Clickers, Frams, and E-cores, oh my (pics)

[TC]

DISSECTED A USED "CLICKER" FILTER. LOOKED FINE.

Last night I took out my hacksaw and whacked two USED oil filters which I have yet to take to the recycling center. Each had been on my 2002 Chrysler with the 3.0L Mitsubishi engine for about 5,000 miles. These are also common HONDA application filters. Sorry, no digital camera, therefore no pic's.

BOSCH #3312 (CLICKER)
No defects or damage noted with this clicker bypass filter. The pleats were not warped, displaced, perforated, or torn in any way. They were intact where glued into the base plates, with no perforations along the center tube. I tried to get the clicker spring, as well as the companion base plate, to "click" open in some way, but could not. I'm still not sure which surface clicks open, and I'm not comfortable with this design.

PUROLATOR PUREONE #24458
This filter's cartridge is huge when compared to the Bosch -- I just can't see paying the same price for the much smaller Bosch. No defects or damage to the media at all. Also, unlike a few recent posts showing Purolator bypass plungers sticking open, MY FILTER'S (OIL SOAKED) PLUNGER WAS CLOSED, AND I COULD NOT GET IT TO STICK OPEN DESPITE PRESSING IT IN AT ALL POSSIBLE ANGLES. I'm now back to being 100% comfortable that this is one of the best filters for my ride.

I still don't care for the clickers due to potential/suspected pulsing and metal fatigue issues. But, in fairness, my clicker filter's media was undamaged (an invalid statistical sampling of one), looking nothing like some damaged clicker pic's in this thread. To intentionally or inadverdently suggest that "all" clickers sustain damage, I won't agree to that based on my experience.

[ March 23, 2005, 08:00 PM: Message edited by: TC ]

 

[Gary Allan]

quote:

---

How can they be doing such when they are more or less made to fail in 3K miles?

OCI's range from car to car,How can a filter that lasts 3K be in spec for a 7500 mile oci?

---

I may have missed it ..but I didn't see any reference to 3k miles. I saw only "within manufacturer recomendations" type comment. Did lube owner quote any specific miles??

We have no idea how many miles or months were on these filters. Again ...virtually none of the membership has run into this ..in spite of a vast number of filters being opened. I've cut open 10k and 12k filters and found nothing out of the ordinary.

I don't think that one can make any conclusions from this sampling without more data.

 

[Filter guy]

Well there are an AWFUL lot of misconceptions that need to be addressed. So much to debunk so little time.

Has anyone ever read the Filter manufacturers "warranty" for the brand of filter you use? I suggest you do. I don't care if it is AC, Baldwin, Champ, Donaldson, Fleetguard, Fram, Purolator, Wix.. Mann, Mahle, Nippon Denso..any of them. Go on their website and read them

They all about state the same thing:
X filter company warrants their product to be free from defects in material and workmanship.

That's it.

and generally they say..if any engine damage is directly caused by a new properly installed filter during a normal service interval.

Some even state : DO NOT CUT OPEN THE FILTER.

John W Colby;
LOL, of course that is true, however when X(HIGH) percent of filter X is ripping that is a simple fact, easily observed. It is NOT meeting the requirement of the owner of the product. Say it however you will, the person who bought this product is NOT being protected, and there is no warning system to tell him so.

I hate to break the news to you but Owner expectations are irrelivant to filter design. Oem specs are what's important. So if GM, Ford, Chrysler or other OEM wants certain perfomance, that's what the filter MUST meet or exceed. Otherwise.....the OEM would send out technical bulletins flatly stating Brand X does not meet our specs and the use of Brand X will void OUR OEM warranty.

And finally there is this little problem of - if the oil pressure is so high why isn't the bypass kicking in? If that was the problem and the bypass opened then the pleats wouldn't rip. Hmmm... holes in the logic here? Or maybe the filter is just SO cheap that the bypass doesn't work properly either?


No holes in any logic. You obviously do not know how a by-pass valve works. It seeks differential pressure to open. When a pressure regulating valve sends higher pressure to the filter the valve will open. However that "shock" wave of the pressure can and will rip/tear pleats before the by-pass valve has the time to aliviate enough pressure off the paper. But there's more to it than that. There are these other factors: how contaminated is the media, what condition the oil is in, how much sludge has accumulated in the filter can, are there metal particles in the filter can ( that can act like knives upon the media), how long the filter has been in use, what is the viscosity of the oil at start up ( colder ambiant temperatures on effects viscosity), type of oil ( petroleum , semi synthetic, synthetic), etc. Which is why filter companies say don't cut open the filter, you can lose the evidence that's inside. And they can run some oil anaylsis on the residual oil in the filter if need be.

So when labman cuts open his filters there seems to be those who want to blame the filter or it's construction...when in fact what they are seeing is the RESULT of what has transpired within the engine lube system since the brand new filter was installed. It shouldn't take a rocket scientist to figure that part out.

I will leave it at this simple, inescapable fact. The product is NOT MEETING THE CUSTOMER REQUIREMENTS.

Then I suggest you don't buy filters. Because regardless of brand, all filters are subject to the conditions they see during their use. They were built free from defects. And if the individual filter wasn't built properly, all filter companies will warranty it.

The reverse proof is in these forums if you read them. Champ filters with clicker valves have not "failed" with numerous owners in here.
and WHY is that? Do they drive different? Are they little old ladies who only drive to church? Do they only change their filter every 1 or 2,000 miles and never go over 3,000?


Some of those who only look at the pictures that lubeowner provides really, really, really, need to get some perspective from what others in here also experience. I went 9,000 miles last oil change with no problem and a clicker valve Champ built filter and oil analysis to prove it.( mobil 1 oil)

 

[Filter guy]

quote:

---

Originally posted by motorguy222:
Something that still isnt being addressed here is that the filters in question are SUPPOSED to meet the auto makers specs.

If the filters are not lasting the specified amount of time between oil changes,they are not meeting spec.

Can you tell us what spec this is that an OEM would have a filter company test to? And i'm also curious what testing the engine company did on their OEM filter to obtain this "spec". If the Champ filter didn't meet their "spec", as i've mentioned before, the OEM would send out tech bulletins that says the Champ filter doesn't meet their spec. Or don't use clicker filters on their engines.

Just so you know, the OEM will "spec" how much minimum dirt holding capacity the filter must hold before a certain pressure differential is met. That equates to filter life. Every filter built by US manufacturers meets or exceeds that spec. Even the Champ "cheap" filter.

The price in this case has nothing to do with it.

When you buy a filter is states that they meet the auto makers specs when they are changed accordingly and are warrented for such.
You got this part right.

How can they be doing such when they are more or less made to fail in 3K miles?
And you think any filter company in it's right mind would make a filter that doesn't last 3,000 miles? Boy i've got ocean front property in Montana for you.

But isn't that's what's been discussed in this thread already? No filter is bullet proof for every condition it will encounter for 3,000 miles or more. So answer your own question..If a new filter free from defects has a problem, what caused it? Because what you have on your car does meet or exceed OEM specs. What those owners who lubeowner had on their cars also met OEM specs.

OCI's range from car to car,How can a filter that lasts 3K be in spec for a 7500 mile oci?

It cant.

Sure it can. Happens all the time.

If Champ's cheap filters are only good for 3K then they need to put such on the filter box so people will know this and know not to use them for oci's above the 3K that they cover.

And so you know for a fact that Champs "cheap" filters will last less than 3,000 miles before having problems. That's going to be news to many in here who have used them for a lot longer than that.

---

 

[John W. Colby]

If an Edsel simply failed to perform, what would you say? Buy another car!

"It met manufacturer's spec".

If a Chevy vega broke down when almost every other car continued to perform admirably what would you say? Buy another car!

"It met manufacturer's spec".

If a Ford Pinto burst into flames with your daughter in the back seat what would you say. Buy another car!

"It met manufacturer's spec".

If the Ford Bronco consistently rolls over killing passengers what would you say? Buy another car!

"It met manufacturer's spec".

If a specific filter is consistently disintegrating what would you say.

Oh, sorry, we know what you would say... it's the owner.

"It met manufacturer's spec".

Do I SOUND impressed with "It meets manufacturer's spec"?

Reward mediocrity.

 

[motorguy222]

Something that still isnt being addressed here is that the filters in question are SUPPOSED to meet the auto makers specs.

If the filters are not lasting the specified amount of time between oil changes,they are not meeting spec.

The price in this case has nothing to do with it.

When you buy a filter is states that they meet the auto makers specs when they are changed accordingly and are warrented for such.

How can they be doing such when they are more or less made to fail in 3K miles?

OCI's range from car to car,How can a filter that lasts 3K be in spec for a 7500 mile oci?

It cant.

If Champ's cheap filters are only good for 3K then they need to put such on the filter box so people will know this and know not to use them for oci's above the 3K that they cover.

 

[Shannow]

If the filter failures are a result of owner maloperation, are owners being advised in how to operate their vehicles to avoid filter failure ?

Does simply following their owners manual guarantee that these filters won't fail ?

Does that mean that vehicle owners who buy these particular filters are general vehicle abusers ?

What has lured them to pick on these particular filters ?

 

[Dave Hess]

Filter Guy,

What is the difference between the Mobil 1 and the K&N oil filters ?? Is it the paper media inside that is different ? And are Mobil 1 filters worth the $9.99 ?? Thanks.

 

[motorguy222]

The 3K was just a reference,lubeowner has found filters that have failed in the 4K range.

I still dont see how a filter that fails in 4K can meet an OCI of 7500 miles.

I have been using Champ made filters for a while now on a GM car.

They seem to be doing fine but I have not cut them open,they too may have failed.

[ March 25, 2005, 02:14 PM: Message edited by: motorguy222 ]

 

[Filter guy]

quote:

---

Originally posted by motorguy222:
The 3K was just a reference,lubeowner has found filters that have failed in the 4K range.

I still dont see how a filter that fails in 4K can meet an OCI of 7500 miles.

I have been using Champ made filters for a while now on a GM car.

They seem to be doing fine but I have not cut them open,they too may have failed.

---

I posted this in another thread.
I went 9,148 miles with a Walmart bought Super Tech ST3600 and a clicker valve using Mobil 1 oil..0-20W. My oil analysis was fine. I currently have another Walmart ST3600 on my engine and i'm getting near to almost 6,000 miles since my last oil change at the present time. So far my engine hasn't dropped off the motor mounts.

Which leads you to have to decide..if a filter can go 9,148 miles on a car that has a 3,000 mile severe and 6,000 mile normal service interval...then why would the same construction filter "fail" before 4,000 miles or less?

And that is the question isn't it...

Was it the filter or the conditions the filter was subject to?

You decide.
-------------------

LT4 Vette ..get back to you on that, Champ is closed for Good Friday. I'm off to Alabama next week for business. If I get the chance and can catch the right person, i'll find out next week. So give me some time. I will answer the question.

 

[teamDFL]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Filter guy:
Which leads you to have to decide..if a filter can go 9,148 miles on a car that has a 3,000 mile severe and 6,000 mile normal service interval...then why would the same construction filter "fail" before 4,000 miles or less?

And that is the question isn't it...

You decide.

---

I think it is an easy decision to make. You give a sample of one, lubeowner gives a sample of dozens. There is something going on, and I will not risk my filtration on it. I still buy Champ (Mobil 1 filter installed yesterday) but I won't be buying anything other than their extra premium product. The regular filters are on the same list as Fram for me.

 

[John W. Colby]

quote:

---

Originally posted by teamDFL:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Filter guy:
Which leads you to have to decide..if a filter can go 9,148 miles on a car that has a 3,000 mile severe and 6,000 mile normal service interval...then why would the same construction filter "fail" before 4,000 miles or less?

And that is the question isn't it...

You decide.

---

I think it is an easy decision to make. You give a sample of one, lubeowner gives a sample of dozens. There is something going on, and I will not risk my filtration on it. I still buy Champ (Mobil 1 filter installed yesterday) but I won't be buying anything other than their extra premium product. The regular filters are on the same list as Fram for me.

---

There ya go. I own a 2004 Chevy Venture. For years X% of those vans had a gasket failure allowing the coolent to leak, sometimes into the cylinder, sometimes into the oil. It had NOTHING to do with the owner or anything else, it was an inferior design of the gasket, unable to resist the quite normal flexing of the heads as they heat up and cool down. The gaskets would get pinched and cause leaks. The gasket was modified to resist the pinching and the problem was (hopefully) solved.

The fact that because one (or even millions) of some item don't fail does NOT mean that others don't fail, it does NOT mean that there is no problem. It does NOT MEAN ANYTHING except that those particular units don't fail.

The fact that significant percentages DO fail really indicates a manufacturing deficiency where commonly encountered conditions can cause a significant quantities of the units to fail. The item in question is not designed to meet conditions commonly found in the environment that the item is used.

It may in fact be the case that quite normal pressure differentials are causing these failures. Perhaps these particular filters will resist up to (for example) 12 lbs of differential but a high percentage will fail at 15 lbs differential. MAYBE these filters are simply operating right at the edge of their capacity to resist tearing. MAYBE there are dozens of different vehicle models with widely varying pressure differentials and some filters are experiencing pressure differentials that are common in those vehicles yet cause the filter to rip.

It may be acceptable to say "the owner..." when a small percentage fails. When a huge percentage fails you cross the line and it becomes the responsibility of the manufacturer to meet the conditions found in the real world. It isn't as if this is impossible. Other filters are not failing in these quantities (percentages).

It is completely unacceptable to simply close your eyes to the problem and say "it must be the owner, because after all 'it meets manufacturer's specs'". The gasket in the 2000 Chevy venture "met manufacturer spec" and yet thousands of owners paid millions of dollars out of their own pocket to fix their engines for a problem caused by the gasket.

 

[Filter guy]

JW...do go on. Your reports read like Area 51 conspiracy theories.

I enjoy them.

 

[ZR2RANDO]

I agree with ya JW Colby!
and I bet those folks that took VIOXX caused their own problems too, I think it was meeting spec as well.

I think those filters with the CLICKER valves ARE handling most of the normal world problems, but they probably should have a laundry list of "conditions acceptable for use" on the box.
You CAN use in Texas..
You CANNOT use in OREGON..
.
.
.
I can just see Joe Smith at the Walmart oil filter section reading the fold-out list of rules taped to the box..

 

[Gary Allan]

I think you all have jumped on some witch hunt band wagon is what I think.

None of you can show hardly any failures among the memership ..yet you accept a slice of a commercial operation that sees 1000's a month.

We still don't have ONE PIECE of mileage or time data ON ANY OF THESE FILTERS beyond "within manufacturer's recommendations".

quote:

---

The fact that because one (or even millions) of some item don't fail does NOT mean that others don't fail, it does NOT mean that there is no problem. It does NOT MEAN ANYTHING except that those particular units don't fail.

---

Absolutely ...and one swallow does not the summer make. In the case of your intake gasket situation ..this is a known weak point that may or may not occur. You have no such incidence to base the same opinion under the same criteria in this situation. You're taking a very limited amount of data ..and applying it in a blanket disposition.

quote:

---

The fact that significant percentages DO fail really indicates a manufacturing deficiency where commonly encountered conditions can cause a significant quantities of the units to fail. The item in question is not designed to meet conditions commonly found in the environment that the item is used.

---

What % data do you base that on? Did lube owner open all the Warner/Champ filters? Just what % failed? Got a number?? How many oil changes does lube owner do?

If this is such a high level of incidence of failer ...lubeowner could easily grab the lot # off of the filters (or maybe the case(s) that they came in )...send the opened filters back to Champ with a few of the new filters that are yet to be used. ISO 9k makes ALL this traceable to the line, machine and operator(s) that made them.


I need to see an non-quicky lube type show me a champ lab filter look like the ones that lubeowner shows us. So far I've seen none. Mileage and duration data would really help.

Hey, I don't have a dime into Champ ..but some of you here are like the mob in some old town kangaroo court ..actually looking for a hanging to occur so you can watch the spectical.

If any "normal" user shows me a Champ filter that looks like those ...then I'll start to pay real attention to this situation. So far we've only seen it from the source that the MOST negligent of our population frequent when it comes to car maintenance.

 

[teamDFL]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Filter guy:
JW...do go on. Your reports read like Area 51 conspiracy theories.

I enjoy them.

---

I don't think that is fair comment at all. I think JW is stating that sometimes, inspite of best efforts, parts do have flaws. No conspiracy, just a mistake or miscalculation. If I thought Champ was crooked and intentionally out to screw consumers, I wouldn't buy Mobil 1 filters. But they are not. The evidence I have seem simply supports the conclusion that their regular filter is not as robust as it should be for some driving habits. Since I want peace of mind, I will leave them on the shelf.

 

[teamDFL]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gary Allan:
If any "normal" user shows me a Champ filter that looks like those ...then I'll start to pay real attention to this situation. So far we've only seen it from the source that the MOST negligent of our population frequent when it comes to car maintenance.

---

The logic of this statement escapes me. Unless we are calling lubeowner a liar, he finds only these faults in the Frams and the low-end Champs. Unless those two brands only find their way on to negligent owners' cars, and considering the number of filters he sees that is at best unlikely, there is clearly something in those filters that are not up to the standards set by the others. Note, I am not saying mfgr's spec, but comparative to the other products in the market. Choose yourself, but since we do not know what causes these failures, I personally will avoid these filters in case I am guilty of the same thing the other owners are.

Seems to be a perfectly reasonable conclusion to me to base ones decision on the worst case scenario rather than the best.

 

[Gary Allan]

quote:

---

The logic of this statement escapes me.

---

It's simple ..lube owner is the only one that has produced this result for review. Name someone else

Show me the number of lame champs that you can find on this board ..or any other. This should be simple enough to understand.

quote:

---

Unless we are calling lubeowner a liar, he finds only these faults in the Frams and the low-end Champs.

---

Where did I call him a liar?? So what if he only finds this condition in low-end Champs? You still have nothing but antecdotal evidence to form any opinion.

What YOU don't know is what results he would have with higher priced units for the same applications. His Mann and other "high-end" filters are the OEM spec for THOSE vehicles. How do YOU know that if ONLY those high end filters were used for ALL lubeowner's customers ..that it wouldn't result in simular failures in them?? You don't. You can't make that assertion because it would only exist in your imagination. Right now ..you assumption that all Champ filters are junk is ONLY in your imagination. You have only limited "observed" data to go on ..and a very limited amount at that.

You said it yourself....

quote:

---

we do not know what causes these failures,

---

XACTLY!!!!! You haven't a clue why this has happened ...yet are more than willing ..in fact assertive in conviction that the filters were commonly defective. This may or may not be the case...yet you act as though it was cast in stone and a bona fide fact.

I pray that you aren't a police investigator or research assistant on any thing important like pharmacuticals. You are looking at "apparent" data ..and don't even bother to figure out the true cause.

quote:

---

Seems to be a perfectly reasonable conclusion to me to base ones decision on the worst case scenario rather than the best.

---

Someone once said that planes would crash too. They were absolutely correct. Please don't fly. It's too dangerous!!


This is not to say that there isn't a defect here ..and that your suspicions are well founded ..but they are just that ...suspicions. I've seen no proof from anyone except lube owner that would lead me to make form such a broad opinion without question. I'm questioning ..seeking more data ..and I get none.

I've cut open plenty of extended drain filters ..well beyond "manufacturer's recommendations" ..and a few of them Champs ..and have never noted anything wrong with them. Why should I change my attitude about it. My experience is counter to that of lube owners. Why should I disblieve myself??

In fact ...since they're junk ...I'll take all the Warner filters that lubeowner has (and from any member) in my size for salvage (S&H).

[ March 25, 2005, 08:42 PM: Message edited by: Gary Allan ]

 

[Filter guy]

Well I find some of the comments of the usual big business is bad and out to stroke consumers interesting but misguided in this case.

I haven't work for Champ since 2000. And I guess it must really gall people i'm not some sort of whistleblower to dish out all the dirt on just how bad it is there and what shortcuts Champ takes. I don't do that because there isn't any. So I don't really have a dog in this race either because I don't work there anymore.

However, I still am in the filter industry. So I do have some responsibility to clear up the usual misconceptions.

If anyone thought that Champion Labs private label accounts thought for one minute the product was not good enough to put their name on it, they wouldn't. They would buy from someone else. All those Companies routinely hear from who they sell to distributors or customers or from their lube operations. If there are any problems or concerns, do you think they shove them under the carpet? Or do you think they'd love nothing more than to blame the manufacturer for the problem as it's not their problem and switch to someone else? Corporate doesn't need problems from their suppliers. Do you think AC (GM), or Ford, or Mopar who Champ builds for want bad product under their label? Not to mention the other hundreds of accounts Champs builds for.

But some of the inferences as to the media in use by Champ or any other filter company and the problems of seeing the resultant use when cutting it open, leads one to belive..well looky there, something wrong and it's the filters fault. Period. End of discussion.

Champ and every other filter manufacturer goes to great pains to test product before it gets sold. Champ and the others, test new filters, used filters, deliberatly contaminate filters to near there restriction maximum and still the pleats don't rip or tear.

What others fail to realize is that Champ doesn't make it's own paper or media. It relies on specialty media manufacturers who also do their own testing on the product before it is shipped to Champ ( same as the other filter companies, I would presume). Champ in turn tests every batch of incoming media to make sure it is within specs. I know of one supplier disqualified for failing to consistently supply media to Champs specs, when they claimed they did. ( That rejected media was bought by someone else and used by them)

So the filter media is tested at least twice.

But even at that, the filter itself is tested under all kinds of conditions. We know Champ is working on the Mobil 1 new extended life filter. There are a few different versions for Mobil to determine which one they want. They are being tested on a fleet of taxi cabs. Cabbie's have a tendency to not use their cars as daily driver. They put their engines through severe conditions. The filter , in all tests, has yet to "fail". There are some performance differences but it's up to Mobil to choose which version they want. Each oil and filter combo has been extended beyond the advertised oil change interval rate because Mobil and Champ can't guarantee the consumers who drive cars will change oil as advertised.

This has always been the case even with filters back when I started. It is expected by filter manufacturers and engine OEM's that a certain percentage of consumers WON'T change their oil as they should . So there is a safety factor built in for the "life" of the filter. Not just by Champ but by all filter companies.

But i've said this before, filters are not bullet proof to what consumers habits are. They are not designed to survive worst case scenarios of neglect by consumers or pressure regulating valves malfunctioning due to other problems.

So if you ever cut open a filter and the pleats are ripped or there is some other problem that is not a manufacturing defect as stated in the filter companies warranty statement ...sue the filter company if your denied warranty. Champ or Brand X. That's your right as a consumer. You'll find out just how much testing has been done for all kinds of use by consumers both in the lab and in "real life" and not just OEM specs done on laboratory test equipment.

 

[teamDFL]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gary Allan:
You said it yourself....

quote:

---

we do not know what causes these failures,

---

XACTLY!!!!! You haven't a clue why this has happened ...yet are more than willing ..in fact assertive in conviction that the filters were commonly defective. This may or may not be the case...yet you act as though it was cast in stone and a bona fide fact.

---

Right. I don't know the cause. However, I know that lubeowner is only seeing these failures on Fram and low-end Champ. I do not know what the people who own the cars are doing, but for all I know I won't take the risk and fit my car with either of these filters. I am not saying it is a fact that the filters are faulty, I am saying that we have a seen a certain type of filter fail and I am going to avoid it because under what should be similiar conditions other filters have not failed.

I am not making a decision about criminality. I am not making a decision about drug safety. I am making a decision on what type of filter to use with very limited resources. I have never cut open a filter and don't particularly care to. Lubeowner and others here have access to way more filters in a week than I will in a lifetime.

This thinking amazes me. We have so many choices in filters, if you see a reputable person say that he only sees a media failure in one or two brands of filter, why on earth would you not just buy a different one? Why take the chance? You're analogy to the airplane is ridiculous and your attempt to belittle me by casting me as a chicken little is pathetic. Random accidents happen and there is nothing you can do about it. Lubeowner has reported a pattern here - Champ and Fram filters with torn media. This is not random.

I personally do not care about the cause. You may, I don't. For me, it is way easier to just buy a different filter and minimize my risks. Filter Guy said it best "Draw your own conclusions." For me, the conclusion is, the Mobil 1 filter is worth the extra money, and if I want to spend less money, Motorcraft and Wix seem very good.

I am 100% aware that I am basing my decision on incomplete data and suspicions. Guess what? You did it when you bought your car, new or used. It happens all the time, to all of us. I am comfortable with the amount of info I have and am ready to move on.