-utilized XG, when even the EG would be under-utilized?
Seems to me that your mind is already made up and you just want some manner of adulterized authorization to reaffirm your choice. So here it comes:
Do what you want; get the XG. There's nothing wrong with stuff that makes you feel good, as long as you're honest with yourself. Just don't try to convince us that it's a smart decision, because there's no proof it would be so.
- The XGs are generally rated at 99+% efficient; rated 20k miles
- The TGs are generally rated at 99% efficient; rated 15k miles
- The EGs are generally rated at 95% efficient; rated 10k miles
ANY of those filter are far more capable of the task you propose (5k miles).
NONE of those filters are going to be able to produce a result you'd be able to differentiate IN THE REAL WORLD. You will never be able to produce a filtration effect that your engine will see any real difference in cleanliness or wear rates between those three. The capacity of all three is more than you intend to use them for, and even the EG is rated for 2x what you will do. The efffiency of all three are so good that you'll never see any wear rate difference you can truly prove (not theory BS, but really show tangible results).
A "tad overkill" you say? No, sir, that's a massive waste of money that will never give you any discernable ROI. So why pay for a grossly under-utilized XG, when even the EG would be under-utilized?
Seems to me that your mind is already made up and you just want some manner of adulterized authorization to reaffirm your choice. So here it comes:
Do what you want; get the XG. There's nothing wrong with stuff that makes you feel good, as long as you're honest with yourself. Just don't try to convince us that it's a smart decision, because there's no proof it would be so.
I've never seen a return of investment concerning vehicles. I don't buy classics nor the $100,000 plus. In normal times they depreciate. The bank owns my home. At least we are transitioning into a new year. So to speak.
Just a thought! Mr. dnewton3 did make an excellent point though about the filters...
Just a thought! Mr. dnewton3 did make an excellent point though about the filters...
