Best filter for this application

[Forkman]

3.1L V6 Century (less than 12K mi on odo)
Running Mobil 1 5w30 that will be changed when the oil life monitor trips the change oil light (which will probably be about every 6K mi).

I currently have a ACDelco PF-47 on it (cannot use the bigger filter because of space restrictions).

Out of these filters that are readily available in my area which one would be the "best" in this application - cost is not an object.

-Wix (NAPA or Carquest rebadged)
-Purolator (either PureOne or Premium Plus)
-AC Delco

I may also be able to get Baldwins from a farm/implement supply store.

 

[fasty]

Baldwin, FleetGuard and Donaldson...

FleetGuard/Donaldson has better filteration and only 1-4 oil pressure PSI drop

Baldwin is also great filteration but FleetGuard/Donaldson has more better quality filteration cost more than Baldwin.

 

[TR3-2001SE]

Of those three I would pick the Pure One. The Wix/Napa Gold would be my second choice. Both of these are excellent filters. I have gone through the UOA's for filters that show very low insolubles levels and PureOne seems to top the rest but the Wix again is almost as good. If you believe in the test data the PureOne is also tops in filtration for the two standard test they run on filters.

[ September 17, 2003, 05:06 PM: Message edited by: TR3-2001SE ]

 

[Patman]

I recently saw specs on the Fleetguard which indicated it's efficiency was only 55% at 30 microns, and only flowed 3gpm. I'm not sure if it was just this one particular model number (which was for a Toyota) but to me those specs are not impressive in the least, especially considering Wix filters flow about 7-9GPM and filter closer to 100% of the 30 micron stuff out.

 

[pscholte]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Patman:
I recently saw specs on the Fleetguard which indicated it's efficiency was only 55% at 30 microns, and only flowed 3gpm. I'm not sure if it was just this one particular model number (which was for a Toyota) but to me those specs are not impressive in the least, especially considering Wix filters flow about 7-9GPM and filter closer to 100% of the 30 micron stuff out.

---

Pat,

Where'd you see these numbers? I believe this is the first "bad data" I have seen on these filters.

 

[Patman]

Someone from this site sent me the Fleetguard specs yesterday, here they are:


DEFINITION AND MAIN DIMENSIONS


Part Type LUBE FILTER


Configuration SPIN-ON

Flow Direction OUTSIDE/IN


Part Function FULL FLOW


DOME OUTSIDE DIAMETER 2.69 in

GASKET INSIDE DIAMETER 2.15 in

GASKET OUTSIDE DIAMETER 2.45 in

OVERALL HEIGHT 2.9 in

SEAM OUTSIDE DIAMETER 2.69 in

THREAD SIZE 3/4-16 UNS-2B


FILTRATION, MECHANICAL SPECIFICATIONS AND TEST STANDARDS


CAPACITY 5.3 g SAE J1858

10 MICRON EFFICIENCY, TWA 15 % SAE J1858

30 MICRON EFFICIENCY, TWA 55 % SAE J1858

CLEAN ELEMENT DP, MAX 1 PSI ISO 4548-1

RATED FLOW 3.01 GPM

ELEMENT COLLAPSE/BURST, MIN 74.98 PSI ISO 4548-3

HYDROSTATIC BURST, MIN 349.96 PSI ISO 4548-6

HYDR. PULSE DURABILITY, MIN 25000 Cycles ISO 4548-5

ADBV LEAKAGE, MAX 60 mL/h

BPV OPENING DP 9.5 PSI

 

[boxcartommie22]

patman, not true on those fleetguard specs!!! ask fleetguard to send you via email specs and you will see 10u 50% and 30u 95% with the stratpore it s 100% at 30u.... i use the lf 16002 which is the stratapore filters 50% at 10u and 30% at 100%..the standard ones are the same except 30u are 95%...they make all their auto filters this way...

 

[Patman]

quote:

---

Originally posted by boxcartommie22:
patman, not true on those fleetguard specs!!! ask fleetguard to send you via email specs and you will see 10u 50% and 30u 95% with the stratpore it s 100% at 30u.... i use the lf 16002 which is the stratapore filters 50% at 10u and 30% at 100%..the standard ones are the same except 30u are 95%...they make all their auto filters this way...

---

So where did those specs that were sent to me come from then?

 

[Forkman]

Thanks for the suggestions.

Any thoughts on the Donaldsons that were mentioned. I found a local CAT dealer that is a Donaldson distributor.

 

[sbc350gearhead]

Wix emailed me and told me that their filters are 95% at 25 microns. Does that mean that they compare to the fleetguard as far as filtration? They didn't mention any other specs.

 

[boxcartommie22]

pat, perhaps he was mistaken but i cannot imagine a good company like cummins to make such a filter with those kind of specs. i really would call fleetguard and talk with someone and he or she will be glad to send you any info, or specsheet you ask for via email its well worth your while!! toll free number also..look into the stratapore media..cummins are very particular about their products ALL their filters are made with the very best heavy duty and high performance quality..

 

[boxcartommie22]

also if you look at the demisions of the above filter its only 2.9 in. tall very small filter!!!

 

[labman]

For the price, I am not sure you can beat the AC. From what I have seen of the insides, it is better than the Purolator and most other lower priced filters. WIX and some of the other exotica may have better specs, but I wonder if you are paying for over kill you don't need.

 

[RalphPWood]

A filter that can filter 100% of anything under one micron might be worth something. An engine would get some benefits from a filter that can remove all abrasives smaller than five microns. One hundred percent particles under 30 microns is a joke. A 30 micron particle is a boulder in a percision piece of equipment.

Ralph

 

[Patman]

I would be happy to have a filter which stops 100% of the particles under 30 microns!

You really mean over correct?

Besides, many people have gotten good engine life using AC Delco filters, which basically are 25-30 micron filters.

 

[Forkman]

Ralph, I take what you say with a very large grain of salt. I've seen you over the years touting (spamming) your Gulf-Coast bypass filters all over USENET even as far back as the early to mid 90s. In 90% of the posts you never addressed any of the legitimate questions of many of the posters and continually sited dubious studies and reports about gov't testing of the Gulf Coast by-pass filters and reports about some po-dunk sherriff's department from the middle of nowhere using said products.

Anyone who doesn't blieve me simply go to Google Groups and run a search for Raplh Wood or Gulf Coast bypass etc.

 

[Bio-T]

Forkman,
Sorry that you don't have the knowledge required to understand bypass filters. I am sorry, but I won't degrade my level of intelligence by arguing with an incompetent being.
I don't sell anything by the way.

 

[BOBISTHEOILGUY]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Forkman:
Ralph, I take what you say with a very large grain of salt. I've seen you over the years touting (spamming) your Gulf-Coast bypass filters all over USENET even as far back as the early to mid 90s. In 90% of the posts you never addressed any of the legitimate questions of many of the posters and continually sited dubious studies and reports about gov't testing of the Gulf Coast by-pass filters and reports about some po-dunk sherriff's department from the middle of nowhere using said products.

Anyone who doesn't blieve me simply go to Google Groups and run a search for Raplh Wood or Gulf Coast bypass etc.

---

Forkman, instead of accusing him of this which in a way is a direct attack on him, take a moment and explain ( or backup your comments). What kind of legitimate questions is it that you feel he has never answered. Maybe you failed to understand his answers? Right now, your statement provides nothing and does nothing for the board as it is. Do not go copying and pasting other sites, just ask the questions you think he hasn't answered please.

 

[sbc350gearhead]

Quick question. If bypass filters are so efficient, would they mask a bad UOA?

 

[Bio-T]

quote:

---

Originally posted by sbc350gearhead:
Quick question. If bypass filters are so efficient, would they mask a bad UOA?

---

Good question, and the answer is no because the minute particles to small for a bypass is still read by the analysis. Remember on an analysis only particle smaller that about 30 micron is read anyhow. Some labs equipment is under 20. So you will still get a very valid analysis. The other side of the coin is that if the particle is not in the oil, the wear is still occuring but is being filter out. So then we can say that you have clean oil continously and that is the best you can do for any engine. New oil cannot do any better, except to refresh the additive package, and FF and bypass changes do that. This is one reason Amsoil has been so successful and accepted in the market. In the heavy duty market Gulf Coast is a large player, and Amsoil is gaining ground usually with those converting to their oil. So a win/win market.