Best brand of oil filters

[ZeeOSix]

What filter around here that anyone is going to use is 60um? Even cheapo filters seem to get pretty close to 99% at 40um.

The point of the data is to show that as the filtration gets better the level of wear decreases. Obviouly if they would have tested a 99% @ 20u filter the wear would be lower than the 60u and 40u filter. No wear study ever done doesn't show this relationship.

Member @TC compiled a whole list of what was historically quoted on this site. There are some pretty lousy filters, but really most are reasonably good in the grand scheme.

I have concluded the filtration arguments are mostly academic - which I believe you and many others here have already stated.

Of course if the bypass doesn't seat or there is a tear, almost might as well have no filter really.

Lets not forget the best filter is a oil change - but short OCI gets no love around here much either.

Like said, the longer the OCI the more benifit of higher filteration. Engine wear is proportional to the level of sump cleanliness over the OCI. Dump the oil every 1000 miles and you don't need nearly as much filtration as a 10K OCI. Using a 99% @ 20u filter for a 10K OCI will cause less wear than using a 99% @ 40u filter.

None do a great job <10um and there are lots of studies in industrial that show particles down to 1um are still pretty abrasive.

The OG Ultra filtered a lot of debris below 20u, and so should other filters ISO rated at 99% @ 20u. Keeping the level of debris below 20u at a much lower level is the main reasons that higher efficiency filters result in less wear. That why a bypass filter is added to a full-flow filter when someone wants the wear level to be even better.

 

[ZeeOSix]

One guy drove his 2 Toyota Tundras over a million miles each using just OEM Toyota Denso filters. So high efficiency filters are not needed to rack up millions of miles on a vehicle.

Nobody has said they are "needed" to get to any target mileage. Lots of factors involved in getting a vehicle to 1 million miles. The use conditions of those trucks - mainly long run highway use - is one big factor why they made it that far. Just because two Toyota trucks accomplished this doesn't mean that better oil filtration isn't benifical.

 

[SC Maintenance]

The point of the data is to show that as the filtration gets better the level of wear decreases. Obviouly if they would have tested a 99% @ 20u filter the wear would be lower than the 60u and 40u filter. No wear study ever done doesn't show this relationship.


Like said, the longer the OCI the more benifit of higher filteration. Engine wear is proportional to the level of sump cleanliness over the OCI. Dump the oil every 1000 miles and you don't need nearly as much filtration as a 10K OCI. Using a 99% @ 20u filter for a 10K OCI will cause less wear than using a 99% @ 40u filter.


The OG Ultra filtered a lot of debris below 20u, and so should other filters ISO rated at 99% @ 20u. Keeping the level of debris below 20u at a much lower level is the main reasons that higher efficiency filters result in less wear. That why a bypass filter is added to a full-flow filter when someone wants the wear level to be even better.

Yes, but your own study above shows a non linear improvement between 60, 50 and 40um. ie diminishing returns. So what is the continued improvement between 40 -- 20um? So sure, less debris is always better. But we really can't establish how much better with the data we have.

The person I replied to was using a 60um filter as an example - when really I am not sure such a lousy filter is anything anyone here would run. Even lousy OEM filters are significantly better than that.

As for your <20um statement, to my knowledge the only actual data we have ever seen here stopped at 15um, and none of those filters are even still available in their old form if I remember correctly.

 

[Pablo]

If the filters are the same price well of course 20um. Who could argue with that?

That said, whole different topic..............oh boy.............these low cost 99% 20um filters..........have they been tested by a third party?

 

[ZeeOSix]

Yes, but your own study above shows a non linear improvement between 60, 50 and 40um. ie diminishing returns. So what is the continued improvement between 40 -- 20um? So sure, less debris is always better. But we really can't establish how much better with the data we have.

So now it has to be linear to be justifiable? ... well apparently for some. Actually, there would still be a good reduction in wear because a 99% @ 20u filter is going to catch much more 20u and below debris. Just look at the efficiency vs particle size graphs of Ascents ISO tests.

As for your <20um statement, to my knowledge the only actual data we have ever seen here stopped at 15um, and none of those filters are even still available in their old form if I remember correctly.

Motorking when he worked for Fram verified with the engineering dept that the OG Ultra was 80@ 5u. Looking at Ascent's ISO testing data it seem it could easily meet that. Those efficiency curves for the top 3 efficient filters aren't going to magically drop off the cliff below 15u where the graph stops. So they are all catching a good amount of debris below 20u ... way more than the lower efficiency filters. That's why they would keep the oil cleaner and result in less wear than filters coming in at 60% @ 20u.

 

[WeyounDS9]

I just purchased a new Nissan Pathfinder yesterday and would like a little help on deciding on the best brand of oil filters for it. After looking over many forum post, I have become confused with what brands are considered best nowdays. It seems like there have been a number of changes in ownership and decreases in quality of a number of the brands. I think I am especially looking for a brand with the highest 20 to 25 micron filtration rate that will still hold together with the best construction. Thanks for all comments back. On a second thought, does anyone know how good the factory Nissan filters are just for comparison?

Congrats on your new Pathfinder!
Excellent vehicle, when I come back to the US, I might pick one up to complement my Armada.
Did you get the 2WD or AWD version?

Not sure how things are now, but back in the 90s the Nissan OEM oil filters had a stellar reputation.
Many users on the Nissan/Infiniti forums would prefer them over some other big name filters.

I def still trust them.
That said since I am in germany getting the Nissan OEM filter might be some hoops, as they dont sell the Nissan V8s here anymore
So I use Fram Ultra Syn 7317

 

[SC Maintenance]

So now it has to be linear to be justifiable? ... well apparently for some. Actually, there would still be a good reduction in wear because a 99% @ 20u filter is going to catch much more 20u and below debris. Just look at the efficiency vs particle size graphs of Ascents ISO tests.

If its not linear you can't just draw a straight line - thats the point.

Your now mixing data - your data above that shows wear from 60-50-40 being pretty parabolic. So how much does the wear drop below 40um, in this one test, for example? Forgive my shaky hand.

Similarly in the Ascent test the Boss and XP fall off a cliff at some point also.

Its hard for me to presume the others will continue on their merry linear way. I don't know where they will drop off, and neither do you.

So you have rapidly diminishing returns on the wear profile below a point, and you have rapidly diminishing returns on the filtration efficiency at some point also. Sounds a lot like a lot of diminishing returns.

 

[ZeeOSix]

If its not linear you can't just draw a straight line - thats the point.

Your now mixing data - your data above that shows wear from 60-50-40 being pretty parabolic. Forgive my shaky hand.

Never said or claimed in any way that the relationship between filter efficiency and wear reduction is or should be linear. I don't care if it's a perfect linear relationship or not ... fact is higher efficiency filter is going to lower the level of wear. If you don't think going from 99% at 40u to 99% @ 20u is "meaningful" then keep using those 99% @ 40u filters, lol.

Here's some data showing 40u down to 15u filters. If I could buy a 99% @ 15u filter for the same price or a few bucks more than a 40u or even 20u filter, I'd do it because it's sill keeping the wear down a little more. Why not?

Similarly in the Ascent test the Boss and XP fall off a cliff at some point also.

Its hard for me to presume the others will continue on their merry linear way. I don't know where they will drop off, and neither do you.

Even if the top 2 filters (Ultra and RP) in that graph suddenly rolled over and dropped off like the other two, they look like they'd easily make 75-80 @ 5u. I believe Motorking's info that the OG Ultra was 80@ @ 5u.

 

[SC Maintenance]

fact is higher efficiency filter is going to lower the level of wear

No one ever said it wasn't. The debate was over when it matters.

If you don't think going from 99% at 40u to 99% @ 20u is "meaningful" then keep using those 99% @ 40u filters, lol.

Perhaps I will. Whats the most miles you have ever put on an engine? Just curios?

Here's some data showing 40u down to 15u filters. If I could buy a 15u filter for the same price or a few bucks more than a 40u or even 20u filter, I'd do it because it's sill keeping the wear down a little more. Why not?

Yes, its very non linear as well I see.

There is no way they are going to drop off any faster than the two lower efficiency filters.

So you speculate.

 

[ZeeOSix]

No one ever said it wasn't. The debate was over when it matters.

Everyone has their own definition of what "matters". To me, any better level of oil cleanliness matters - even if it's a diminishing return unless it's going to cost some big money. Buying a high efficiency oil filter vs a low efficiency filter is not a delta big bucks issue ... far from it. Some lower efficiency filters even cost more than some high efficiency filters. If it doesn't matter to anyone else, I really don't care ... not my machine. I just point out the data ... people can then decide what "matters" or not based on data.

Perhaps I will. Whats the most miles you have ever put on an engine? Just curios?

Yes, its very non linear as well I see.

Obviously if there was a data point with no oil filter it would really be non-linear. It doesn't have to be linear relationship to matter for some people. Everyone's definition of what matters and what doesn't is different. A lot of people don't care a lot about diminishing returns depending on what the specific subject matter is.

So you speculate.

Not hard to speculate with that graph. And the data point from Motorking of the OG Ultra being 80% @ 20u backs up the speculation.

 

[Ronn]

Filter efficiency cannot be “Overdosed”, so the higher the efficiency the better. Question is when does “BETTER” no
no longer “MATTER”?? That becomes more and more a matter of JUDGEMENT when you’re already in say the “95%@30 microns” or better. As for myself, I will always choose the filter with the highest efficiency….all other things being “equal”(build quality, stoutness..etc) and additional cost “trivial” on an annual basis.
So each individual will, at the end of the day, pick what they are “comfortable “ with.

 

[nomas]

I think I am especially looking for a brand with the highest 20 to 25 micron filtration rate that will still hold together with the best construction.

This needed to be repeated .