Collapsed filter media revisited

Status
Not open for further replies.
Filter Guy,
Glad to see you actually found a case of owner abuse so you can attempt to qualify almost everything you say on here, obviously, in that case, you can blame that owner for his problem. You actually found a case that would have killed ANY filter. Most engines don’t have rags accidentally stuffed inside though, most of them just get driven around doing the normal internal combustion thing. These are the engines we are concerned with here (most of us anyway).

In the general sense…getting back to normal engines…

FG- So the only way a by-pass valve can fail is because it was defective. Wonder how you'll do explaining to some GM owners who have theirs in the block and the by-pass fails after 50 or 100,000 miles or so (or maybe never). If one of their valves takes that long to fail, why do you think the same construction in a filter which is changed every oil change can't last?

We don’t seem to see many (if any) filters fail that are used in applications that use a bypass in the filter mount, it is usually the particular Frams and cheap Champs that have bypasses in the filters themselves..and you think it is the same construction for that bypass in a cheap filter?
You can look at that Champ “clicker” valve and see it is doomed from the start. The Frams cause that valvetrain noise even when newly installed.

FG-
The filter is supposed to remove contaminant but it's time for you to understand that the filter media is designed to remove contaminant in the 1-40 micron range. LARGE pieces of contaminant will not be trapped by the media and it is these size particles that can wedge into the by-pass valve.

If you know something about contaminant sizes, 40 microns is the lower limit of visibility at 20/20 vision. So if you can see the particle, it is to large to be trapped by the media itself generally. If particles that size make it to the filter, the larger particles should drop into the bottom of the can ( provided the filter hangs straight down). However the turbulence of the oil flow can keep them in suspension and potentially lodge in the by-pass itself.

Bull! Who do you think you’re dealing with here? Maybe what you are trying to describe here is a problem for Champ designed bypasses, but filter mount bypasses don’t seem to have that problem.


You can brag all you want about your “credentials”, and your “experience”. I am not impressed at all. You couldn’t even describe how your own previous companies’ bypass valves work properly, but you COULD tell us how to request a “filter retrieval kit” and file a warranty claim. I don’t know about everyone else, but I would rather use a filter that looks well made, using common sense design, and having a good verified reputation, than to use a filter that shows repeated failures, and looks like a bad design to boot, and then just hope I don’t cause myself problems and then depend on someone who made that filter to warranty it.
It is your attitude that is your problem. Most of us are here to learn, or to help others learn. You seem to be here mainly to deflect attention away from crap filter design and performance.

I have benefited here at BITOG from Mr. Mechanic, and Mr. Consumer, and Mr. Enthusiast. You might want to start listening a little more to them yourself.
 
ZR2RANDO:

I admitted before I was unaware of the clicker valve construction because that was developed after I left Champ. I was used to certain criteria for by-pass valve construction. The clicker valve was not designed that way. I corrected my "impression" of the workings of the valve.

However, the same criteria for valve failure applies no matter what the construction. If the valve is manufactured properly and installed properly..then what causes the valve to malfuntion? (1)Please adress that one specific point.


I realize that shop rags are not consistent with everyday engine construction. My point was to Phoenix who only can see things one way..that there are a lot of "anomolies" that can have an effect on the by-pass valve. One's in which , unless you work at a filter company you'd have never dreamed of. But they get to see everything. And I do mean everything.

Most people in here can only relate to their perfectly maintained car and have no idea what a crule world it is out there. The chance of your perfectly maintained car having a problem is slim.

But by the same token, those cars not maintained properly have a higher risk at having a failure.

So if you only concern yourself with your own experience, you'll forever argue..this can't happen. Oh but it does..


Please explain to me why the car manufacturers or engine companies have a recommended Oil Change Interval? (2)

How do they determine it? (3)

What criteria do they use? (4)

What rate of failure did they see? (5)

What impact various brands, types, formulations of oils, have on the Oil Change Interval determination? (6)

What consumer useage was taken into consideration? (7)

And when your done explaining from a car company or engine companies perspective on how and why they chose the figure they did, then explain why ANY filter company would build a filter that wouldn't meet engine manufacturers specs including oil change? (8)

I expect and answer to each question i've asked. I've numbered them. There are 8.

And this is for anyone who wants to give it a go, not just Rando..Winston? Lubeowner? Gary? Phoenix? Anyone else?
 
quote:

Originally posted by Filter guy:
Rando..and you have what statistics to back up your claim?

Please provide the stats on "cheap" Champs or Frams, rather than generalities.

Champ has built near 100 million clicker valve filters. So please tell us..all of us..just how many of those filters failed.


No filter guy YOU tell us how many have failed. These are sealed units, the guts of which are never seen. They are put in the car, function (or don't) are pulled out and trashed.

YOU TELL US HOW MANY HAVE FAILED! You can't.

You claim that "very few" have failed, but YOU have NO PROOF that is true. There could very well be (and probably are) MILLIONS OF THEM FAILING.

YOU TELL US HOW MANY HAVE FAILED! You can't.

Luckily for your silly attempts to persuade us that this is such a FINE filter, no one can prove anything. So you can say with impunity that "very few fail" knowing full well that it is quite impossible to prove otherwise.

Luckily for me, I can just as easily, and with just as much "proof" claim that fully half of the filters are failing.

I got news for you Filter Guy, OVER HALF of the filters are failing.

Now...

Please provide the stats that over half of the filters AREN'T failing.

The ball is in your court. And of course, you will never (can't) provide such stats.
 
Filter guy,
Actually you have shown that you don’t know how the “clicker” valves on the old style, and the “combo” valve on the ecore style BOTH work, or at least how they are INTENDED to work……but you defend them relentlessly.
Read page 2 of the “New Ecore ST3675 Photos.” topic in case you forgot that example.

Doesn’t make sense why you defend something so much when you don’t even know how it works…or is even intended to work.

Concerning the following statement:
FG- However, the same criteria for valve failure applies no matter what the construction. If the valve is manufactured properly and installed properly..then what causes the valve to malfuntion?

You are making a huge assumption that the Champ designs even allow the valve to work sufficiently if made and installed properly. I’m not sure that is a valid assumption. They seem to be a contributing factor to Champ filter failures.
 
I've done a pretty fair job of staying out of these "discussions"....I must add my .02 worth however on one point.....a collapsed filter is an "effect" of a handful of influences....a filter brand is not the "cause" of the "effect" usually....so I would caution those on the bandwagon of "change filter brands and your problem is taking care of".....I humbly submit this single observation...please pass the popcorn...I return you to your regularly scheduled slug fest....
 
quote:

Originally posted by sgtgeek:
I've done a pretty fair job of staying out of these "discussions"....I must add my .02 worth however on one point.....a collapsed filter is an "effect" of a handful of influences....a filter brand is not the "cause" of the "effect" usually....so I would caution those on the bandwagon of "change filter brands and your problem is taking care of".....I humbly submit this single observation...please pass the popcorn...I return you to your regularly scheduled slug fest....

You know that I agree with you, kind of. IF the filter model from that brand is an otherwise quality unit, then what you say is correct, absolutely.

On the other hand if the unit is junk...
 
Hi,

I don't know if I'm the lucky guy or what but ALL of the Super Tech filters I've opened up (a 7317 yesterday was thelastone and a ecorelastweek) have been perfect.
dunno.gif


The ends were fine, the filter media was together and no holes anywhere.
confused.gif


The new Ecore I opened up and posted photos here online was fine.

I know I've opened up around 20 filters and thats a small number in the millions sold, 100% of the filters I've used have been ok.

I never used Super Tech filters before I came here on BITOG and have been since. My used oil analysis, my motors and after cutting open every filter MYSELF, all is good!

For $2 a filter, I'm happy.
grin.gif


Call me lucky!
smile.gif
Bill

PS: and I'm sure some will call me something else. All I can say is I have POSTED photos of new ecores and used Super Tech filters here. CUT OPEN. NO Problems ...

Have you?
rolleyes.gif


PPS: I don't work for or sell oil filters.. Just use them
cool.gif
 
[/QUOTE]You know that I agree with you, kind of. IF the filter model from that brand is an otherwise quality unit, then what you say is correct, absolutely.

On the other hand if the unit is junk... [/QB][/QUOTE]

Lets define "junk" my friend.....Jezzuz...I'm gonna get my big dumb butt right square in he middle of this ain't I......
Look...folks screaming to high heck about a certain brand of filter/design ain't gonna do any of us any good....do you for one second think that the very high dollar filters mentioned here at BITOG do not fail....statistically and realistically all filters will suffer from the anomalies of failure.......as I read all the strings and relate to all my shade tree experience....I see a few common denominators....wrong filters on wrong engines...unknown OCI's...unknown outside caveats (driving habits/environmental issues/other engine components issues)...whatever....I just get nervous when "we" all jump on the dog pile over a certain brand/"new design" as a failure.....I very distinctly remember all the "hoopla" over the new spin on filters versus the tried and true canister filters...weren't the Internet back then...had something better...called the feed store....the new spin on filters were **** junk...the auto manufacturers designed them just to toast the engine right as the 6000 mile warranty ran out...it was a conspiracy....etc.etc...well guys...I submit that we are experiencing "change" and will continue to experience change.....lets keep an open mind....and not be guilty of silly prejudices towards these changes.....Gawd love the Internet...at least we don't have to drink that GawdAwful coffee down at the FeedStore:)
 
quote:

Originally posted by Bill in Utah:
Hi,

I don't know if I'm the lucky guy or what but ALL of the Super Tech filters I've opened up (a 7317 yesterday was thelastone and a ecorelastweek) have been perfect.
dunno.gif


The ends were fine, the filter media was together and no holes anywhere.
confused.gif


The new Ecore I opened up and posted photos here online was fine.

I know I've opened up around 20 filters and thats a small number in the millions sold, 100% of the filters I've used have been ok.

I never used Super Tech filters before I came here on BITOG and have been since. My used oil analysis, my motors and after cutting open every filter MYSELF, all is good!

For $2 a filter, I'm happy.
grin.gif


Call me lucky!
smile.gif
Bill

PS: and I'm sure some will call me something else. All I can say is I have POSTED photos of new ecores and used Super Tech filters here. CUT OPEN. NO Problems ...

Have you?
rolleyes.gif


PPS: I don't work for or sell oil filters.. Just use them
cool.gif


I agree, every filter I have run and cut open has been in good working order. Including cheapo frams and Champs.

I do enjoy these "discussions" as they pass time. I have been watching the media closely awaiting the crisis caused by the evil oil filter companies ruining a large percentage of cars on the road.
rolleyes.gif
 
quote:

Originally posted by sgtgeek:


You know that I agree with you, kind of. IF the filter model from that brand is an otherwise quality unit, then what you say is correct, absolutely.

On the other hand if the unit is junk...
[/QUOTE]

Lets define "junk" my friend.....Jezzuz...[/QB][/QUOTE]

I'm perfectly willing to define junk. A product (in this case a filter) designed to be as cheap as it can possibly be (in this case a buck or so) in order to sell a million of them.

Look, it's a known issue. Have you ever been sucked in to one of these "as sold on tv" things. Looks too good to be true, is too good to be true, but is too cheap to even think about the hassle of getting your money back. They sell MILLIONS of things that just plain don't do ANYTHING. **** few people get their money back. They make millions defrauding the public.

There's an ad on the local radio for a diet pill, it's aloe, safflower oil and beeswax. THEY SAY SO for crying out loud, right in the ad. JUNK. It does absolutely nothing, but they sell millions of dollars worth of this crap. JUNK

JUNK.

Now, we have filters, made to be as cheap as possible. Why? To sell millions of them. The lube shops need a product that costs them pennies, that they mark up and can still make a profit on, but do they do ANYTHING? They only cost a buck, do you really think that they do anything?

If they work just fine, then why do they sell $3 filters? Why would a $3 filter be needed? Why are there $10 filters? What is the marketing ploy here? Hey, our 50c filter is a smashing success, it performs so well you don't need anything else, except... uh... this $3 filter is better...

Am I stupid?

How about this.

The 50c filter does absolutely nothing. It filters nothing, but it persuades jq public that he has a filter. The shop owner gets them cheap, marks them up, makes a few cents on them but sells a $19 oil change. IF you come in every 3K miles, then the fact that they do nothing whatsoever will not damage your engine because you are keeping the oil clean simply by changing it every 3K miles.

IF on the other hand, you don't do the 3K oil change, if you let it go to 5K or 10K do you think the engine just dies? Of course not. It just wears out faster because now there are particles of crap wearing the sliding and rolling surfaces.

So... the poor guy buying the 50c filter doesn't know it, but when he doesn't keep his oil clean by changing it every 3k miles he is wearing out his engine. This would not happen if he had purchased a $5 filter, even according to the people on this forum. Everyone seems to agree that a $5 filter is better than (most will say MUCH better than) a 50c filter. But the point here is that the person who manufacturers the 50c filter can safely sell them by them millions. The engines don't just quit when the filter fails to do anything, they just wear out after 100k miles instead of 200k miles.

Now, PROVE that it was the 50c filter that caused the engine to wear out!

I have NO PROBLEM defining junk. Junk is a product designed to be so cheap that it fails to perform the stated objective. PROVING that it fails to perform the stated objective is the problem. I can't do that,and neither can you, and that is EXACTLY why the scam can continue.

What I CAN prove is that the filter is designed to meet a price point, so that the lube shop owners will buy them. THAT is what they are designed for, NOT protecting your engine. If you believe that they are designed to protect your engine then I have 10 million dollars in a bank account that I will share with you, and all you have to do is send me a thousand dollars to pay off an official in Nigeria.

I am always amused by the copius posters that say something like "I use these $1 filters and they work GREAT".

Uhhh... OK. Sure they do. Or they do absolutely nothing and you THINK they work great. Either way, if you are happy, and you sell your car before the engine wears out from unfiltered oil, all is well.

Personally, I use a bypass and a Mobil 1 FF filter, and I use synthetic oil. I spend hundreds of dollars a month between car payment, insurance, gas, maintenance etc. Why in the world would I try to cut costs by putting a trash (junk, POS etc) filter on my car?

Please help me get my money out of Nigeria guys. All I need is a thousand dollars to pay off ....
 
quote:

Originally posted by Bryanccfshr:

I do enjoy these "discussions" as they pass time. I have been watching the media closely awaiting the crisis caused by the evil oil filter companies ruining a large percentage of cars on the road.
rolleyes.gif


lol.gif

Like you would even know? You make it sound as if the engine just grinds to a halt when a filter fails.

pat.gif
 
quote:

Originally posted by John W. Colby:

quote:

Originally posted by Bryanccfshr:

I do enjoy these "discussions" as they pass time. I have been watching the media closely awaiting the crisis caused by the evil oil filter companies ruining a large percentage of cars on the road.
rolleyes.gif


lol.gif

Like you would even know? You make it sound as if the engine just grinds to a halt when a filter fails.

pat.gif


Like I am going to risk the cars I have in my garage. I run A supertech in a 2004 vehicle with no qualms(it is the older style ) while I run a motorcraft fl400s in the other one. (I don't actually care about the longterm for the BMW so whatever the dealer says is fine it's theres in the end)

The point is who is meeting a price point. How much better is a $10 filter compared to a 3-5 dollar filter? Who gets 50cent filters???

The point is this is mountains out of MOLE hills. Will I continue using SUpertech filters? I don't know I will let THe results guide me. I may change the car using supertech over to a motorcraft filter. I will not spend 10 dollars on a filter. It doesn't make me feel like I am doing my car any favors by spending twice as much for perhaps a single digit real world performance gain.

cheers.gif



Of course you see this differently. You are a bypass running type of guy. If I did many many miles I would be in your club, but To be honest I don't drive that much. I run more mileage in my work truck that I have no attachment whatsover to than all my other vehicles combined.
For some there is no value in paying premium prices. I will take premium products at sale prices in a heartbeat! Percieved value.
 
quote:

Originally posted by Bryanccfshr:
[I will not spend 10 dollars on a filter. It doesn't make me feel like I am doing my car any favors by spending twice as much for perhaps a single digit real world performance gain.

cheers.gif


First of all, if you are talking about $5 filters as opposed to $10 filters I am not even addressing you. The $5 filters don't seem to be the subject of this "discussion". If you are talking about $1 filters vs $5 filters then I am.

The problem with your statement is the question of "single digit real world performance gain". You state that as if that is fact. Consider that a $1 filter probably simply does NOTHING. A $3 filter actually filters something and lives long enough to be worth $3.

The Algebra class I took as a freshman in High School told ME that the difference between 0 and ANYTHING is infinite, not "single digit".

And my beef isn't with YOU CHOOSING to use a $1 filter. You get on these forums, read, analyze and make a decision. You are at least informed.

My beef is with a system that sells these pieces of junk to the public, professing that they actually do something, knowing full well that they don't. The rationalization (I can sleep at night ripping off the public because...) IF they change their oil every 3K miles their engine won't be damaged. Or... (and I LOVE this one) "what do they expect for $1".

Excuse me but a scam is a scam, and the public does NOT know this is going on. AND IF they DON'T change their oil every 3K miles then their engine IS being slowly damaged.

I mean even your own response does not argue that the $1 filters aren't junk, but rather why you will use them anyway.
 
I still don't use $1 filters, I don't use frams which aren't "cheap"(although I have had frams by differnt names installed by dealers on my wifes car before)

I did buy a couple of supertech filters (3950's)due to the compliments they recieved prior to the Ecore thing has got everyone up in arms. .
I have about 5k on one right now. I will sample and tear into it when I change the oil and the second supertech will be installed. If the results are good for 5-7k mile changes I can't see the beef. Yes we are informed here and I am taking a calculated risk, and knowing what I know now will probably be more selective of bypass valves on filters and there locations(I already am choosing the FL400s by Motorcraft for my Taco).
offtopic.gif


At issue here is a poster with interest(although divested he is still loyal)in a particular company. And we have another poster with some interesting photos of filter failures but no real documentation other than most these filters came out of a bulk used oil bin.

Niether source is exacley the best to take at face value. I hold no grudge against either but people hold interest and beliefs and make the mistake of starting a debate based on a conclusion rather than putting together the facts. In either case we need more than one corraberating source.


The reason is because we are dealing more with a people issue here than a filter issue.
It is unfortunate and I have recently been dissapointed with an individual I had no reason to distrust professionally. Yet after backing the man up after an incident I find out that he lied to me. To protect his own interest he was willing to do the unmentionable (self inflicted injury) and lied about it.

I have lost alot of faith recently at taken anyone for therre word in person...so forgive me in doubting much I read here.
nono.gif
 
Brian, I had uncovered the ownership lineage of that company, which was shocking, those posts were nuked without explanation.
Very odd.
 
Well, J-dubbya ...here's the little glitch here that seems to have escaped some.. aside from some ecore issues ...all the weight of the "stain" is with Warners ..the lowest of the low end stuff. You yourself have no problem using a Champ filter. So the same incompetent, lame, greedy, could care less manufacture made the filter (M1 ff) that you use on your car. How in the world can you, after seeing what they have no lost sleep over marketing such trash ...get the impression that they also wouldn't sell you expensive trash with the M1 ...just throw a fancy label on expensive junk. I see that all the time too. There are plenty of Mainline people that are daily examples of nature's way of saying that they make too much money. Some pay for distinctive items ...but most pay for standard stuff that is just priced too high. What do they care? They just make it go away with more money.

So, you, and everyone else has transferred lubeowner's experience to the entire Champ line ..EXCEPT for the one that you use. In spite of others experience, they are the risque fools ...and others are ingenius for using a filter from the same lame manufacturer.


How does this add up in any court of sensible rational? No one here is using Warners. Yet anything that is below your criteria of "acceptable" is trash?
dunno.gif



This dialog has been entertained since its byproduct is a substantial number of hits in the oil filter section ..where before it was, although functional and informative, rather boring. That is, the drama (however mellow) has its content value to many. This is an ongoing bout in the WWE. Most of it is bs ..but occasionally you see a few trick moves that break up the usual predictable activity. This is a Roman Senate debate "in the round", where various philosophers are tuning their verbal sabers for the audience in the gallery.
wink.gif


Oil filters are manufactured for target markets. Their quality varies accordingly. It's that simple. Even in the informed ranks of BITOG, the use of any oil/filter combo beyond 3-6k would be the exception. By that I mean that if you tabbed up the 5k and under ..they would far out number the 5k and over. In probable reality, we're seeing 3month, 4 month, or 6 month usage patterns. Under that view, it would be reasonable to imagine that most of the ailments that one might see in any filter ..would be far less likely to occur (Fram's lame ADBV excluded).

For all you know J-dubbya ..there is exactly the same incidence of failure with your M1. It's made by the same manufacturer ..but due to its expense we've only seen ...in fact I can't remember the first time I've seen one pulled apart (I'm sure there is at least one). So, how do we know that the $$$ spent equal quality?

On the other hand, we've seen tons of ST's opened up without apparent damage or defect. Yet this bona fide evidence is "without merit".
dunno.gif


[ June 12, 2005, 05:13 PM: Message edited by: Gary Allan ]
 
quote:

Originally posted by Gary Allan:

So, you, and everyone else has transferred lubeowner's experience to the entire Champ line ..EXCEPT for the one that you use.


No, in fact that is my point exactly, I do NOT hold the entire company in disdain, I do NOT believe that every thing they make is crap. In fact I have stated in so many words that (apparently) the only slightly more expensive filters seem to be just fine. I believe that they are making a specific line or set of lines of filters that are crap. I think the company is quite capable of making a quality product, and do in fact make quality products.


How does this add up in any court of sensible rational? No one here is using Warners. Yet anything that is below your criteria of "acceptable" is trash?
dunno.gif



LOL, what have you been reading? Anything that is JUNK is not acceptable. I defined JUNK. "A product designed to meet a price point so low that it can no longer perform it's stated objective". Yea, anything below "able to perform its stated objective" is trash!!!

My criteria of acceptable is "able to perform its stated objective". Is that a bad thing?

I am stating the obvious, which no one attempts to deny. The low end filters are made for one thing only, to sell to the lube shops for next to nothing so that they can say they put a filter on your car. Which is true, they put a filter on your car. Does it do anything however?

Ahhh.... well, everyone avoids that question like the plague. I don't hear anyone contesting that the higher end filters actually filter, and actually stick around long enough to filter something.

I only hear one specific individual claim that the junk filters are also "just fine", almost everyone else readily admits that you should buy a better filter if you want it to work.

The problem of course is that JQ Public doesn't read these forums and he is being sold junk, without his knowledge.


Oil filters are manufactured for target markets. Their quality varies accordingly. It's that simple.


My point exactly. The quality varies from "hey it only costs a buck, what do you expect" junk to the $10 filters that most actually acknowledge will filter a substantial % or the trash down to 10 mic rons or so.


Even in the informed ranks of BITOG, the use of any oil/filter combo beyond 3-6k would be the exception.


And in the meantime, ALL the new chevy's are putting in oil monitor computers that tell their owners to change their oil at 10k miles or so (depending on driving patterns of course). But... and here's the catch, the lube shop owner is still selling the junk that essentially does nothing, expecting the user to return in 3k miles for an oil change. But the car says 10k miles. Hmmm... who's car is going do die a premature death, and why? And was he informed that he has a junk filter?


By that I mean that if you tabbed up the 5k and under ..they would far out number the 5k and over.


Maybe, but less and less as the computer says "I'll tell you when to change your oil".

And in the end, that is an excuse for allowing the sale of junk - "it doesn't matter" seems to be what you are saying. Why don't we just excuse the process instead of holding their feet to the fire?

And this coming from senior respected members of BITOG.
pat.gif



For all you know J-dubbya ..there is exactly the same incidence of failure with your M1. It's made by the same manufacturer ..but due to its expense we've only seen ...in fact I can't remember the first time I've seen one pulled apart (I'm sure there is at least one). So, how do we know that the $$$ spent equal quality?



We don't of course if none of this exact filter has been pulled apart. What we do know is that only the junk filters are showing significant quantities of failures. LubeOwner says he has opened many of the more expensive filters and hasn't had any failures to show, and that he only shows pics of the failures, i.e. no failures, no pics.


On the other hand, we've seen tons of ST's opened up without apparent damage or defect. Yet this bona fide evidence is "without merit".
dunno.gif


Nope, that is very much merit. If a product CAN BE MADE for a very low price and still perform, then more power to them, they should win the business. I have no beef with ANY product that performs as it claims to perform, reliably of course.

This is not about bash the low cost product, this is about bash the junk. There is a difference, and I have absolutely NO problem giving credit where credit is due, and I likewise have no problem bashing the junk.

OTOH, there has been a ton of "defend the junk" noise in here. Why? Why do we need junk? If it is indeed possible (as you claim) to make a filter for a very low price that isn't junk, then why not promote that, and abandon the junk?

[/QB]

 
John W. Colby

I have told you and everyone else the amount of filters returned to Champ on an annual basis.

Which for your edification is less, by number/quantity, than their competitors. It is much less by % of filters built on an annual basis than their competitors. ( and how does Champ know..and probably their competitors as well... because people leave Brand X and go to work for Champ and vice versa. And as Champ was purchased 2 years ago, that company looked at other filter companies and settled on Champ. One reason being Champ had less warranty issues.)

Champ builds about 500,000 filters per day.

Champ had approximatly .005% of one days production returned for analysis or warranty last year. Lord only knows what that means percentage wise of a years production. This is for ALL brands that they make.

Now if others want to tell us how this brand or that is crap or cheap filters are falling apart, then YOU post your stats. If you say 50% of Warner filters are crap, then you're talking millions upon millions. If you pick any other private label brand that Champ makes, then agains it's millions upon millions. And yet, the real stats tell a different story, don't they?

You can claim that the overall vast majority of filters aren't cut open. Fair enough. That is true of EVERY filter manufacturer. Even those other filter companies who have more filters returned every year.

But if an engine fails or needs repair and the filter is thought to be the potential culprit, people send them back to every filter manufacturer. One poster in here got his money from Champ and he's stated that twice in two different threads. And Champ never even knew he posted on this forum for everyone to know how he was treated....lol.


And since I brought this up about people in here using Champ filters, who after reading about a filter problem because of pictures, it seems some have posted they've cut open a number of Champ built filters and never seen the same problems. So we'll put them in the 99.995% of one days production who didn't need to send the filter back.
 
My criteria of acceptable is "able to perform its stated objective". Is that a bad thing?

Not at all. So I should be able to get your nod that I'm not a total jackazz for using ST's when I've cut open virtually all of them and found ..nothing wrong. They appear to peform their stated task in my use.

Oil filters are manufactured for target markets. Their quality varies accordingly. It's that simple.


My point exactly. The quality varies from "hey it only costs a buck, what do you expect" junk to the $10 filters that most actually acknowledge will filter a substantial % or the trash down to 10 mic rons or so.


Even in the informed ranks of BITOG, the use of any oil/filter combo beyond 3-6k would be the exception.


And in the meantime, ALL the new chevy's are putting in oil monitor computers that tell their owners to change their oil at 10k miles or so (depending on driving patterns of course). But... and here's the catch, the lube shop owner is still selling the junk that essentially does nothing, expecting the user to return in 3k miles for an oil change. But the car says 10k miles. Hmmm... who's car is going do die a premature death, and why? And was he informed that he has a junk filter?


You've got some good points there. I would only offer that the quickie lube shop is at fault for selling a product that is designed along the lines of a 3k life span (which the quick lube and many oil companies tout as sensible). I'm sure that they fall into a presumed majority of some demographic that uses such a service. I don't imagine too many high end Euro alloy ..or high end domestic iron using those services beyond 3k on a regular basis ...if the owners actually have anything "regular" to their maintenance habits.

Somehow, I don't see many people with OLMs showing up at quick lubes. I could surely be wrong, but somehow the guy putting the sticker on the windshield to remind the person to come back in 3000 miles just doesn't fit with the image that I see. This will naturally change as the technology gets filtered down via the used car market.

I'd love to see a survey sample of what shows up at a typical quick lube. Lube owner appeared to say that "a few" of his clients were 2002 cars and such ...so, in his experience, it would appear that virtually all of them are post warranty ..and maybe even on the second owner.

And in the end, that is an excuse for allowing the sale of junk - "it doesn't matter" seems to be what you are saying. Why don't we just excuse the process instead of holding their feet to the fire? No, not at all. There's a reason that this type of product is sold ..there is a market for it. All commercial entities have modified products for commercial use. Some are enhanced ..some are detuned ..both due to economics of the sector that they cater to.

I don't, btw, see how you extracted any of that from my post. I don't endorse using anything that is substandard. There are those who obviously do.

I will leave the insult intact.

On the other hand, we've seen tons of ST's opened up without apparent damage or defect. Yet this bona fide evidence is "without merit".

Nope, that is very much merit. If a product CAN BE MADE for a very low price and still perform, then more power to them, they should win the business. I have no beef with ANY product that performs as it claims to perform, reliably of course.


Well, then we can agree here ..at least on this point.
 
Originally posted by Filter guy:
John W. Colby

I have told you and everyone else the amount of filters returned to Champ on an annual basis.

Which for your edification is less, by number/quantity, than their competitors. It is much less by % of filters built on an annual basis than their competitors. ( and how does Champ know..and probably their competitors as well... because people leave Brand X and go to work for Champ and vice versa. And as Champ was purchased 2 years ago, that company looked at other filter companies and settled on Champ. One reason being Champ had less warranty issues.)



All of that means absolutely NOTHING. Sorry FG, it is just meaningless. This is a product where % of failures reported is simply unrelated in any meaningfull way to quantity produced. YOU KNOW THAT. This is not a tire where a failure is seen. This is not a belt where a failure causes the air conditioner to stop working or the water pump to quit pumping and the car over heats.

This is a sealed can where failures are NEVER seen and are thrown in the trash. When a failure occurs, it causes it's damage, then is thrown away, and TWO OR THREE OIL CHANGES LATER the engine craps out. YOU KNOW THAT. SO KNOCK OFF THE NONSENSE, CAUSE I'M NOT BUYING IT.

How on god's green earth can a filter be shown to cause a failure when it was the filter three oil changes back that did the damage? PRETTY DARNED GOOD BUSINESS MODEL IF YOU ASK ME. Make trash and then are able to prove that THIS PARTICULAR piece of trash did not cause the problem!!!


YOU KNOW THAT 99.99% OF ALL FILTER FAILURES ARE THROWN IN THE TRASH WITHOUT EVER BEING DETECTED. Except of course in the case of a certain lube shop owner who cuts open a huge number, and whom you wish would go away because he is apparently embarrasing you.

[ June 12, 2005, 08:20 PM: Message edited by: Gary Allan ]
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom