I've had weird things happen before. I could try it again and maybe have zero issues next time. I have both a Fram ultra and m1ep on the shelf right now (use the same application to fit my olds 350 with headers), curiosity has me wanting to try the ultra again instead of the m1 which I had planned on using. Worst case scenario, I pull it off and put on the Oldsmobile again like last time. I was planning on running the ultra 2 oil changes on the Olds. It gets a lot of short trips besides the recent 600 mile trip to Niagara falls and back. I don't go more than about 3k miles/6 months on it. But if the truck doesn't like it again, I'll put the new ultra on it again.
Best filter choices for GM 4.8/5.3 in dusty conditions
- Thread starter 350Rocket
- Start date
It’s probably the o ring in the pickup tube that’s shot. My 4.8 ticked and now is quiet. It’s so quiet it creeps me out. I was used to the way the engine had sound, now it’s crazy quiet. Go on YouTube. Lots of people have this issue. Some more extreme than others. Yours is probably just starting to leak.
Just saw this thread as I was checking if I can use the 10060 my father in law stocked up my shelf with (for his 2008 and 2018 express vans).
It's been a year and a half and I haven't lost any oil pressure or gained any extra noise. It was a coincidence that it seemed to tick with the ultra, I had a spark plugs that loosened off a bit and was leaking compression. I'm using ultra filters again (3675) and it only has a minor lifter tick when warming up cold. Silent when hot.
Glad I haven't touched the oil pump o ring as it's an expensive job with 4wd.
Any reason not to use a 10060 in an application calling for the 3675?
My oil pan gasket was leaking so I changed that o ring out at the same time. Yes is a big job. My truck is 4x4 and dropping the front differential takes some time. I've only used the 10060 since my truck was new. Hasnt blown up yet.
The threads are different on those filters. 10060 is metric 22 x1.5 and 3675 is 13/16-16.
dnewton3
Staff member
Given that all Frams now have silicone ADBVs, I cannot see the logic of debating ADBV merrit between those three models (EG, TG, XG). They all will flow well more than what the engine needs. They should all hold oil with the silicone ADBV. They all have well more than enough capacity for the A.R. BITOG OCI duration.
I suspect that very small production variation from filter to filter (TG to TG, EG to EG, XG to XG) may play into this. We've all seen the stories of this brand and that brand having an occasional production mistake or just production variance. It happens to Fram, Wix, Mobil, Champ, and even Amsoil (Donaldson).
Just because an XG coincided with an objectional noise, I'd not assign that noise to the entire filter line unless the experiment were repeatable several times back-to-back. Otherwise it's just an anecdotal occurence. And you have to realize that when you buy a filter at the store, you may or may not be getting another filter from the same production run. Unless you check date codes, you don't know another part of the important story.
OP ... I would think that any decent made filter with 95% or greater efficiency will do well in this application; ie the EG. If you want more efficiency for the same stated OCI, then I think the TG is a great compromise between cost and performance.
I suspect that very small production variation from filter to filter (TG to TG, EG to EG, XG to XG) may play into this. We've all seen the stories of this brand and that brand having an occasional production mistake or just production variance. It happens to Fram, Wix, Mobil, Champ, and even Amsoil (Donaldson).
Just because an XG coincided with an objectional noise, I'd not assign that noise to the entire filter line unless the experiment were repeatable several times back-to-back. Otherwise it's just an anecdotal occurence. And you have to realize that when you buy a filter at the store, you may or may not be getting another filter from the same production run. Unless you check date codes, you don't know another part of the important story.
OP ... I would think that any decent made filter with 95% or greater efficiency will do well in this application; ie the EG. If you want more efficiency for the same stated OCI, then I think the TG is a great compromise between cost and performance.
But are the black ADBVs now seen in some newer stock Frams still silicone? Thats' the hot debate going on lately.
Yep lol. I figured that out pretty fast.
I've pretty well concluded there was no difference. I've used several different filters and mostly back to the ultra because it goes on sale frequently and I feel better about the high efficiency and capacity while trying to clean out some leftover sludge.
It seems to be mostly temperature that affects noise on cold start with this truck but overall it along with oil pressure are unchanged for the past year and a half.
The oil pan can be taken off of a 2005 5.3 by taking the front chunk loose and letting it drop down a little. Use a jack under it to control the weight. I actually removed the jack and had to pull down just a little. Not a fun job. I took my time and it took about 5-6 hours. Oring cost about $5 and if doing it again I would probably have reused the oil pan gasket.
I'm hoping I never have to do it on mine! Doesn't sound fun at all.
dnewton3
Staff member
Good question and I don't have an answer to it. If it were black, I would only assume it was nitrile and not silicone. I've not seen any black Fram ADBVs in my local WM for a while now. However, given today's supply chain issues, perhaps they (Fram) have reverted back to nitrile in the EG??? If that were true, I'll probably go back to using TGs then, because I run long OCIs and would want the silicone ADBV.
For these engines, likely one of the best combos, IMHO.
Similar threads
