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

[TurboJim]

quote:

---

Originally posted by ZR2RANDO:
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..

---

Well I live in Oregon and so far my clicker failure rate is zero. Admittedly though I don't do oil changes for a living - I just handle about a dozen or so annually for myself, friends, and relatives.

The only real difference I can think of between how lubeman's operation changes oil and how I might do it myself centers on specialized equipment. I assume that lubeman's facility has some sort of device that either sucks oil out of the dip stick tube (at great presure) or the drain plug is removed and air pressure is applied to the dip stick tube to speed up the process. I may wait 15 minutes or so to get the last drops out, I doubt if I was in it for a living I'd feel like I had that luxury.

Many of the pictures of damaged filter's we've seen came off of OBDII vehicles. I would think that if the filters were this bad that some sort of code would be thrown indicating abnormal oil pressure.

 

[Gary Allan]

Well ..let me first state that I wasn't attempting to belittle you. We're in a disagreement and I was making extreme examples to make a point. I, once again, didn't use enough gremlins. My bad.


But..I'll leave you with this thought. You've formed this opinion upon information from one source. A good source ..but just one. If I showed you 45 M1 or PureOne's ..or Mann ...or Fleetguard or Baldwin filters in the same condition ...where would you "move on to"? And would you just believe me if I was the only source?

But by all means ..use something else ..for no other reason than for simple piece of mind. I think I'll just keep using ST's and keep cutting them open and finding "nothing".

 

[labman]

quote:

---

Originally posted by labman:
Something funny is going on here. Most of us here are suspicious of Fram and clickers. Glad the ST number I am using is neither clicker or Ecore. Lubeowner is confirming our worst fears, but nobody has responded to my request for previous posts confirming the problem. snip

---

Many of us have cut up a few filters. The total number must add up. Why haven't any of us seen the same thing?

 

[Gary Allan]

That's my point, labman. Absolutely no other instances that I can recall.

Now I'm personally not fond of the clicker bypass in concept. In my mind I see a less "smooth" action to it. This would tend to create (in my mind's eye) shockwaves that could be unfavorable.

..but..where are all the failed filters?? They should not just end up (visions of the kids assembly game "Marble Works®") magically in lubeowner's shop..

 

[John W. Colby]

Filterman and Gary,

I think you misunderstand my posts. I am not saying that the filter manufacturer doesn't test. I am not saying that there is any conspiracy. I am not saying anything except that YOU (specifically) FilterGuy are just blasely writing off ALL of these failures to "user mistreatment" of their autos.

I am hearing a lot of "I cut my filter (singular) open and it wasn't torn". SO WHAT? I am not a statistician any more than I am a mechanic but I can tell you that you can't tell anything about a sample size of one. You can't tell much with a sample size of five. Five out of five torn filters would be very suspicious but not anything like conclusive.

Likewise five out of five filters NOT tearing doesn't tell the whole story. How many do you need in a sample? Lots, we should all agree with that. It is a POSSIBILITY that 40 filters in a row could be bad but the next million show no failures, in which case you "write off" that 40 as being an abberation. Unfortunately you have to get your hands on the next million to be able to see that fact.

On the other hand, all WE have to go on is what we are seeing here. Lubeowner is doing hundreds and IS SEEING a trend...

Gary, your first message in this thread begins:

***
lube owner

I've torn apart a few of my filters ..but have never seen the media distorted like the images that you show. Are these "neglected" vehicles that you see here? That is, are these customers typically letting their OCIs go too long ..or something else??

***

I can appreciate the thought but aren't you "jumping" right on to the "abusive owner" theory?

Lubeowners very next post states:

****
Not trying to send everyone in to panic mode, but those filters in the pics were the only ones we cut open yesterday. I would not call the failures an isolated instance. these came off newer cars with low mileage. We rarely service cars over 6 years old and most are fewer that 4 yrs. old. Our shop is in an upper middle class area with lots of SUV's and higher end cars. We do get the occasional neglected sludgebucket as some of my pics have shown but all of the pics from yesterday were ODI's within the manufacturers suggested mileages.
****

Newer cars, upper middle class... ODI's within the manufacturers suggested mileages... occasional sludgebucket...

This does not sound like his "typical" owner would tend to be neglectful.

Gary, one of your replies:

****
I think that the clicker type bypass isn't progressive and sends fluid shockwaves (violent) through the media. I have nothing to base this on beyond the "clicker" action that one observes as opposed to other type spring actions. (visions of diodes in "avalanche" after a certain reverse bias)
****

IF this is the case (and we have no proof it is but we also have no proof it isn't) this would be a design defect. Just pointing that out...

One of FilterGuys replies:

***
Some of the common reasons why media will appear as they do in these photo's are all those things that we know effect the media. Dirt through the air filter or vacuum hoses, old oil sludge that remains in the pan and contaminates the "fresh" oil, extended drain intervals, overheated engines due to improper cooling system maintenace, and coolant leaks or water condensation that is present in the oil.

Lubeowners pics are interesting but without the data of his "good" frequent customers and what their maintenance habits are to compare what happens on the same engine over 2-3-4 oil changes and the filters being cut open on that one specific vehicle, he will always find what he does.
***

Lubeowner says again (to a different post):

***
You have gotten the point I have been trying to make. For those not understanding I will say it again. The ONLY failures we are seeing are with all Fram built products and CLICKER BYPASS Champion products. THE OTHER CHAMPION PRODUCTS ARE HAVING NO ISSUES, other than the Poserstroke diesel filter that had turned to mush. Why don't I post up pics of Wix, Fleetguard, Baldwin, or other high end filters? Because I have seen no failures with them. I am cutting open all filters, clicker, no clicker, e-core, etc. I will say it again. THE DAMAGED CHAMPION FILTERS ARE ALWAYS, 100% OF THE TIME CLICKER BYPASS MODELS. Specifically PH2835, PH8A, PH820, PH253, PH2808 seem to be having the porblems. These are off newer vehicles with 150,000 mile service hybrid coolants, low mileage, and drain intervals that are within manufactures recommendations.
***

One of Filterguy's responses:

***
Lubeowner..

I'm glad your "scientific" study is comprehensive enough for you to determine conclusively that the only problem with filter construction is the clicker valve.

Maybe you can explain what test equipment, SAE tests you ran to help you along with your anlysis.
***

Is it just me or is that response bordering on nasty? Do you get my point here. LubeOwner simply came to this forum (as a newbie if I remember correctly) offering to cut open a bunch of filters and tell us what he finds.

When he does so there is a concerted effort to "explain" how all of his failures must be lack of maintenance by the owner. There is little or no willingness to even entertain the possibility that a manufacturing problem could occur. Lots of talk about millions of dollars spent on equipment by the manufacturers, lots of talk about how they test till the cows come home, and of course all that proves, CONCLUSIVELY, that it simply ISN'T POSSIBLE for there to be an issue with the filters.

In other words, Lubeowner, don't bother cutting open filters because whatever you find doesn't prove anything anyway, or at best it simply proves that the owner didn't perform the required maintenance.

Or in other other words, LubeOwner, build up a solid case that can be taken to court or don't bother us here because we don't want to see it.

I AM NOT SHOUTING CONSPIRACY. I am not shouting anything except that FilterGuy specifically seems to have his mind made up that the filters simply cannot be the problem. And then accusing the rest of the respondents of making up conspiracies.

I believe that FilterGuy has a great background in the filter industry which could be tremendously useful in a situation like this but... an open mind is the MOST IMPORTANT asset and I see no indication that you have one FilterGuy. YOU have made up your mind that this simply cannot be the filter and all your posts have been about "show me incontrovertable proof that it isn't abusive owners".

It is not Lubeowner's "duty" to build a watertight case against a manufacturer. He has stated that his clients are by and large upper middle class owners of upper middle class vehicles who mostly maintain their vehicles. He has stated that at least some of the filters came off of low milage vehicles. He is just showing what he sees.

He is making observations of course, which appears to rankle certain individuals but in general he is just cutting open filters and showing the ones that "fail" with brands and models. He has stated that he isn't showing the ones that don't fail, so if it isn't in the rogues gallery then he hasn't seen any of that model fail.

Scientific? No of course not. Useful? It would be much more useful with nice columns of brands / model numbers, showing failure percentages, miles, sex of owner, income, family size, number of airplanes owned, etc. but this is just a guy who owns a lube business cutting open filters and giving us raw data as it comes in.

Which convienently allows us to dismiss it as irrelevent since it isn't scientific.

And please don't forget that the factory has invested 427 BILLION dollars in testing gear and of course, with such equipment in place monitoring the output of the plant it simply is not possible to have manufacturing issues. Someone should tell Chevrolet that. They have umpteen billion in test equipment and have managed to manufacture entire models of cars that were one big manufacturing issue.

EVERY manufacturing line has issues, that is why they have the fancy equipment. And EVERY manufacturing line ends up shipping product that managed to slip past the tests because they were testing the wrong things or the wrong way. Admit that fact and move on to more useful discussions. Quit being so defensive and you will probably find less conspiracy theroies hidden in the replies here.

These failures MAY be manufacturing issues. No proof here, just observations of which filter models are failing. Lots of people saying "hmmmm... maybe I'll buy this other brand since they aren't being reported as failing". A few people saying "no proof so you are silly to switch brands". A lot of people saying "better silly than sorry".

Seems a good summation to me.

Thanks LubeOwner for taking the time out of your day to show us the raw data. I made a personal decision about a month before I encountered this thread that I would pay $10 for a quality filter (Mobil 1) for my new van, and in fact I have just installed a bypass filter on it. However had you shown me dozens of Mobil 1 filters ripped and torn, I would definitely have gone looking for a different filter.

Better silly than sorry.

 

[Gary Allan]

quote:

---

I think you misunderstand my posts.

---

No ..I don't think that I misunderstand them at all.

quote:

---

I can appreciate the thought but aren't you "jumping" right on to the "abusive owner" theory?

---

No ..but it was like when my brother in-law was a security guard at the GE Space Center (I was unemployed at the time) and he says that he's going to Maryland/DC for an "assignment" ..and I say "What" ..he goes "Work" as though to say "I can't tell you sshhh..it's a secret" ...and I respond .."Well, David, seeing as there are plenty of uniquely qualified security personnel in the Washington, D.C. metro area ...just what skill or quality of distinction requires your special tallents for this event?"

That is, although I may have opened only a few filters ...several thousand have probably been opened up by our membership ..yet this anomaly is absent ..so the obvious (to me anyway) ...what's so odd about this instance in these filters. I've never seen media damaged or distorted like that ..anywhere. That's the limited dimension to my disposition in that regard.

quote:

---

I would not call the failures an isolated instance. these came off newer cars with low mileage. We rarely service cars over 6 years old and most are fewer that 4 yrs. old. Our shop is in an upper middle class area with lots of SUV's and higher end cars. We do get the occasional neglected sludgebucket as some of my pics have shown but all of the pics from yesterday were ODI's within the manufacturers suggested mileages.

---

Not one quote of year, make, or model ..length of service or miles (in spite of polite requests for such information) has been forthcoming. Yet you take it as gospel ..as though it had definitive worth. If a product claim was substanitated by this type of "testimonial" you would scoff it off as snake oil ..yet you will attribute a "snake oil" assignation to a product upon the same nebulous testimonial. There is no balance to the POV if you see what I mean.

Don't you realize that you too have "jumped on a band wagon"???

The saying "When I was a painter ..they didn't call me XXYYZZ the artist. When I was a musician ..they didn't call me XXYYZZ the pianist. But suck just one XXX000 and you're a XXYYZZ the 'sucker for life!!" comes to mind.

Everything that lubeowner asserts or suggest may be soundly based in fact..these may be inferior filters either in design or manufacture ...it's just not supported by anything other than apparent results. This is the ONLY point I have ever tried to make out of my entire dialog on this post.

The Corvair was destroyed by one film shown to one consumer do gooder by Ford with an undercranked camera. He condemned without seeking the cause either. I'll stick with my method for judgement.

 

[slalom44]

I posted these pictures on another thread, but since there are doubts about clicker valve filters, I'll post them here:

The torn media in these two filters were two back-to-back ST-3614 filters I used last year. One filter had 3,180 miles on it, and the other had 3,400 miles. My car started to consume oil at the same time these filters were in service, so I contacted Champion Labs. I sent the filters to a guy named Don Rigg, and I was contacted by a company called Sedgwick Claims Management Services, who reimbursed me for damages. So Lubeowner isn't the only person that has found these failures.

The reason I say that the clicker valve is to blame is because I can't see how it can possibly work. Oil pressure makes the pressure outside the valve greater than inside, meaning that rather than opening up, the clicker valve gets pushed tighter against the holes in the baseplate. I've tried pushing the center, and nothing clicks. You just can't open that valve up with oil pressure.

This means that if the oil pressure exceeds the strength of the media, end caps and center tube as it is assembled, something has to fail. If the engine's pressure relief valve opens up before the filter fails, then you'd never know there was a problem with this filter.

 

[edwardh1]

So the media is the relief valve. what a concept.

when I took an air cond course in the 70s the instructor explained that the GM air cond compressors had a relief valve set at 440 pounds.
he said he had never seen one lift/open as it usually blew up the discharge hose first.
Same concept.

 

[Gary Allan]

quote:

---

Oil pressure makes the pressure outside the valve greater than inside, meaning that rather than opening up, the clicker valve gets pushed tighter against the holes in the baseplate.

---

I don't see how this is possible. The flow originates from outside the filter through the holes in the baseplate. There is no way pressure could force the bypass valve closed against them. Or did I misread your post???

But you are at least one other data point beyond lubeowner.

Thanks

 

[Gary Allan]

quote:

---

Well I was going to volunteer to go down to two different establishments and ask for 100 oil filters from each and cut them open. The problem here is that I can't get the "required data" to make the data useful to you so what's the point?

---

No, there would be a point. This would be from another source. If you got 100 filters, not just the clicker type, and cut them open ...and ONLY the clicker type showed failure...then I would have two people's observed data to base a reasonable conclusion on.

Suppose you ONLY got clicker type ..and they showed a 50% failure ...what would that prove if not compared to non-clicker filters from the same source?? It would prove that in that establishment's use and installation of clicker type bypass valves ..that a 50% failure rate occured. Without indexing it with non-clicker type filters ..the data is meaningless. One would never know how they stacked up against non-clickers in the same service.

This is merely an exercize in reliable data accumulation. We don't see any "non-clicker" type shown in the same or simular duty to compare from lube owners selection.

quote:

---

I understand quite well Gary that you want data but that simply isn't Lubeowner's job.

---

No, it's not ..but it would present a more complete and comprehensive assertion. To establish proof beyond "FWIW" ..one should try and index your findings.

quote:

---

f there is even a HINT (and there is at least a hint) that this might be happening then the manufacturer should go out to 100 shops around the country and get a hundred of the filters and cut them open.

---

Absolutely! If I were lubeowner ..I'd be in contact with my vendor or Champ and report this. I would not be buying these filters with his discovery and would be leveraging my vendor for the potential litigous position that he put me in. I'd be backcharging my current inventory to the vendor and perhaps sending a case of suspected filters and discovered filters to Champ for analysis. This isn't something beyond reasonable ability for any retail vendor to do. This is the wonder and marvel of the information age and ISO 9000. Everything has a document attached to it. As I said ...take a look at (I think) EVERY filter that you own. It's got a lot# on the end cap. This can be traced back to the point of manufacture (Pure One's are a little hard to read). If this is indeed an engineering problem product wide ...Champ needs to correct it. If this is an "old" discovery ..and Champ has already corrected the flaw, then he needs to recover/exchange his current holdings of defective filters. This may IN FACT already have been done ..and the intermediate vendor DID exchange all the defective filters with those whom had sought them ..but the intermediate vendor decided to re-release these on to the market due to the fact that discovery, as you pointed out, is beyond resonable possibility. These things can happen. The children's clothing manufacturer that used the flame retardant, triss(spl?), that caused health problems in babies pulled all their products off the shelf ...and sold them to a rag manufacturer ...who then sold them as new children's clothing ..never turning them into rags.

That is, lubeowner's vendor may have bought these as salvage, knowingly or unknowingly, ..and returned them to the market when they've already been "written off" somewhere in the supply stream. This happens. I worked for Trend Instruments when it was a 20 person production dept. We made bimetal thermometers and sold under labels like Robert Shaw as well as our own. I got a selection of defective thermometers mixed in with some older display units ...$1000/s worth of thermometers for nothing. I merely handed them out to friends for the fun of it ..but they typically were destroyed/recycled. Some had misaligned face gaskets ..some nothing at all. All were functionally accurate for telling temp ..but they may or may not have performed over the intended life cycle with the typical MTBF (mean time between failure) rate. In this day and age I would probably have put them on ebay and they may have, after filtering through a couple of hands, ended up in actual intended use in the market they were intended for.

quote:

---

So how can you possibly say that "none of the other filters are failing"?

---

I never said that. I said "Where are all these failed filters?" (or words to that effect)..so far, as you can see, we have one other source of reported failure. If someone posted that all his customers cars that he used Techron in had injector damage ..and you had hundreds of fellow members using Techron w/o apparent problems ..what you you ask? Would you take it as "proof" that Techron was bad for injectors ..or would you look a little deeper into it.

quote:

---

Answer me a simple question...

You are comfortable putting these on your car because obviously you take care of your car. Would you be comfortable recommending these filters to the guy in the pew next to you in church, not knowing how he treats his car?

Assuming that you don't suspect that Lubeowner has an agenda, in which case I personally would ignore the whole thing, I would be just a tad uncomfortable recommending the filters in those pictures to someone that may not change their oil with obsessive compulsive regularity.

---

I don't recommend or not recommend them. I merely don't want to accept only one source for forming an opinion. If someone would ask me, I would say "Although I have personally had no problems with these filters, and have used them in the past, some have reported a notable incidence of failure ..so you may want to use XXXYYZZZ".

quote:

---

Or is your point here that if you abuse your car in the slightest then if the filter fails "it's ok".

---

Right now ..we have no idea if the failure was a result of abuse or not...nor to what degree. You're assuming that either I or Filterguy is looking for excuses ..and not reasons. Without that data ..you're assuming the worst ..without recourse. Done deal. I owe nothing to Champ ..or FilterGuy in this debate.

This is more a function of my personality than anything else. I won't "follow the herd" in any en vogue stampede. One whiff of some scent (whether it be gummy bears or dog crap) doesn't send me anywhere that I don't see a good enough reason to move to. I don't form opinions upon hype, panic, or consensus unless it adds up in my head. You see this all the time here. It's human nature ..and I never - ever - will consider myself "one of the herd" ...hence, I will never respond in that manner. I may end up in the same location ..but I've seen too many "led by the nose" all too often to behave that way.

That is, I may indeed come to the exact same conclusion that you do ..so we're not arguing about anything except how we base our opinions. Yours is based on "apparent" data. I'm much more curious than that.

 

[Filter guy]

Well a few things..

I don't think anyone is questioning lubeowner about his pics.

However, without data one is making assumptions on visual evidence. Now I don't know the last time someone in here went to a quick lube, but don't they log in what your vehicle is and how many miles on the vehicle? And in some instances ask how long it has been since the last oil change. Or in others, because of repeat customers, the lube operation does know how long it's been between oil changes.

I personally have said I would be happy to go to lubeowners shop and watch or help when he cuts open filters. I have also offered some oil analysis kits to send samples in for those vehicles that may be a bit dodgy. If he needs a filter cutter, I can probably get my hands on one and bring it with me.

No responce.

Slalom44..had a problem with a filter, sent it back, and Champ paid the claim. ( btw..Don Rigg is the Warranty Manager). If there is evidence of a mismanufactured filter, Champ pays. Always did when I was there.

But if they know it's not the filter which failed, they won't pay. Nor should they. ( Nor will the other filter companies).

Which gets back to my point of the extensive testing that filter companies do. Clicker valves or not. They have extensively tested various media and filters over 20-30 years that I know of and have all the data as to what causes the "visual" problems consumers might see when they cut filters open. ( We used to have a brochure with pics of media and explained exactly what caused the "failure".)

There obviously was extensive testing on clicker valves before they were introduced. And if Champ sees to many of them with problems, I would suspect they would quit offering them. They private label them for auotmotive OEM's and people like AC have their own labs to test the design as well.

So that's why I am confident there is nothing wrong with the design.

What may be happening is that the clicker valve is susceptable to certain conditions of owner related problems. Such as sludgy oil, extended drain intervals, other chemicals being added to the oil, etc. On top of one the owner has little control over and thats excessive pressure by the oil pump regulating valve.

However, if the filter fails because of those conditions..it's not the filters fault.

There have always been premium filters, low end filters, medium grade filters and variations in between. That is why various oil companies, OEM's, auto parts chains, and quick lubes have options of how they want to market the filter they put their name on. But ALL of those filters produced meet or exceed specs and real world testing. Every filter company does that. They do real world testing to confirm what conditions cause what problems.


As Turbo Jim says..and he lives in Oregon where lubeowners shop is..he's never seen a problem with the clicker valves he's pulled off the multiple cars it sounds like he changes per year.

Maybe he has a point about oil extraction that quick lubes might do..

It's still a mystery to me why lubeowner see's what he does to me without more specifics, visual evidence means little unless the owners side of the story and their maintenance habits are added.

Lubeowner can call Champ 1-800-851-3641. He can call his rep. He can email them. He can send filters back. He apparently has the time to cut open 20-30 filters or so and post pictures. He should have the time for a phone call or to box up filters and send them back. He'll get a letter from Don Rigg for each filter he does send back. And as he's draining oil, it would be nice to send an oil sample back because Champ has their own oil analysis lab besides the independant lab they use.

Then maybe we'll have a more definitive answer and can "debate" the merits at that time.

 

[427Z06]

quote:

---

Originally posted by John W. Colby:
EVERY manufacturing line has issues, that is why they have the fancy equipment. And EVERY manufacturing line ends up shipping product that managed to slip past the tests because they were testing the wrong things or the wrong way.

---

Not to mince words, but a better way to state that is virtually all manufacturing lines will have issues at one time or another. And as one who has provided engineering support to production lines, there's dozens of things that can cause issues, from a design that is just plain hard to manufacture consistently, to worker training, part substitutions that meet specs but turn out to be slightly different, test equipment out of calibration or that just breaks and no one notices immediately, etc, etc, etc.

If you NEVER bought ANYTHING that didn't have some kind of defect in it, hurry up and buy a lottery ticket. You are the luckiest person in the world.

 

[Filter guy]

427Z06

Don't disagree at all. Things can and do happen that get by the best inspection and quality control programs.

I mentioned before that I used to handle warranties for a brand Champ sells. So I know filters get sent back for analysis.

Champ, last year... 2004 for all brands, had about .002% of one days average production sent back. That's not to bad is it? 2004 had clicker valves out in use by Joe Consumer under various brands. I'm sure some never got sent back that someone could send in. But Champ can't analyse what they don't have returned.

 

[John W. Colby]

Well I was going to volunteer to go down to two different establishments and ask for 100 oil filters from each and cut them open. The problem here is that I can't get the "required data" to make the data useful to you so what's the point?

The bottom line is that if Lubeowner were to cut open 100 thousand filters and 50% of the frams (or whatever brand) had obvious failures, you would STILL be saying "yea but no data". It makes absolutely no difference to you that ONLY specific brands are failing which is my point. Without "proof" that the failures (all umpteen thousand of them" are occuring on cars that are well maintained, then there is no problem.

I understand quite well Gary that you want data but that simply isn't Lubeowner's job. If there is even a HINT (and there is at least a hint) that this might be happening then the manufacturer should go out to 100 shops around the country and get a hundred of the filters and cut them open. In fact if you asked me (and you didn't) they should be doing that anyway.

These are not tires, or belts or anything else visible to the consumer or even the person changing them out. I will bet you dollars to donuts that of the hundreds of millions of filters changed out every year, a few thousand are cut open. And THOSE are being cut open by the OC types in forums like this who change their oil every 3k miles. What in Gods name is that going to tell us? Do you honestly believe that the guy in the lube joint LOOKS at the filter he changes? I don't think so. So we have a situation where none of the filters, removed by people who don't even glance at them before they chuck them in the collection box, are ever looked at, yet the fact that no filters are reported as bad proves something. Hmmmm..... Yea, it does, it proves that no one ever looks at these things.

So how can you possibly say that "none of the other filters are failing"? You don't know that, all you know is that of the .0000001% of the filters, cut open by the people on this forum who are admittedly a tad on the OC side of the equation, no damage is seen. And you then make that claim as if that were some kind of PROOF that the no filters anywhere are failing.

Answer me a simple question...

You are comfortable putting these on your car because obviously you take care of your car. Would you be comfortable recommending these filters to the guy in the pew next to you in church, not knowing how he treats his car?

Assuming that you don't suspect that Lubeowner has an agenda, in which case I personally would ignore the whole thing, I would be just a tad uncomfortable recommending the filters in those pictures to someone that may not change their oil with obsessive compulsive regularity.

Or is your point here that if you abuse your car in the slightest then if the filter fails "it's ok".

That seems to be one of the overriding themes here that it is quite ok for the filter to fail as long as it can be proved that the owner didn't change his oil as regularly as the owners manual calls for.

Obviously I don't see it that way.

I will make the offer anyway. If someone can tell me how to easily cut these things open I will gather 100 filters from a lube joint and a repair garage with a good reputation for service. I will cut them open and post at least one picture of each filter, damaged or not, with the markings on the can. I will do this IF... I am not subsequently hammered with "what was the mileage on the car, oil pressure, vin number, condition of the air filter, sex of the operator who drove it in, etc. etc.". I can not and will not try to obtain any of that kind of information.

Raw data, condition of filter, model of filter, that's all you get. If you are going to discount the results unless I can give you that other data then just tell me so (and lube owner as well) and I will save my time.

It would be more useful if a couple of other people would do the same, the more data points the better.

I have no agenda Gary, except to suggest that investigations of a problem start with observations of the problem and a willingness to admit that there may be a problem. It is Chevy's job to gather data about when and why the gasket fails, it is the filter manufacturers job to gather the data as to when and why the filter fails. My (or Lubeowner's) ONLY job is to observe a problem and report it.

Furthermore if the you or the manufacturer is going to simply suggest that "yea, 35% are failing but they meet manufacturer's spec so it is OK that they failed" then I personally will just save my time and buy another manufacturer's filter (which I do anyway).

 

[slalom44]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Gary Allan:

quote:

---

Oil pressure makes the pressure outside the valve greater than inside, meaning that rather than opening up, the clicker valve gets pushed tighter against the holes in the baseplate.

---

I don't see how this is possible. The flow originates from outside the filter through the holes in the baseplate. There is no way pressure could force the bypass valve closed against them. Or did I misread your post???

But you are at least one other data point beyond lubeowner.

Thanks

---

Oops. I need to pick my words more carefully.

When I said baseplate, I meant the dome-sided endcap. In other words, when in bypass mode the oil is supposed to flow from outside the media through the circle of holes in the encap. Since the "clicker" pushes against these holes from the outside, oil can't get through.

Look at this picture (you can see the tear on the left and two of the holes in the endcap)

The "clicker sits outside of this endcap. For oil to get through, it would have to lift the "clicker away from the holes. This can't happen because there is more pressure outside of the filter media/endcap enclosure than is inside. If the center is supposed to "click" in, allowing a gap, well I can tell you that you can press as hard as you want and that endcap doesn't move.

Here is a discussion about it over a year ago:

http://theoildrop.server101.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=001305#000000

 

[Filter guy]

Well i'll chime in on the clicker valve construction. I will give my opinion as I have yet to actually see it cut open and really haven't asked about it.

From the pictures that have been posted, you have the element with a bottom endcap with 6 holes in it. Inside these six holes is a rubber gasket, like the anti-drain.

There is a leaf spring that keeps the tension on the element to make sure the element remains in place against the backplate asembly. This has always been the case in every spin on built. Either a leaf of coil spring is used. That is it's only function, to keep the tension there.

The area between the leaf spring and the end cap looks small, I guess, to some. So how does oil "by-pass" the element may be the question.

Oil will find the least resisitance to flow. Either through the media or through the by-pass. As oil enters the filter the pressure will need to be aleviated. This is standard. With a coiled spring by-pass it must must push against the cap in the by-pass and force the spring to open to allow oil through. This is regardless of engine end, dome end by-pass, or engine block by-pass. The "caps" are made of different material depending on who the filter supplier is.

In the clicker valve style, the same happens. The oil forces between the leaf spring and in through the six holes and forces the rubber away from the endcap thus allowing the oil to by-pass the media.

As we know by-pass valves work on pressure differential so the clicker style or spring style will close when the differential equalizes depending on the by-pass setting itself.

In other designs where the by-pass is located in the dome end, the oil must flow "under" the leaf spring, force the cap ( generally a 1/4 hole) to open against the tension of the spring.

I would suspect the six holes in the bottom end cap equate area wise to the 1/4" cap in the dome end spring type by-passes.

Anyone who's cut open the dome end by-pass style filters can see where the same action happens with the clicker valve.

Just a hunch...

 

[Gary Allan]

I just cut open a ST16 that was on my son's Neo for the past 5 months. No pleat seperation ..I'll post an image later.

The media and its metal end caps appears to "float" ..held down against the spring via the ADBV. That is, the ADBV appears to be the seperating seal on the baseplate end of the can. The way the "clicker" works (or so it appears) is that the ADBV, as the media accumulates particles ..and otherwise as needed ..pressures the the media "module" down upon the flexible spring mechanism making it flex and allow access to the fixed and inflexible end cap which has the holes in it.

So ...

quote:

---

If the center is supposed to "click" in, allowing a gap, well I can tell you that you can press as hard as you want and that endcap doesn't move.

---

Yes, you could press in that little area of the end cap til you're blue in the face and it's totally true that it won't "flex". It donsn't appear to be part of the function of the clicker bypass ..the entire assembly is pushed down upon the spring and that causes it to flex ..opening the acess to the holes.

For those interested ..I'll snap a pic of the ST16 w/clicker. Aside from the damage I did to it getting it appart ...nada .no wave ..no odd ball seperation ...no holes. This was used in the clean phase of an auto-rx that was left in for 5 months and at least 3000 miles.

 

[goodvibes]

I don't get how Champion does this super extensive testing on filters and then radically changes it's bypass design less than 2 yrs into the clicker. They probably thought it was good enough to get by or it just couldn't hold spec on in production. Either way there is obviously a problem with it if it's already on its way out. Their test proceedure clearly wasn't comprehensive enough. I'm not claiming conspiracy. I suspect they started working on a new design VERY shortly after the clickers intro. At least they made a change and came out with a filter that will remain cheap and be a better alternative to Fram. Fram's still Fram and everything else is more expensive. It just needs to not fail.

 

[Gary Allan]

Nothing odd here...

 

[slalom44]

Gary & Filter guy: your feedback is really helpful. I really appreciate your input. I'm still confused though.

Filter guy: you mention a rubber gasket inside the holes in the endcap. The filters I've had didn't have any rubber gasket other than the ADBV and the mounting gasket. Maybe I'm misinterperting your post.

And for the oil to push the leaf spring back to open up the holes, there would have to be more pressure on the end cap side of the leaf spring than on the other. It would be like putting a metal plate over a Shop-Vac hose. The differential pressure would pull the plate against the hose end, not push it away. This is where I get hung up. My education includes classes in fluid dynamics and it just doesn't make sense to me. Filters with coil springs work because they are mounted inside and oil pressure actually pushes the valve open.

Gary: If I understand you correctly, you're suggesting that as differential pressure builds in the filter, the entire cartridge (filter media & endcap piece that I show in my pictures) compresses the leaf spring, exposing the holes. I never looked at it that way before. If the can you dissected for your picture isn't too mangled, could you try pushing the end cap into the leaf spring on the dome end of the can and see if it puts space beween the holes and the leaf spring? You should be able to see this from inside the center tube.