j'accuse is another favorite method by some people here.
Can someone explain Amsoil Test Quality?
- Thread starter 63Avanti
- Start date
- Status
Notice Hastings is not included on those charts. Hastings was the mfg of the SDF line of filters using media only provided to the SDF models). I bet they are the source of those test results.
Hasings (Balwin/Clarcor) were the source for the SDF oil filters up to 2005 when they moved to WIX and the new filter lines.
[ September 16, 2006, 02:08 PM: Message edited by: Mike ]
Hasings (Balwin/Clarcor) were the source for the SDF oil filters up to 2005 when they moved to WIX and the new filter lines.
[ September 16, 2006, 02:08 PM: Message edited by: Mike ]
63Avanti,
The test is not an Amsoil test, as you referred to it in the original post. It's the industry standard SAE HS806 test, which I'm sure specifies the number of test runs you have to make with a particular filter to get the efficiency. I'm also sure the spec indicates the variability you can expect when testing the same filter media over and over, which is the key piece of data you'd like to see here.
Amsoil is using standard SAE and ASTM tests to compare their products to the competition. However they are reporting these results within the realm of advertising and doing so to a largely non-technical group of potential customers. So you not going to see the same statistical treatment of the data you would if this was a PowerPoint presentation to a bunch of aerospace engineers.
If you care to drop a dime and call Amsoils' technical services department @ (715) 392-7l01 (ask for Darren Wallace) I'm sure you can get the answers to your questions. As Mike mentioned, I'm also guessing that Hastings/Baldwin ran these tests for Amsoil when they were the supplier of the old SDF oil filters. The results on the WIX and NAPA Gold filters are close enough that I can easily see them being the same media.
I'm not trying to be combative,but I honestly don't see any big conspiracy here. The two most expensive filters tested out the best and that doesn't seem surprising.
Ted
The test is not an Amsoil test, as you referred to it in the original post. It's the industry standard SAE HS806 test, which I'm sure specifies the number of test runs you have to make with a particular filter to get the efficiency. I'm also sure the spec indicates the variability you can expect when testing the same filter media over and over, which is the key piece of data you'd like to see here.
Amsoil is using standard SAE and ASTM tests to compare their products to the competition. However they are reporting these results within the realm of advertising and doing so to a largely non-technical group of potential customers. So you not going to see the same statistical treatment of the data you would if this was a PowerPoint presentation to a bunch of aerospace engineers.
If you care to drop a dime and call Amsoils' technical services department @ (715) 392-7l01 (ask for Darren Wallace) I'm sure you can get the answers to your questions. As Mike mentioned, I'm also guessing that Hastings/Baldwin ran these tests for Amsoil when they were the supplier of the old SDF oil filters. The results on the WIX and NAPA Gold filters are close enough that I can easily see them being the same media.
I'm not trying to be combative,but I honestly don't see any big conspiracy here. The two most expensive filters tested out the best and that doesn't seem surprising.
Ted
The Amsoil test references SAE J806.
It does not list "which" version of J806 the test was conducted to. My guess is SAE J806B
The current test is SAE HS806 as best explained here:
http://theoildrop.server101.com/cgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=003828
It does not list "which" version of J806 the test was conducted to. My guess is SAE J806B
The current test is SAE HS806 as best explained here:
From this discussion:
http://theoildrop.server101.com/cgi/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=003828
Gee...I thought I gave Filterguy a hard time occasionally. You Amsoil salesmen take the cake when some unsuspecting person simply asks a question about your product.
Think 63Avanti would ever want to buy any Amsoil products from you even if they were superior?
Think 63Avanti would ever want to buy any Amsoil products from you even if they were superior?
I tried to answer his question as did others. I guess I should ignore the word choice and try not to read "tonality" into the message.
I think what got my juices flowing, 63Avanti never actually acknowledged anything I wrote. Not even a rebuttal. Pretty typical of internet BB's. But then he got all belligerent with TS's prodding, I was chatting at Gary and we quickly veered. Normal BiTOG stuff.
I think what got my juices flowing, 63Avanti never actually acknowledged anything I wrote. Not even a rebuttal. Pretty typical of internet BB's. But then he got all belligerent with TS's prodding, I was chatting at Gary and we quickly veered. Normal BiTOG stuff.
I don't mean to take the high ground on y'all. Most people know I don't pull many punches on posts I think are wrong or troll material. But then again, I'm not representing a product line with hopes of some sales.
It looked to me that Avanti63 simply asked a question and sat back as Gary, Pabs and others hashed it out. Then TooSlick started getting personal and then the piling began.
Just an observation from a different perspective.
It looked to me that Avanti63 simply asked a question and sat back as Gary, Pabs and others hashed it out. Then TooSlick started getting personal and then the piling began.
Just an observation from a different perspective.
Well i'll add my 2 pence worth.
I would also guess the chart is nearer to 10 years old.
But Wix has not always had the same media as NAPA Gold, if memory serves. Just because the two are similar now, does not mean this has always been the case.
But, for arguments sake, lets say the two brands did use the same grade media.
SAE J806 requires a minumim of 3 filters tested and averaged. Based on the pleats in the filters it is easy to come up with variations test to test. The more filters one test, the better the average becomes.
If Amsoil only commissioned a test to use the minimum amount of filters to get results, that could be the variable people are missing. ( more filters tested--more money for the test)
One gram dirt holding capacity difference is nothing. Pleat count can account for that variance as all filters have a + or - number allowable. Generally 4. So you could have two filters one with 56 pleats and the other with 64 and both be within manufacturing spec where the base is 60.
The difference of 7% efficiency is a bit interesting but still it would depend on the plus/minus tollerances of the media supplier and the blend of media itself. Especially when one may only test 3 filter samples per brand. If the same date codes were used ( and this is highly likely with a small test sample) this may effect the overall efficiency numbers. Test more date codes and your averages could reflect a totally different outcome.
But staring at that test on some auto parts counter or website makes for interesting reading for the non BITOG types.
It would be nice if it was dated and more information known on the test parameters. What would be better is if it was tossed in the trash if it is old news rather than let some people think it is current information. Because with the Champ built part numbers on the Amsoil test all have had media changes within the last three years. As I would suspect have the other brands...
I would also guess the chart is nearer to 10 years old.
But Wix has not always had the same media as NAPA Gold, if memory serves. Just because the two are similar now, does not mean this has always been the case.
But, for arguments sake, lets say the two brands did use the same grade media.
SAE J806 requires a minumim of 3 filters tested and averaged. Based on the pleats in the filters it is easy to come up with variations test to test. The more filters one test, the better the average becomes.
If Amsoil only commissioned a test to use the minimum amount of filters to get results, that could be the variable people are missing. ( more filters tested--more money for the test)
One gram dirt holding capacity difference is nothing. Pleat count can account for that variance as all filters have a + or - number allowable. Generally 4. So you could have two filters one with 56 pleats and the other with 64 and both be within manufacturing spec where the base is 60.
The difference of 7% efficiency is a bit interesting but still it would depend on the plus/minus tollerances of the media supplier and the blend of media itself. Especially when one may only test 3 filter samples per brand. If the same date codes were used ( and this is highly likely with a small test sample) this may effect the overall efficiency numbers. Test more date codes and your averages could reflect a totally different outcome.
But staring at that test on some auto parts counter or website makes for interesting reading for the non BITOG types.
It would be nice if it was dated and more information known on the test parameters. What would be better is if it was tossed in the trash if it is old news rather than let some people think it is current information. Because with the Champ built part numbers on the Amsoil test all have had media changes within the last three years. As I would suspect have the other brands...
Ok, I guess the 3 Amigo's are going to have to show 63 Avanti (The Money)
Lets see some new bar graphs for the engineers on this board. Amsoil does have a few.....
Show us the Money!
Lets see some new bar graphs for the engineers on this board. Amsoil does have a few.....
Show us the Money!
Maybe BITOG could commission their own test.
People can all chip in with the dollars people save on those oil and filter rebate coupons for a start..
People can all chip in with the dollars people save on those oil and filter rebate coupons for a start..
a year or 2 ago some unscroupulous amsoil dealer [name withleld] signed me up and paid my membership fee as a preferred customer. inbetween things like advertisements for multivitamins and such, they would send out this mini mag called amsoil action news. each month they has this advertisement for amsoil branded filters and in that advertismenet they would show this same bar graph, only it was jazzed up with modern colours to reflect more modern times. i remember seeing this exact same graph with wix and napa gold filters, one being better then the other.
weither or not this bar graph is 10 years old is of no consiquence. what matters is the points in time that amsoil used this data as an advertisement. sence i can clearly remember this bar graph as little as 1-2 years ago, then i can see atleast 2 outcomes.
1. it is old data, taken from before the time when wix and napa gold were the same, and amsoil elected to use this old data to make their line of new filters look better.
2. it isnt old data, and they did use an identical pair of napa gold and wix filters but somehow amsoils testing came up with different results for 2 identical filters, which still makes their filter line look good.
weither or not this bar graph is 10 years old is of no consiquence. what matters is the points in time that amsoil used this data as an advertisement. sence i can clearly remember this bar graph as little as 1-2 years ago, then i can see atleast 2 outcomes.
1. it is old data, taken from before the time when wix and napa gold were the same, and amsoil elected to use this old data to make their line of new filters look better.
2. it isnt old data, and they did use an identical pair of napa gold and wix filters but somehow amsoils testing came up with different results for 2 identical filters, which still makes their filter line look good.
I doubt anybody is surprised that the test presented by Amsoil shows that Amsoil is the best. And for what you pay for one, they have room to actually make a better filter although their volume will crimp that. They may also score well because the test parameters are selected to match the design goals. If I design and test a filter for 95% efficiency at 20 microns on first pass and 6 GPM, it should do better than one designed for other conditions. How nefarious is proving a product does what it is designed to?
The Mobil 1 is a strong second but why is AC and Hard Drive ahead of the more expensive Pure One, WIX, and NAPA? Fram is about where we would all expect it.
Likely Fram could design a test where they would score well, perhaps conserving resources while maximizing shareholder return.
The Mobil 1 is a strong second but why is AC and Hard Drive ahead of the more expensive Pure One, WIX, and NAPA? Fram is about where we would all expect it.
Likely Fram could design a test where they would score well, perhaps conserving resources while maximizing shareholder return.
You are wrong, I went back to Jan of 2001 and never found that graph in the Action News Magazine. Not once.
You need to back up your claim or retract it.
[ September 19, 2006, 08:35 PM: Message edited by: Mike ]
I am truly sorry M,A, that you had a bad experience with an Amsoil dealer. That guy was a real jerk. I have never done that to anyone (why anyway??) nor have I known any dealers like that.
Amsoil has shown some filter charts over the years in Action News, but does update them so the ones you saw even two years ago must have been similar, but not the same.
You cannot assume the filters are identical. This has never been established.
I'm just trying not to be confrontational - so please don't take this in any negative way.
Amsoil has shown some filter charts over the years in Action News, but does update them so the ones you saw even two years ago must have been similar, but not the same.
You cannot assume the filters are identical. This has never been established.
I'm just trying not to be confrontational - so please don't take this in any negative way.
All filter testing be it SAE or ISO uses multiple samples and then averages. Both typically call for a minimum of 3 filters to be tested. You can test more..
So it is not surprising you found that similar in an ISO protocol.
But as I mentioned above...the higher the quantity of a part number tested..the better for the average.
Pete C.--thanx for clarifying that the Napa Gold and Wix are the same construction and media wise.
Would you agree however, that when testing the two part numbers, that the difference in the test performance could be the variance in the tolerance of media supplier spec? Which is why testing multiple date codes gives a better average for analysis. And that there is a variance in pleat count from filter to filter even of the same part number.
Now all of a sudden you guys are listening to me. I've made that statement on more than one occasion.
You're all running around like a bunch of chickens, and the only true information you have is what a picture, of a supposedly unbiased test, indicated that one filter is supposedly better than another. Are you sure this was truly a NAPA Gold filter?
Who actually conducted this test? What was the testing standard they used? Were all filters tested to the same standard? When were the tests conducted? Were they conducted by the same lab? On the same test stand? With the same lot of test media?
Personally I think anything that a manufacturer puts in their advertising MUST be taken with more than a few grains of salt.
Send oil samples of your next oil change to 2 different labs and check the results.
Yes there can and are variances in the same roll of filter media. But the largest variance has to, still, meet the customers specs.
There are variances in pleat counts in everyones filter elements. It's the nature of the beast. Either manually cut or machine cut pleat blocks, will vary +/_ XX pleats(put your manufacture of choice count allowance here) the nominal spec.
You're all running around like a bunch of chickens, and the only true information you have is what a picture, of a supposedly unbiased test, indicated that one filter is supposedly better than another. Are you sure this was truly a NAPA Gold filter?
Who actually conducted this test? What was the testing standard they used? Were all filters tested to the same standard? When were the tests conducted? Were they conducted by the same lab? On the same test stand? With the same lot of test media?
Personally I think anything that a manufacturer puts in their advertising MUST be taken with more than a few grains of salt.
Send oil samples of your next oil change to 2 different labs and check the results.
Yes there can and are variances in the same roll of filter media. But the largest variance has to, still, meet the customers specs.
There are variances in pleat counts in everyones filter elements. It's the nature of the beast. Either manually cut or machine cut pleat blocks, will vary +/_ XX pleats(put your manufacture of choice count allowance here) the nominal spec.
How about CarQuest brand? The parts counter people tell me those are WIX. True? How do they compare to the Wix then?
How many brands are actuall Wix?
2 parts store here, Auto Value and CarQuest. AV has the Wix brand and CQ has the CQ brand which he claim are a Wix. The CQ is sold for less than the WIX but it could be just local competition. I was looking for a 24938 for my ATV, the CQ place could not x-ref it to thier line and the AV store did not stock. They said they could order it and when it came they wanted me to buy a (12) case of them. Declined and they shipped them back, would not sell me just one. They did not want to be stuck with 11 of them that would never sell.
Not trying to be ahole, just wonder why they would do that. Sort of like the spinach scare, same stuff under 20 labels.
[ September 20, 2006, 03:42 PM: Message edited by: Mike ]
How many brands are actuall Wix?
2 parts store here, Auto Value and CarQuest. AV has the Wix brand and CQ has the CQ brand which he claim are a Wix. The CQ is sold for less than the WIX but it could be just local competition. I was looking for a 24938 for my ATV, the CQ place could not x-ref it to thier line and the AV store did not stock. They said they could order it and when it came they wanted me to buy a (12) case of them. Declined and they shipped them back, would not sell me just one. They did not want to be stuck with 11 of them that would never sell.
Not trying to be ahole, just wonder why they would do that. Sort of like the spinach scare, same stuff under 20 labels.
[ September 20, 2006, 03:42 PM: Message edited by: Mike ]
- Status
