Baldwin post micron ratings now

[Job]

You left out the particle size in your tome.

Any normally used in car particle testing, doesn’t matter. 98.7 rounded is 99, arithmetic. They take advantage. 99+ is embellishment of the graph for sales. 98.7, 99, 99+ @ 20 all the same. You already know this. Now if they say 99.0 that is something different.

 

[RamFan]

Any normally used in car particle testing, doesn’t matter. 98.7 rounded is 99, arithmetic. They take advantage. 99+ is embellishment of the graph for sales. 98.7, 99, 99+ @ 20 all the same. You already know this. Now if they say 99.0 that is something different.

1) Explain how 99.0 and 99 are different.
2) I would agree with you that 98.7, 99, 99+ at 20um is essentially the same. Except that we're not comparing at 20; one is 27um and the other is 20um.

You're simply not accurate in your assessment that their (Baldwin's) efficiency is excellent.

 

[Job]

1) Explain how 99.0 and 99 are different.
2) I would agree with you that 98.7, 99, 99+ at 20um is essentially the same. Except that we're not comparing at 20; one is 27um and the other is 20um.

You're simply not accurate in your assessment that their (Baldwin's) efficiency is excellent.

98.51 or 99.49 can be rounded to 99, but not 99.0, which can be rounded from 98.951 to 99.049. If they say 99.0 or 99.1 or 99.2, then it wasn’t rounded up from 98.7. I think that’s right.

Wasn't putting any micron rating to the rounding up example, as already stated. The example is what I think companies do to get the 99 on their box. Some are at 20, some are at 30 etc. some may be at 40. The magic is to get the 99 on the box so people buy it. The asterisk and small micron number are hidden enough so many people won’t see it. So they buy it. The company exists to sell the products.

The word absolute means 100%, but some call it 98.7%. Absolute is absolute not almost absolute. So by the 100% I believe the micron rating is excellent. Another way I think it’s excellent is I think 27 is an excellent number, more than Supertech or some others.
Excellent doesn’t mean best, but to me it means, excellent. So many variations on that one word. Even most excellent. Baldwin could say their filters are

So maybe it’s correct or not but that’s my answer to your questions.

 

[ZeeOSix]

But just what exactly is "is" ... Most people that don't read this forum don't even know what a micron is if they saw it on the box.

 

[4WD]

.

 

[RamFan]

98.51 or 99.49 can be rounded to 99, but not 99.0, which can be rounded from 98.951 to 99.049. If they say 99.0 or 99.1 or 99.2, then it wasn’t rounded up from 98.7. I think that’s right.

Wasn't putting any micron rating to the rounding up example, as already stated. The example is what I think companies do to get the 99 on their box. Some are at 20, some are at 30 etc. some may be at 40. The magic is to get the 99 on the box so people buy it. The asterisk and small micron number are hidden enough so many people won’t see it. So they buy it. The company exists to sell the products.

The word absolute means 100%, but some call it 98.7%. Absolute is absolute not almost absolute. So by the 100% I believe the micron rating is excellent. Another way I think it’s excellent is I think 27 is an excellent number, more than Supertech or some others.
Excellent doesn’t mean best, but to me it means, excellent. So many variations on that one word. Even most excellent. Baldwin could say their filters are

View attachment 45736

So maybe it’s correct or not but that’s my answer to your questions.

Thanks for the education on rounding. Apparently my sarcasm wasn’t severe enough. No one is going to write 99.0 when the percentage is 99. So saying there’s a difference between the two is playing with semantics and you know it.

It is an industry standard that absolute means 98.7%. Why? I don’t know. But it is. Regardless of your feeling that absolute should mean 100%, that’s not reality. So using context, 98.7% at 27um is worse, than 99% at 20um. Any argument to the contrary is disingenuous. Now, I’ll admit that my first comment of excellent may have been harsh, and for that I can apologize. But to say that the Baldwin is just as good, is factually incorrect.

You’re mixing what you think “should be” and “what is”. That’s a slippery slope to get on.

 

[bullwinkle]

If they see a micron on the box, they have better eyesight than I do!

 

[4WD]

If they see a micron on the box, they have better eyesight than I do!

Right, that’s me trying it a couple posts up ^^^^

 

[ZeeOSix]

If they see a micron on the box, they have better eyesight than I do!

Depends if the print is in 100u or 20u font.

 

[Job]

Thanks for the education on rounding. Apparently my sarcasm wasn’t severe enough. No one is going to write 99.0 when the percentage is 99. So saying there’s a difference between the two is playing with semantics and you know it.

It is an industry standard that absolute means 98.7%. Why? I don’t know. But it is. Regardless of your feeling that absolute should mean 100%, that’s not reality. So using context, 98.7% at 27um is worse, than 99% at 20um. Any argument to the contrary is disingenuous. Now, I’ll admit that my first comment of excellent may have been harsh, and for that I can apologize. But to say that the Baldwin is just as good, is factually incorrect.

You’re mixing what you think “should be” and “what is”. That’s a slippery slope to get on.

You missed the point I guess in context. The statement rounding up to 99 from 98.7 is correct of course, grade school arithmetic. Yes 99.0 or 99.1 can be written also. But if they are written, it isn’t a rounding up from 98.7, is it? 98.7 can’t be rounded to 99.0, yes or no? So seeing a 99 point something means it wasn’t rounded up. I wasn’t out to educate, you asked how they are different, not me. So I told you my idea. Now I am out to educate because I answered? Why is that being added?
I put a link to absolute too. They mention some feel 100% is not realistic. But that’s what absolute means, none. Regardless, 99 or 100, I stick to saying their filter is excellent.
So all better now?
Good morning Vietnam! I can get what he was getting at now.

 

[ZeeOSix]

 

[Bettez88]

So the b1402 with 23 Nominal; 45 Absolute is good? As good or better than the wix 57356?

 

[ZeeOSix]

So the b1402 with 23 Nominal; 45 Absolute is good? As good or better than the wix 57356?

45μ Absolute is 98% at 45μ. Not too good. What's WIX show for beta ?

 

[Bettez88]

45μ Absolute is 98% at 45μ. Not too good. What's WIX show for beta ?

2/20=6/20

 

[bullwinkle]

So the b1402 with 23 Nominal; 45 Absolute is good? As good or better than the wix 57356?

Is the 57356 old stock (good), or is it newer Purolator/Mann (we all know what that means!)? Seems like the real test is still particle counts, on a clean engine, with a known good air filter-lower PC means a better filter. Baldwins don’t generally tear, and have solid construction-that gives them a big leg up on ANY Purolator.

 

[SteveG4]

If they see a micron on the box, they have better eyesight than I do!

Micron makes highly-rated RAM and SSD's!

Like Micron, Baldwin has been a reputable mfgr for decades. I wouldn't think twice about using their product.

 

[2016 Outback]

Part Number:​	57055​
UPC Number:​	765809570559​
Style:​	Spin-On Lube Filter​
Service:​	Lube​
Type:​	Full Flow​
Media:​	Enhanced Cellulose​
Height:​	3.4(86)*​
Outer Diameter Top:​	2.57(65)*​
Outer Diameter Bottom:​	Closed:​
Thread Size:​	20X1.5 MM​
By-Pass Valve Setting-PSI:​	27​
Anti-Drain Back Valve:​	Yes​
Max Flow Rate:​	8-10 GPM​
Nominal Micron Rating:​	15​

From what I have seen in my gazes of the info on the FB25 is as of 2010 is I believe when it made it appearance and the By-Pass PSI changed from 23. ? to 27 psi, so the 57055 seems to the perfect fit. I don't even think the OEM is as perfect fit.

 

[Ignatius]

Part Number:​	57055​
UPC Number:​	765809570559​
Style:​	Spin-On Lube Filter​
Service:​	Lube​
Type:​	Full Flow​
Media:​	Enhanced Cellulose​
Height:​	3.4(86)*​
Outer Diameter Top:​	2.57(65)*​
Outer Diameter Bottom:​	Closed:​
Thread Size:​	20X1.5 MM​
By-Pass Valve Setting-PSI:​	27​
Anti-Drain Back Valve:​	Yes​
Max Flow Rate:​	8-10 GPM​
Nominal Micron Rating:​	15​

From what I have seen in my gazes of the info on the FB25 is as of 2010 is I believe when it made it appearance and the By-Pass PSI changed from 23. ? to 27 psi, so the 57055 seems to the perfect fit. I don't even think the OEM is as perfect fit.

This is a thread about Baldwin oil filters not the Subaru OEM oil filter bypass spec. There are literally a countless number of threads on the Subaru subject that you could post in on this site spanning over a decade.

By the way, the 12A/15A Subaru OEM oil filter bypass has always been 1.6 bar since MY2009 and despite what some might speculate otherwise no one has ever provided actual evidence to support the suggestion that it is higher. Again though, this is for another thread.

 

[2016 Outback]

This is a thread about Baldwin oil filters not the Subaru OEM oil filter bypass spec. There are literally a countless number of threads on the Subaru subject that you could post in on this site spanning over a decade.

By the way, the 12A/15A Subaru OEM oil filter bypass has always been 1.6 bar since MY2009 and despite what some might speculate otherwise no one has ever provided actual evidence to support the suggestion that it is higher. Again though, this is for another thread.

Wow did I miss something? Post number 9 by you and you wrote
" I cross referenced the Wix 57055 and got Micron Rating: 23 Nominal; 45 Absolute. So that reflects what the efficiency of the corresponding Baldwin filter is?

The Wix 57055 is 99% at 23 microns so no I am very confused unless they are referring to the Wix XP which is likely closer to those numbers based on what I have seen elsewhere. "
Wix was mentioned a few more times in other posts, so I just thought I would post the specs. for the 57055 NOT the XP. I did not write about the OEM filter except for 10 words in a sentence stating that I do not think they changed the OEM filter to 27 psi from 23.2 or whatever the .? is.
Boy in way I thought I was just back up your statement on the WIX 57055

So please explain what it is that I did that was so wrong so that I do not do in the future.

 

[Zee09]

45μ Absolute is 98% at 45μ. Not too good. What's WIX show for beta ?

Just like I always said on here
It ain't no premium filter ☺