Best Bypass Oil Filter Out There?

[pachecospirit]

Hi everyone, new to bypass oil filtes and have some info to share and questions to ask: I've shopped for the best bypass oil filter for months and finally landed on these options for my two vehicles: 2003 4Runner and a Powerstroke 6.4. [list] [*]Amsoil (for powerstroke) [*]IInsane Diesel Extreme Bypass Oil Filter (for both 4runner and Powerstroke) [*]Frantz Filter (for powerstroke) [*]Sinister Diesel (for powerstroke) I'm curious as to what everyone has used for their vehicle and if anyone had any experience with the filters above? Here are some things i've learned during my search for a bypass oil filter that I hope will help others find the right filter: 1- The ONLY way to know how clean your oil gets is to analyze your oil. Many companies will talk a big game but in the end the analysis will provide the ISO cleanliness results (great article about ISO heregreat article here). CALL the company and ask for this info. - Optical Microscopy (ISO 4407) - Automatic Optical Particle Counting (ISO 11500) - Pore Blockage Particle Counting (BS3406) 2- STATIC filters are different than PROGRESSIVE filters. A 2 micron static filter does a great job filtering down to 2 microns but it will clog easily and quickly because larger particles are caught first, resulting in having to buy more filters. That's how they make their money. A progressive filters will filter in layers (like 10 to 3 to 1 micron) and this will reduce the chances of your filter clogging significantly. 3- No one filter will fit everyone's needs. Buying a filter is a lot like finding the right tool for the job: [list] [*]If you have an older vehicle that's falling apart and you just want it to last longer, go with a cheaper bypass oil filter kit. [*]If you have a new vehicle get a high quality bypass oil filter which usually costs more. [*]If you have a healthy vehicles with many expensive mods then consider a higher quality bypass oil filter to protect your investment [*] Consider how much you drive before buying a bypass oil filter. Heavily used vehicles should definately consider a higher quality bypass oil filter [*] Consider the cost of maintenance and change intervals. A bypass oil filter is suppose to save you money and eventually pay for iteself after some years. This is all just my amateur opinion as someone who obsessed about finding the right filter for my vehicles. I will most likely document and post my 4runner installation here in about a week but still shopping for my 6.4 kit. Thanks all!

 

[beanoil]

Frantz on Steroids Lots of ways to address bypass filtration, not as many reasons to support it. You may see an overall improvement in oil cleanliness because your factory filter is rated at 99% efficiency @ 25 microns for the 6.4 . But unless you are extending OCI, or are shooting for the high mileage hall of fame for the engine you probably wont benefit. If campground bragging rights are important, by all means, have at it, and post up some pictures. I removed the Insane model from my list because when contacted, the guy was, lets say, less than professional, dogging every other bypass filter on the planet, saying only his was effective, and why bother if not buying his. Doesn't speak well for someone researching and gathering info. You can check this out. Racor Knockoff.

 

[goodtimes]

The Frantz would be my choice. They have good data, real world. They take used oil that has been full flow filtered and clean it. The multi pass four hour lab test for full flow has it's uses but isn't real world testing, where the circulations are many times more over 50x the hours on average, and the particle load is far higher to speed up the test.They offer a synthetic and cellulose element. The cellulose traps water.

 

[FlyNavyP3]

That Racor Parker filter is a beautiful filter from a long standing pillar in the plumbing and fluid filtration world, but it's HUGE, even the smallest one is huge. Also for me the 72.5 PSI limit is a limiting factor for my use as I've toyed with the idea of a small simple bypass on my 4Runner but cruises down the road with 75-85 psi of oil pressure. Does anyone know the pressure limit of the Frantz? It's about the right size for me to try and incorporate in a convenient location and replacement filters are only a trip to the grocery store away.

 

[A310]

My 6.4 had similar oil pressure when it was cold and I had no issues with the Frantz unit leaking. You can always put a 1/32" orifice on the intake side of the filter and that will reduce the flow enough that it will not leak.

 

[beanoil]

Originally Posted by FlyNavyP3

Also for me the 72.5 PSI limit is a limiting factor for my use as I've toyed with the idea of a small simple bypass on my 4Runner but cruises down the road with 75-85 psi of oil pressure. Does anyone know the pressure limit of the Frantz? It's about the right size for me to try and incorporate in a convenient location and replacement filters are only a trip to the grocery store away.

I never noticed the pressure rating, good catch, and surprising. That would be a question for Parker/Racor. I've got the older offering from Racor, a LFS801. 150PSI, up to 20 quarts, string wound depth loading media.

 

[jacobs]

Originally Posted by FlyNavyP3

Does anyone know the pressure limit of the Frantz? It's about the right size for me to try and incorporate in a convenient location and replacement filters are only a trip to the grocery store away.

About 30 years ago I used a Frantz to filter out moisture and any other contaminants in a 125 psi air line. It was very successful except for the rust in the canister.

 

[xtell]

The ones that I have personal experience with are the Frantz Bypass Filter, the Frantz Oil Refiner (new version of the original Frantz) and the Baldwin B50. I have these three versions installed on my work trucks and personal vehicles. No issues so far with any of them. I use sandwich adapters for most of my Bypass installs.

 

[dnewton3]

Just like there is no "best" oil ... There is no "best" bypass filter. There are many good ones, if and only if you intend to use it at the tool that is can be, and not a toy. For my comments to be relevant here, we're going to consider a typical, healthy engine; no absurd racing engines, oddities or neglected stuff need be discussed. Most folks don't understand WHY to use a BP filter. It's a means of controlling contamination only after the sump system is contaminated to a point where wear rates are otherwise affected. IN the following images, you'll see how folks think wear happens, and then how it actually happens. The differences in wear rates is typically non-existent in fresher OCIs. Only AFTER the system becomes compromised does any one competitor have the potential to gain an advantage. The "series" differences can represent filter choices, lube choices, etc. The concept to glean is that most of the time, wear rates are very consistent regardless of what oil/filter you choose. This is because the oil/filter really isn't the main entity controlling wear in short-to-moderate OCIs. The wear is more so affected by the TCB and yet-to-cause-trouble soot. Here's what really happens in terms of contamination loading, and specifically soot, which is probably the greatest concern in general: As you can see, unless the OCI is extended far out, the soot loading (most importantly the size of soot) never really gets to a critical point. If your OCI is kept reasonably short (say less than 15k miles), then the soot does not get big enough to do any real damage. If you extend the OCI, then you can continue to keep a sump with low size contamination by using BP filters. Soot size stays fairly small until some point, and then it's growth can become exponential if left unchecked. The key here is to make sure you manage the soot particulate size with one of two methods: 1) filter it out 2) flush it out Either is totally effective and will result in nice, desirable wear trends. When the soot is small, it's not going to affect wear. As it grows in size, it will cause issues. BP filters have no real effect on wear rates UNTIL the sump would otherwise be overrun by larger stuff. We see LOTS of examples of this here on BITOG. Those who run BP and also OCI often, get no "better" results than folks who do traditional OCIs. Flushing or filtering out contamination is just two different roads to the same destination. It's just that flushing has an immediate affect, whereas BP filters have a delayed effect. Neither is "better". What is "best" is understanding how/why to control contamination, and then managing your maintenance program as a whole.

 

[pachecospirit]

This is amazing, thank you! Yes I want to extend the life of my engine and I am going for breaking over 400K on the toyota (mainly because i've invested quite a bit on mods and kit). I'm at 200K miles now, is starting on a bypass oil filter a good idea at this point or did i pass the threshold for saving my SUV? Another question: is your data stating that it's almost pointless to install a bypass oil filter on a new vehicle that will go through scheduled/traditional OCI and bypass oil filters are really for vehicles pushing miles past a certain point? Your chart says "soot too small" to be cleaned at a certain point, what is considered "small" (in microns), would a 1 or 2 micron filter catch those small particles before they become a problem? Basically i'm wondering if installling a bypass oil filter will help prevent problems if installed on a brand new vehicle or are they useless until about 20K miles (as seen on your chart)?

 

[pachecospirit]

dnewton3, I can't find the answer to one simple question that maybe you can answer: how do soot microns get larger? How does soot gain size to the point it begins to damage the engine? Does larger micron soot just appear after a certain mileage (out of no where) or does it build up starting from a small micron. From what I understand, soot builds UP and that's how it grows in size, if that's true then wouldn't preventing that build up by filtering out smaller microns (much smaller than OEM filters) early be beneficial? Serious question btw.

 

[Linctex]

Originally Posted by pachecospirit

Your chart says "soot too small" to be cleaned at a certain point, what is considered "small" (in microns), would a 1 or 2 micron filter catch those small particles before they become a problem?

The smaller soot particles are constantly getting caught by the filter media.... just like any window screen on a hose gets dusty over time.... BUT- dispersants in the oil can flush away the particles after they are caught, anyway. The good news is that Soot particles often are waaaaay too small to be cause for concern of wear.

 

[Linctex]

Originally Posted by pachecospirit

how do soot microns get larger?

Through the process of "agglomeration" ..... the particles stick to each other eventually (agglomeration) to become larger particles.

 

[pachecospirit]

Thanks for helping Linctex, someone sent me this to explain how soot particles get larger which confirms the "agglomeration" process (in the photo there's a step called "coagulation surface growth" which i'm reading about now. So my main question is that if large and harmful particles of soot come from a build up of tiny particles of soot ... then isn't tiny particles of soot dangerous? Isn't preventing that from happening wise? I may not be understanding this fully (but im studying hard) but to me it sounds like common sense. Here are my questions: 1- Why wait for tiny "harmless" particles to build up into harmful large particles? Harmful large particles don't just magically appear after a certain mileage. 2- OEM filters don't catch tiny particles that cause this build up because they filter around something like 13 microns or more. Bypass filters target smaller particles. 3- Isn't preventing something bad from happening by catching the tiny particles good? Why does it seem like everyone is against what sounds to me like common sense? Is it because people don't plan to have their vehicles past 100/200K miles (because that's about the right time to sell)? I personally drive my vehicles until their completely dead (which is why i'm looking up bypass oil filters now). Thanks all for the input, this topic is blowing my mind.

 

[Linctex]

Originally Posted by pachecospirit

3- Isn't preventing something bad from happening by catching the tiny particles good? Why does it seem like everyone is against what sounds to me like common sense?

All moving metal parts are SEPARATED from each other by a film (a cushion) of oil - so in operation, there is no metal to metal contact, or an engine would last only 30 seconds, not 300,000 miles. The soot particles are often so small, they just float along inside this film/cushion of oil... far, far, far, far, too small to pose a threat. I added a bypass filter (it's only 5 microns nominal, though) just because I pretty much had all the parts & lots of room... and I also plan to go to 400,000+ miles as well. I figured "Why Not?"................ but I am not expecting any miracles to occur

 

[beanoil]

Your common sense thought would hold true only if there was no oil. If the soot particle, no matter how small, was larger than the oil film, then you have wear. All modern oil has additives to keep the soot particles in suspension, and try to prevent agglomeration. Lubrication Regime Soot Particle Theory Soot Decoded Lubrizol Dispersants

 

[dnewton3]

What I speak to is directly taken from real UOA data. I have over 15,000 UOAs in my database, from just about every manner of application you'd think of (gas, diesel, tractors, OTR trucks, gen sets, marine applications, tow-motors, etc ... in just about every environment you can think of). In confine my following comments to OCIs of 15k miles or less; that is the typical range of "normal" exposure. Once you get into really long OCIs, there are differences that will exhibit themselves. What the data shows is that wear trends are not affected by typical inputs, usually at OCIs less than 15k miles. There will always be a bizarre exception somewhere, but the VAST MAJORITY of engines follow this mantra. Adding syn lubes and bypass filters, while still following short-to-moderate OCI plans, never indicates a change in wear trending. In short, any engine will wear at some self-sustaining rate, and it won't change much despite expensive inputs. Most all engines have a declining wear rate from the OCI out to around 15k miles. Hence, putting a BP filter on a brand new engine, and running OEM limits on the OCI (typically 10k miles or less; depending on the IOLM or set schedule), never shows any reduction in wear compared to a "normally" maintained engine. The two main contributors to wear control are the boundary layer (present upon pressure increase as the pump spins up) and the TCB (tribochemical barrier; matures with the OCI ... read SAE 2007-01-4133). Until soot becomes large enough to violate the boundary layer in both size AND significant quantity, nothing bad is happening. There is no study to address how soot affects the TCB that I'm aware of. There are two ways to keep a reasonably clean sump: 1) flush out the bad stuff 2) filter out the bad stuff However, until the bad stuff get's large enough to make a difference in wear rates, neither really has much effect because the BL and TCB do more to control wear Here's the rub ... UOAs are not perfect, but nothing is. They are, however, by far, the least expensive means to track wear easily. There are SAE studies that show good correlation between UOA wear data, PC loading, and other methods of measuring wear like component mass electron bombardment, etc. UOAs are a good tool, but they are not a perfect tool. They are the best tool for the least cost with quick turn around. If you don't accept these conditions, then just walk away. Given the above statement, and using the knowledge gleaned from other SAE studies looking at filtration, there's a reasonable cause to believe that UOA data shows reasonable correction to wear trends and other forms of meausrment. So ... IF the UOAs are not showing any wear trend data shifts when variables are introduced (such as syn lubes and/or bypass filters), then the rational conclusion to come to is that the inputs which are manipulated (such as filtration) are not producing a statistically significant effect. 15,000 UOAs cannot be wrong here. Whereas one can argue the merits of inputs (soot size, agglomeration, TCB, BL, etc), the OUTPUTs speak the truth. There is no data that shows adding a BP filter to a "normal" maintenance program has any tangible effect. If you change an input, and the outputs don't shift, then the input is moot, because there can be no causation without correlation!

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted by Linctex

Originally Posted by pachecospirit

how do soot microns get larger?

Through the process of "agglomeration" ..... the particles stick to each other eventually (agglomeration) to become larger particles.

I don't buy the idea that carbon agglomerations cause additional wear. At a previous job I worked as a research technologist and for many years it was with carbon black characterization and analysis. Carbon particles do agglomerate but it is a weak attraction and the agglomeration is as easily broken as it is made. Aggregates are completely different than agglomerations and require massively high shear forces to break, but aggregates are tiny compared to agglomerations.

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted by pachecospirit

This is amazing, thank you! Yes I want to extend the life of my engine and I am going for breaking over 400K on the toyota (mainly because i've invested quite a bit on mods and kit). I'm at 200K miles now, is starting on a bypass oil filter a good idea at this point or did i pass the threshold for saving my SUV?

A bit anecdotal but I've achieved the miles on the Toyota vehicles in my sig using mostly Toyota OEM or Denso filters, with no abnormal consumption or problems. The Sienna uses about a quart every 3500 miles or so which is a little more than it did when new. This may be due to valve stem seals or other issues rather than wear of course.