BOBISTHEOILGUY FILTER TESTS

keith · Jun 5, 2003

These tests are really great, but what is the ideal filter?

Assuming that the can size is the same, do you want a high flowing, poorer filtering unit or extra restriction and better filtering?

I don't believe these tests are measuring filtering performance, only restriction. Is there a magic filter that has low restriction and great filtering? How will we know?

Keith.

Dan4510 · Jun 7, 2003

The new filters with synthetic media seem to qualify on both counts of efficient filtering and low flow restriction. Right now however, it is not easy to get a hold of one if you dont have a large truck parts department handy.

The AC delco gold used to fit that bill, but now seem to be discontinued except for two part numbers.

I think the fully synthetic media is the wave of the future, its just not here yet.

Check out Baldwin's hpg line of filters. They seem to do a good job and are available online. They are marketed as a combination of synthetic and cellulose media and are definitely high quality.

If you do a search on this forum for the b2-hpg filter you can find the efficiency for that filter.

Dan

TheTanSedan · Jun 7, 2003

Same with the DONALDSON "Endurance" line.

(And, Bob, I'm finally going to get around to sending you a sample of the Donaldson & Baldwin that I've left in the trunk.)

Dan4510 · Jun 10, 2003

Also check this thread, I finally got some solid info from fleetguard on their synthetic media filters.

http://theoildrop.server101.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=000701

Seems to filter very good and flow a whopping 14gpm.

Dan

diesel_fan · Jun 10, 2003

Hey all, I've been watching this thread with great interest. I'm not sure if you've selected a smaller filter size for further testing, but I've got a few of the following size filter which I think is used by some of the Nissan guys as an oversize. It may be a good candidate if you haven't picked anything yet.

Here's what I've got..These all crossref back to Fram's PH7317 size

Donaldson...P502007
Baldwin.....B1402
Mobil1......M1-110
NapaGold....FIL1356 (says on box it has glass media)
SuperTech...ST7317

If you guys would like these as test subjects for a future round of testing, I'm willing to donate them. Someone just needs to PM me where/who to ship them to...

Thanks,
DF

[ June 10, 2003, 02:50 PM: Message edited by: diesel_fan ]

Mike_dup1 · Jun 10, 2003

I know there is some discussion on the Amsoil dual remote bypass but they also have a remote bypass that does not incorporate the OEM filter. It leaves it in the OEM location and just taps into some other oil source, e.g. sending unit etc. Thats that model I have used before. I am no fan of the dual remotes, seems to provide no fail safe IMO.

Here is a image of it

[ June 10, 2003, 12:30 PM: Message edited by: Mike ]

Ken2 · Jun 14, 2003

I've been away from this thread for a while and just tuned back in....

Does everyone understand what's happening with the Amsoil dual remote fullflow & bypass filters?

In the usual bypass filter installation (including Amsoil's single bypass filter), the oil out of the bypass filter is dumped back to near-zero pressure in the sump or valve cover, etc. The bypass filter gets full pump output pressure, the oil passes through something like a 0.040" orifice (so the bearings aren't starved of oil) and 5% to 10% of the engine oil is "bypassed" through this high resistance filter. The bypass filter element's high resistance is a result of the dense media for the very fine filtration it does.

In the Amsoil dual installation, there needs to be some way to allow the oil to flow from this high resistance bypass filter into the pressurized oil system. Remember, flow is like a river...it only flows "down hill" to a lower pressure point. So...what Amsoil does is to use that restrictor assembly to reduce the system pressure enough to allow the correct flow from the bypass filter. Evidently they work OK and don't destroy engines, but how else will they get flow out of the bypass filter?...it just won't flow with only the 3-4-8 psid of the full flow filter as pressure differential across the bypass element.

Ken

MolaKule · Jun 23, 2003

I was never sure why the Dual Remote filter was introduced in the first place. I thought we were simply testing Full Flow filters for restriction, flow, and differential pressure drop when the oil was cold and when it was hot.

When two filters (FF and BP) are placed in parallel, the Full Flow will have a larger output pressure while the bypass filter will have a lower output pressure. How will the BP filter ever get its oil back to the sump when the FF stream has a higher pressure which overcomes the minute pressure and flow from the FF?

Unless you have a Venturi or some other mechanism for sucking a low pressure flow into a fast flowing stream (virtual pressure drop internally), the BP filters output can never return its oil to the sump and overcome the pressure from the FF filter, assuming a true parallel filter setup.

The single bypass filter arrangement makes sense. You're only dumping its separate, but restricted flow, back to a separate dumping area and its flow stream does not have to content with or fight with the stream from the FF.

The denser filter media for the BP needs a slow, deliberate flow, which is why the flow is restricted with an orifice.

[ June 23, 2003, 04:53 PM: Message edited by: MolaKule ]

YZF150 · Jun 23, 2003

I was never sure why the Dual Remote filter was introduced in the first place. I thought we were simply testing Full Flow filters for restriction, flow, and differential pressure drop when the oil was cold and when it was hot.

I totally agree. Although somewhat relevant because it is about oil filtration, overall I found it to be a distraction, taking the focus away from the issue that is of interest to the majority here. I would be surprised if there were remote filter users in any kind of significant numbers.

And, the whole test seems to have dropped off the scope. All the prep for running filters with better gauges, heated oil, controlled flow--well, it had my appetite whetted, but, where'd it go???

keith · Jun 23, 2003

I agree that the main interest in this thread is the measurement of the single filters. Perhaps the dual bypass mount can be spun off to a separate thread.

Anyway, I don't agree that the system will not work - and no, I don't own one or have an axe to grind. If the bypass element has say 10 times the pressure drop to flow the same rate as a full flow, it will flow about 10% of the oil when in parallel with the full flow (closer to 9% but that's splitting hairs). Both filters, in parallel, are forced to have the same pressure drop and the overall system will have slightly less pressure drop than the full flow filter alone. Bob's tests did not show that, but, the bypass mount has some weird restrictor valve in there.

Probably the bypass filter has a lot more than 10 times the restriction of the full flow, but the principle of the system doesn't change. Even if it is 100 times more restrictive, it will still flow about 1% of the oil with the other 99% going through the full flow.

Perhaps we can get someone from Amsoil to come here and explain why their bypass dual remote has the extra restrictor/valving.

Keith.

MolaKule · Jun 24, 2003

Keith,

Possibly so. But the output of the BP stream could not represent much of a flow if any.

Just a theory, but could the valve in question possiblly operate as a diverter valve in the sense that at low pressures, the oil flow is directed through the BP, while at higher pressures, the flow is directed through the FF filter?

[ June 24, 2003, 03:21 PM: Message edited by: MolaKule ]

cryptokid · Jun 24, 2003

molakule, i was thinking the opposite.

at high pressure when there is excess oil psi, perhaps the valve opens and the byp[*** works. but at low pressure maybe the valve closes as to keep what little idle psi there is to 100% of the engine.

just a theory

keith · Jun 24, 2003

cryptokid - now that's good thinking.

With the oil pumps used in cars, isn't the flow largely independent of the load? If so, then reducing the flow only to the full flow filter (with the restrictor in the mount) would increase the proportion of total oil that flows through the bypass. This jives with the big pressure drop that was seen in the measurements. Make the restrictor pressure sensitive and lower the resistance to the full flow filter during low psi situations. Actually, this mount might be a really good design!

Wish I had one of these mounts to take a look at and figure out how it works. The schematics are just not very clear.

Keith.

MolaKule · Jun 24, 2003

Same here Kieth, wish I had one of these puppies on the bench.

Crypto,

At high pressures the implication is also high oil flow to the bearings, etc.

With the restriction at the BP orifice (and I assume there is), how could oil flow sufficiently to provide cooling?

Anyway, keep thinking, we'll brake this code yet!

[ June 24, 2003, 05:42 PM: Message edited by: MolaKule ]

Brian Barnhart · Jun 24, 2003

Thought I’d share a few items I gleaned from SAE HS-806, 1995 Edition. This oil filter test procedure superceeds SAE J-806.

Most tests are run with a specified test oil (SAE J1260). This oil meets Engine oil Performance and Engine Service Classification SE/CC per SAE J 183a and has a viscosity of about 105 cSt @ 40C and 12 cSt @ 100C. It contains no viscosity index improvers and has a viscosity index of 95 min. The flash point is 210C and the pour point is –18C. It contains some additives, 1% Sulfated Ash, as well as lesser amounts of Calcium, Zinc, and Phosphorus.

Based on size, automotive oil filters appear to fall into classes A through E. This corresponds to a flow rate rating of approximately 2 to 5 gallons per minute.

The Filter Capacity and Contaminant Removal test is run until the pressure drop across the filter is 75% of the bypass valve opening differential pressure. Most automotive filters are run until a differential pressure of 55 kPa (8 psi.) is achieved. Using the standard contaminant rate specified in the document, the Filter Capacity and Contaminant Removal test duration is in the range of 15 to 30 hours. Oil temperature is held to 82C (180F) during this test.

I found the following (quote) interesting:

“The test methods for evaluation of lube filters are complex and the interpretation of the results can be difficult and misleading. Results can be drastically altered by seemingly insignificant changes in any of the four major components of testing procedure, materials, analysis, and equipment.”

Mike_dup1 · Jun 25, 2003

quote:

Originally posted by MolaKule:
Same here Kieth, wish I had one of these puppies on the bench.

I have a kit I will sell if you are interested, don't have the filters. I got it to install on my 2001 GMC but don't have the ambition to do it now. PLanning on selling the 2001 truck in July to a friend who wants it (has bought 2 of my trucks in the past, 92 and 96) and I getting a new 2004 GMC loaded Z71 E. cab or a HD D/A if I can get it at invoice.

You can have it for cost (wholesale) + hsipping to you.

[ June 25, 2003, 12:34 PM: Message edited by: Mike ]

Last_Z · Jun 29, 2003

Any updates on this study?
Rick

sbc350gearhead · Jul 3, 2003

I have always used fram toughgard oil filters on my truck. After discovering this site, I bought some UPF-1218 filters to use at the next oil change. In the initial testing here, the toughgard appears to be very restrictive. On my truck with the toughgard, the hot oil pressure at idle is about 30psi and and about 60psi at 2000rpm. It also runs about 60 at idle when cold. If the toughgard is as restrictive as the initial test appears to prove, wouldn't my pressure be lower?

sbc350gearhead · Jul 4, 2003

I was about 450 miles from an oil change, so just for curiosity, I went ahead and changed my oil and filter. I went from a fram toughgard TG5 filter to a UPF1218. My oil pressure is now about 2psi lower across the board than what it used to be. I did notice a strange side effect......The lifter noise that I have had for years (which I was told is normal for a roller cam by a GM mechanic), is now gone! The engine is very very silent.....No strange noises at all. Is there a logical explanation for this?

Dan4510 · Jul 4, 2003

The new filter is allowing more flow thru the system and keeping the lifters pumped up and lubed, so the noise has gone away.

If I am saying this right, lower pressure means a more free flow of oil.

Dan

BOBISTHEOILGUY FILTER TESTS

Similar threads