Collapsed filter media revisited

ZR2RANDO · Jun 15, 2005

Gary,
I don't know why you want to continue but okay here goes.
My pump has no problems with any filter including PureOnes. The Frams make noise until the oil warms up, other brands do not. The Fram noise even happened with new Fram filters.
Are you just trying to prove some meaningless point with me? Cause it ain't working.

Propflux01 · Jun 15, 2005

quote:

Originally posted by ZR2RANDO:
Good try Filter Guy,
You are not worth responding to.

Everyone is worth responding to. I just think that this thread has basically 2 opinions:

1. The filters are bad.
2. The user is wrong.

For me, it is interesting to hear both sides, even though I have not seen enough evidence from Filter guy, Gary Allen, or KcTom to change my mind on this subject, I still do consider all of them knowledgable, and respect thier opinion. It is what makes topics like this a good experience for learning.

Gary Allan · Jun 15, 2005

I've never said the user is wrong or at fault. I've point out what I preceive as flaws in reasoning. That's all. Call me whatever ..devil's advocate ..whatever. Personally I'll never use a Fram ..and if I see collapsed media in my ST's ..they will be history too. Others may move on as they please. Those with a small amount of available memory will have heard this from me for the 15th time.

Keep in mind here that there is more than filters driving this debate. It's personality dynamics and characteristics. People who are used to winning arguments and don't mind exploring them ad nausium. Some concede to the obvious ..others won't give an inch ..even to the obvious since their personality is not accustom to it.

Zman considered my "Fram is lame ...and I'll leave it at that" as some type of surrender ...instead of me being too bored/tired to continue on the endless story. He made a victory cheer ...so I said "Ok...as you wish" ..and on it went. He didn't address my points ..but basically bypassed them. We could go on ..but ultimately this is a matter of wills. It doesn't have squat to do with the lameness or virtue of one filter over another. Anyone should clearly see that. I've offered alternative POV ..and had it always ...routinely ..redundantly ...predictably turned into me defending defective filters. I've critiqued evidence provided as a substitute for proof ...I've challenged this and that ..but never have I said that any defect is a good thing. Either people are conditioned to cursory reading or they have integration problems between text and thought. I've offered items for discussion ..and all I've gotten is that I've "championed" some lame product. It's a standard techique in some circles ...facts and truth are secondary to the impression that you can create.

ZR2RANDO · Jun 15, 2005

"Gary- guess that pretty much settles the Fram quality issues. Sorry, I didn’t consider it getting dragged off on a sub-topic..I thought we were actually discussing crap( Fram ) filters.
Wanna talk about cheap Champs now?"

You think that was a victory cheer?

Whatever Gary, I just thought we were finished.
At this point however, concerning crap Fram filters discussion with you, I am finished.
Say whatever you want to.

Gary Allan · Jun 15, 2005

How about ...sorry, pal ..bad blood sugar day??

Propflux01 · Jun 15, 2005

When you play 'devils advocate', You will fall under one of the two choices I posted earler. you will either be defending the user, or defending the filter. In this case, I percieve you defending the filter, even though by your own admission you would not use the particular brand for the same reasons your 'advocating' against.

Filter guy · Jun 15, 2005

Tim H..good because i'm in your State..lol. Been to Texarkana, DeQueen, Ft. Smith, Springdale, Russellville, Little Rock ( where I am at the moment) Stuttgart, Jonesboro..time to head back to Big D tommorrow after some LR calls and Hot Springs on the way back..

As for your reply though, no filter company that I know of blows people off. If it's a one of, what can they say? If there is a pattern, then they can adjust. But if they don't know..as I asked the quiet one Rando..how can they do anything?

Same with the OEM. Someone comes into the dealership with a complaint. It is recorded. Corporate is notified. How does one explain the service bulletin about Cummins engines and Fram? Was it because of one owner? or multiple? Naturally it is because of numerous service writers across the country notating the same thing. Not because everyone went running to Fram because it is the OEM who sends out the service bulletin. However, the filter manufacturer, by this time, also has their own information and believe it or not the OEM usually contacts the filter company to see what they are working on to resolve the issue. Why? Because the OEM doesn't want their customers having problems anymore than the filter company does. So there is some collusion to resolve the issue.

And Rando..it would be nice if you played along instead of taking your ball home.

How many other vehicle owners, of your truck, had the same problem? Be honest, you don't know.

How can the OEM or filter company adjust to the situation?

But the rules of this thread is that as long as Rando is satisfied, that's all that matters. Not that others with the same engine and using Fram might not have the problem. They are not to be concerned with. If Rando has a problem, then his is the only problem that matters. 10,000 customers can not have a problem but that is not Rando's concern. His engine did, that's all he knows, he found a solution so everyone should heed his authoritative responce.

We should never ask about the oil pump, any sludge in the oil pan, you can eat off his oil pan it's so clean. We can't question the engine tolerances being off or at the limit or just outside the spec on the upper end of his engine. We can't ask about the oil and grade he used. We can't ask if there is any carbon in the upper end. We can't ask about overheated oil. We can't ask about cooling system issues. We can't ask if his crankshaft is installed and aligned properly. We can't ask about the mileage on the engine. No siree bob. He changed filter brands, problem solved, take his ball home and we should just agree.. never ever question why he was able to resolve the problem and others never ever even have the problem using Fram.

So your right Rando..no responce is necessary. Your lack of responce speaks volumes.

But as an astute Fram user of years can you tell us in your experience when the last time was that Fram made a design change on the filter you used?

As Fram has built millions upon millions of those crap filters for umpteen years and continues to this day. One might ask, of all those who have your engine and using Fram, why are they putting up with that knocking noise. Must be 100,000's of them out there. All of them with the Rando's engine syndrome....if only they read BITOG they'd know.

Propflux01 · Jun 15, 2005

quote:

Originally posted by Filter guy:
Tim H..good because i'm in your State..lol. Been to Texarkana, DeQueen, Ft. Smith, Springdale, Russellville, Little Rock (where I am at the moment) Stuttgart, Jonesboro..time to head back to Big D tommorrow after some LR calls and Hot Springs on the way back..

Uh oh! I better straighten up!!

quote:

Originally posted by Filter guy:
As for your reply though, no filter company that I know of blows people off. If it's a one of, what can they say? If there is a pattern, then they can adjust. But if they don't know..as I asked the quiet one Rando..how can they do anything?

It is easy: Listen to people like me who frequent boards like this, without telling them that they know nothig of filters, and that it just has to be the user doing something wrong.

quote:

Originally posted by Filter guy:
Same with the OEM. Someone comes into the dealership with a complaint. It is recorded. Corporate is notified. How does one explain the service bulletin about Cummins engines and Fram? Was it because of one owner? or multiple? Naturally it is because of numerous service writers across the country notating the same thing. Not because everyone went running to Fram because it is the OEM who sends out the service bulletin. However, the filter manufacturer, by this time, also has their own information and believe it or not the OEM usually contacts the filter company to see what they are working on to resolve the issue. Why? Because the OEM doesn't want their customers having problems anymore than the filter company does. So there is some collusion to resolve the issue.

When someone goes to the dealer with a problem, yes, it is recorded. When you ask a dealer what he recommends for a filter, he will state "We only recommend our brand of filters for our vehicles" he will not say, Fram is great, or etc. he will state only what the manufacturer recommends and uses. Don't believe me? Have a major oil system-related problem on a warranteed car, watch them show you the bill you will be paying when they see that non-maufacturer oil filter on it. I have personally seen that happen, and have read about even more. If, say Fram, actually contracts with Cummins to specifically build filters under the Cummins name, and the filters have some kind of defect that causes a TSB or Recall, then yes, they will contact Fram and see what they are doing to fix it. However, if just alot of vehicles are comming in with Frams (or other brand) on them, and those vehicles are having problems directly related to the filter, The only person they will tell is the customer that the filter they are using is defective, and that you should use only genuine Cummins parts on your engine to maintain quality. they could care less about aftermarket, as every time an aftermarket part is used, The manufacturer loses money in both materials and labour.

quote:

Originally posted by Filter guy:
We should never ask about the oil pump, any sludge in the oil pan, you can eat off his oil pan it's so clean. We can't question the engine tolerances being off or at the limit or just outside the spec on the upper end of his engine. We can't ask about the oil and grade he used. We can't ask if there is any carbon in the upper end. We can't ask about overheated oil. We can't ask about cooling system issues. We can't ask if his crankshaft is installed and aligned properly. We can't ask about the mileage on the engine. No siree bob. He changed filter brands, problem solved, take his ball home and we should just agree.. never ever question why he was able to resolve the problem and others never ever even have the problem using Fram.

Again, just my point. in his case, and the cases of several others here on this board, changing filters DID solve his particular problem. As did others with the same symptoms. All other variables the same, his action of replacing a filter solved his problem. Taking this one step further, you can surmise that all the people who have ever posted just on this board alone, of having an ADBV of a particular filter fail, or that by changing nothing else BUT the filter, and relieving the symptoms, all drive different vehicles. Some Fords, Chevys, Yugo's whatever. these people are having similar problems, with the same brand of filter, on various engines, and in all the cases, changing the filters alone has solved the problem. In the big pic, this tells me the just because all the failures were not noted on just Ford trucks, does not mean there is not a potential problem over the AVERAGE use of the filter brand in general, over an Average spread of different cars.

quote:

Originally posted by Filter guy:
As Fram has built millions upon millions of those crap filters for umpteen years and continues to this day. One might ask, of all those who have your engine and using Fram, why are they putting up with that knocking noise. Must be 100,000's of them out there. All of them with the Rando's engine syndrome....if only they read BITOG they'd know.

This last paragraph is why I so disagree with your logic on it. Just because "Average Joe" finds a fix, and in spreading his 'findings' to others having the same questions manages to 'cure' thier ailments as well, he is not considered to be 'smart enough' to have possibly found a potential problem with a product. I would have never considered a bad filter a possible cause of MY start up knock if not for researching for info on here. Fram sure wasnt sending me any letters, but BITOG and "Average Joe" sure did...

Gary Allan · Jun 15, 2005

quote:

When you play 'devils advocate', You will fall under one of the two choices I posted earler. you will either be defending the user, or defending the filter. In this case, I percieve you defending the filter, even though by your own admission you would not use the particular brand for the same reasons your 'advocating' against.

Well, I don't know. And that's all I've asserted. I don't defend the filter......I question the accusatory tenets and pillars. The filter may be "guilty" as heck. Others don't know as well.

If it's the defense of the filter it's via proxy and under the misguided quest for truth.

I have only offered that Frams have been lame for a long time. Their ADBV are notorious in certain applications (others they are not). You know this ..I know this ...and the pinheads at GM surely have the brains to "know this" too. As does Zman and every other swinging third member out there ...yet (probably) the number 1 selling filter is probably Fram. For the plague that it has brought to the automotive aftermarket ..they pretty much are given carte blanche at destroying the American rolling fleet of consumer owned vehicles. They operate with apparent impunity in the casual ripping of the consumer wallet. Not only in a price/quality manner ..but in giving substandard performance in an important, vital, product.

This leads me to believe that the absolute importance of this product is regarded by many people that are smarter than I am (at least they make more money) in cost/benefit analysis have deemed this an inconsequential issue in terms of engine longevity....since they have not lifted a finger to do anything about it ..even when it can put them in financial peril (GM, FORD, HONDA, etc.). HONDA ..the flagship poster boy for reliability, spec's FRAM as OEM. How can they associate themselves with this lame product?

Now what have I just said? Did I ONCE say that Fram was a good product? No. Not once. It's a PIECE OF DODO.. .repeat DODO. I spit on it. I will buy one and run over it without thinking twice. It deserves to be given the gas chamber for its crimes.

..but automotive experts think that it's acceptable to risk their engines on...so what do I know??? Am I to assume that professional engineers, automotive designers, risk analysis experts, and others that compose the institution of automobile manufacturing are merely turning a (wink:wink) blind eye to the lameness of Fram? Do we have the delusion of grandeur and lone posession of some keen insight that allows us to have this knowledge ..that others of higher station are ignorant of??

Have I defended Fram? If I have I just fooled myself.

Gary Allan · Jun 15, 2005

Gary, how can you say that?

Easy :wink:
So according to you startup noises that routinely occur with one brand of filter and then go away when you use any other brand of filter, is NOT a filter problem?
Where did I say that? I believe I said that it doesn't necessarily mean the filter is not adaquately doing its intended purpose.

Those startup noises obviously indicate insufficient oil flow/pressure.
Well, in the case of a lame ADBV it only shows that it didn't hold. While this is a defect in that part of the filter, I haven't seen anyone show an increased wear UOA for using one

Insufficient oil flow/pressure contributes to increased wear.

Sure, but how does start up rattle equate to wear? I can only say that I don't like it ..and don't want to hear it...but I can't say that it significantly contributes to increased wear ...or if it does at all.

Is it going to kill the engine immediately? Of course not. Is the engine going to have reduced compression in years to come, maybe be a smoker later on in life…possibly.

Or not

Those startup noises that occur with Fram, and then don’t occur with other brands do indicate to me that the Frams are not doing a good job.

No it tells you that the ADBV isn't working. My point was ..this may not mean much of anything. For all you know the ONLY reason for an ADBV is to: 1) Prevent rapid back flushing of debris from the media. or 2) eliminate start up noise for the sake of customer peace of mind. We don't know that it reduces wear. We assume it does (please note the "we" thing, pal, before you take a chomp at me for this

)

That isn’t just “fun and whatnot”, that really does tell me whether the filter is doing a good job or not.

But for all we know ..that's all it could be

That is, let's take our covetted bypass filtration (by some anyway). Does it truly alter your probable longevity of your engine? Sure, if you keep it over 250k. So basically you're providing the junkyard with a clean engine. What if that's all you're doing with a more expensive filter?? Please view this as a discussion point ..and not me saying that I will seek out junk because I don't care. It's suggesting the possibility that I can care MORE than anyone and get, perhaps, NO RETURN on it (note the "suggestion" part of it).

There is just no reason to continue using a crap filter once you find out it is a crap filter. It may be difficult to exactly measure how much of a crap filter it actually is…I could care less…I’ll be using something else.

Absolutely. My only point is that we may just be dwelling on this needlessly ..as important as it appears to us (again ..please note the "us" part in that).

Those filter mfgrs know full well how to make a better filter if they want to…it’s just a matter of how many they can sell, and how much profit they can make. Personally, I am more concerned with my trucks than with their profit margin.

Sure they do, but most everyone will point out that there is no shortage of highmileage vehicles out there with plenty of life left in them with totally substandard maintenance. I'm not saying that anyone is unwise for buying the best filter ..or what they consider an adaquate filter ...but there is the overwhelming evidence that it's not necessary in the assurance of a long life for your engine.

Keep in mind Zman, I've installed massive 1um filters on my guinie pig as a full flow. I've had dual mounted BIG filters on my wife's jeep and even bypass/ff in tandem. I've paid for excellent filtration and actually love creating systems that exceed the need by a great deal. Think functional mechanical "bling" if you will (visions of some smackedazz that puts 37 chome shocks (for some reason always an odd number) on some show raised psuedo dune/off-road machine). I'm only suggesting that this may fall along the lines of "vitamin therapy" ...where the long life is already built into the genes ..and that we're only effecting it by fractional % points.

No ..I'm not saying that anyone should pay good money for junk.

motorguy222 · Jun 15, 2005

This is a little long.

As I have stated before,I worked in manufacturing for many years.

Something that is involved in this process is margins.

A part or product is supposed to meet certain standards.These standards have a certain amount of 'play' that is allowed.

As long as a part falls within this area,it is considered to be an acceptable part.

A manufacturer may choose to make this part at the lower end of this margin,it still may 'technically' meet spec,it is of a somewhat lesser quality than a part that is made at the higher end of the margin.

The degree of difference in the margin from excellent to acceptable may vary quite a bit.

It may even be stricter than the OEM requires,this would be a quality product.

It seems that in the area of oil filters,many are being made to fall in the lower end of the 'acceptable' area of the margin.

While it still may be acceptable,that is most likely all it is.

What is troubling is that the 'acceptable' filters are being touted as being up to par with others.

They state that the meet OEM specs,yet they fail withing recommended OCI's.

When this happens,they are not doing so.

This then brings up that they are failing because of owner abuse etc.

What abuse,they are being changed in the OCI recommended by the car maker.

If the filtres in question are not meant to be used over x miles or x months,this needs to be stated on the filter/box.

However,I have only seen such on Fram.

ST states that they meet manufacturers specs when changed according to the car maker.

I am not sure this is right.

From the many samples that have been seen here,it is not correct.

It is easier to make a filter that falls into a certan 'limit' than it is to make one that meets a more stringent set of standards.

For Example:

Filter A is made to fall in a certain area of margin with a plus or minus of say 10%.This means
that the filter can have a 10% margin of being better or worse that ideal(base filter).

It seems that this filter is made in the minus side of the equation,this saves money.

Filter B is made to a more stringent set of rules and will only accept a filter that is equal to or above the specs required.

This means that there is very little room for 'play' in there product.

The only room would be for it to be above the specs since it wont allow a filter that falls below 'base' to be sold.

This filter may or may not cost more.

It would depend on the total sales of the company in question and the amount of markup that they are sold with.

Propflux01 · Jun 15, 2005

quote:

Originally posted by Gary Allan:

..but automotive experts think that it's acceptable to risk their engines on...so what do I know??? Am I to assume that professional engineers, automotive designers, risk analysis experts, and others that compose the institution of automobile manufacturing are merely turning a (wink:wink) blind eye to the lameness of Fram? Do we have the delusion of grandeur and lone posession of some keen insight that allows us to have this knowledge ..that others of higher station are ignorant of??

Have I defended Fram? If I have I just fooled myself. [/QB]

No, but you have made my point, as well. This was what I was trying to say. Simple economics. They are not worried about that small number of 'joe averages' that may have a problem with thier filters. they think like what Filter Guy has posted. Make it the fault of the customer, not the product. make 'Joe Average' PROVE that his filter caused teh noise/wear. etc. then bash him becasue 4000 other people driving the same exact engine have not Reported The problem.

Filter guy · Jun 15, 2005

Tim H;

There is a line that gets my goat that some in here continue to post, probably because they have no other way of expressing what they want to say:
"Listen to people like me who frequent boards like this, without telling them that they know nothig of filters, and that it just has to be the user doing something wrong."

Now i'm going to ask..why is it when challenged to think about the service conditions that the filter sees ( is used under) one is telling the user he's doing something wrong?

Naturally people will get defensive about "their" car, how they drive ,what their maintenance is, and will defend "their" situation but maybe just maybe people reading these boards will recognize certain things about "their" usage.

A filter is a dead animal. It is only there to filter the oil. What comes into the can is what it is. Simple process.

People can post a picture of an element but we don't see what they poured out in the residual oil in the can. We don't see any metal parts or big pieces of contaminant or sludge present do we? No. We are to just analyse a picture without knowing more than what we see. And if one asks anything, well...you're blaiming the user.

It's not about blaming the user, it's about trying to gather facts about that one individual case. The more information shared, the more possibilities eliminated, the more one can focus on the causes. Because all we see is the effect.

The problem is there are some that have made their determinations and everyone else can be ****ed because you even have the audacity to ask.

Forums are about "sharing" information..imho..not refusing to. Forums are about sharing problems for solutions too. And switching filters might just be the solution -for that one engine-- but why is it many other owners may not ever have the same problem doing the exact same thing? If 1,000 or 10,000 or because of how many filters Fram sells maybe it's 100,000 owners be starting the exact same vehicle and not have the same problem?

While the owner of the vehicle who solved his problem by switching filters can claim success for him/her...there's no need to disparage those countless thousands of others who don't have a problem.

It's all well and good becuase as an individual you had a problem to claim foul, but the only time an OEM will issue a service bulletin saying don't use brand X is when the problem becomes documentable to existing at a certain level. Fram had that problem with the pickup truck Cummins engine. Of course Rando has gone silent as to why no service bulletin was issued on behalf of his OEM. And the logical conclusion would be because it rarely happened. So the OEM doesn't need to adjust their assembly of the engine or the filter company doesn't need to modify their filter construction.

But, hey, that's blaming the owner. I don't see it that way. I see Rando's situation as an anamoly to his one vehicle. There is a company who offers ALL the service advisories and OEM technical bulletins for each make model of vehicle. One would be surprised how many there are for their own vehicle. And these are not just the one's you get for a recall notice. You can't actually read them unless you buy their service ( as they are for the sevice repair biz) but you can read the title of the service buletin in case you are having a particular problem with your vehicle.

With filters, they ain't rocket science after all, their are a few components to the construction. The same design and components that have been used for 25 years or so. But wooooo if one person or a few have a problem. Then the conspiracy theories get thrown out about cutting corners or costs or poor design when nothings changed for years. (except media developement.)
---------------

As for your warranty issue about what a service advisor will say when you bring your vehicle in and your are using the non OEM filter.

That is why you show him the warranty from the filter manufacturer that says the use of their filter will not void engine warranty.

That is why, you tell Mr.Goodwrench, fine save the filter and i'll send it to the filter lab. If I get a service report back that says the filter was not the cause then what is your responce. Because at that point in time you have the filter manufacturers backing, their legal team, to back you up that the filter was not the cause of the problem. So it's funny how the OEM then warranties their engine at that point..
-------------------------------

"This last paragraph is why I so disagree with your logic on it. Just because "Average Joe" finds a fix, and in spreading his 'findings' to others having the same questions manages to 'cure' thier ailments as well, he is not considered to be 'smart enough' to have possibly found a potential problem with a product. I would have never considered a bad filter a possible cause of MY start up knock if not for researching for info on here. Fram sure wasnt sending me any letters, but BITOG and "Average Joe" sure did..."

Again this relates to what I have said at the beginnning of this post. One person or a few, or "some" can have a problem and solve it by switching filter brands. But while that solved "their" problem.....why is it thousands of others with the very same engine and using the very same part number filter never had the problem??? If others don't have a problem, do they have some better made Fram ( in this instance)? What makes the basic Fram filter on their engine not cause the same knock?

I do not see why you don't agree with this logic.

There's nothing you can do about how "your" engine was assembled. So it is not "your" fault.
It's not about being "smart enough".

The quick fix is to switch filters. That's the simple thing. But what I don't see is if...if... there is no service bulletin out warning a vehicle owner to not use brand X on their cars, then--to me--- it means that the problem was such a small percentage of vehicles made that have the problem that it wasn't worthy of a service bulletin.

If it's not worthy of a service bulletin then what? Just lay blame at the filter. Simple.

But that makes all those using the same part number on their engine and not having a problem "not smart enough" as well I presume? Becuase to take the logic to it's full conclusion one is inferring that those who use that filer on the same engine are stupid because it can cause engine knock. But it doesn't for "them". So how are they stupid? How is it the filters fault then?

I know, I know, i'm blaming the owner again...lol

[ June 16, 2005, 09:04 AM: Message edited by: Filter guy ]

Propflux01 · Jun 15, 2005

Again, waht you fail to see in my post, is that just because a service bulletin is not posted somewhere, does nOT mean that a problem is not happeneing!! Only people who take thier vehicles to a dealer for repair will get that particular problem 'noted'. the rest of us, who do our OWN maintenance, simply throw them out, and replace with another brand. This usually does NOT get 'reported'. Why is this so hard to comprehend?

There also need to be taken in account the any manufacturer has a built-in numerical percentage of products that will fail. your posting earlier of Champion labs "returns' proves this. since it is such a small number of reported instances, the manufacturer just accepts that as is, and goes on. Rolls back to the Majority is good, blow off the minority that are bad. Again, simple economics. I am not saying ALL filters are bad, just there are some that are, I beleive it is becasue of the design, and cheap manufacture, teh manufacturere knows this, and accepts that
1. it won't get reported.
2. people just won't notice
3. No one will believe 'average Joe' anyhow.

Are all these people, who have said they had a problem with a filter, who have changed it, and the problem WENT AWAY, wrong? If that engine was all sludged up, tolerance wide, etc. wouldn't the same problem still appear AFTER they switched brands? Seems to me common sense says it should.

John W. Colby · Jun 15, 2005

quote:

Originally posted by labman:
Doing some more thinking on this. I am not the least bit comfortable about the idea of my oil filter having a hole in the media. And maybe some of us need to take a closer look at filters we cut apart. Some of the stuff I see here isn't that apparent. When I strech the media out to measure it, you would thing I would see holes.

On the other hand, how long has Lubeowner been using Warners? Are there people that have been taking their car there for years with one Warner after another failing? Yet the car is still able to drive back in for another oil change? Big, serious problem?

Now I am not saying he should keep using dubious quality filters. Some problems you have to fix now. After all, I swore off Frams. How many engine warranties has he had to pay off?

The problem with that argument is that the engine probably doesn't just fail, it just doesn't last as long. If the car dies at 115K from a bearing failure caused by ugly oil back between 20k miles and 80k miles, how do you prove that? How do you sue?

You don't. You just chalk it up to a cheap car.

And this is the exact problem with all the "well I've been using these filters for the last 5 years" arguments. They don't prove that your engine hasn't been damaged, just that your engine hasn't been killed by the damage yet.

John W. Colby · Jun 15, 2005

quote:

Originally posted by Filter guy:
John W. Colby

I love your rant. And i'm sure there are a few other who probably feel as you do.

Thanks, now if you would just quit spewing garbage!

If only everyone in the USA cut open their filters.

But while you say it is meaningless that Champ has the lowest amount of filters returned, how can that be meaningless? What it does mean is those that DO have a problem, are more likely to have that problem with another manufacturers filter. Doesn't it? Simple as.

Everything is simple to a simple mind.

I love how you consistently ignore (refuse to comment on) the fact that ANY manufacturer never sees the vast majority of their failures.

So you spew numbers about infinitesimally small number of failures per million produced, but we all know that in statistics, if you only sample an infinitesimally small sample of the total, your statistics are meaningless. You have to have a meaningful sample size for the statistics to be meaningful.

Since 99.99% of failures are thrown away, your statistics are meaningless.

If you got 50% of the failures back, I would be most impressed with your figures. If you got 5% of your failures back, I would be most impressed with your figures. But since you only get .001 % of your failures back (never mind .001% of ALL the filters sold), I am just speechless that you would even publish such specs.

The facts that people don't cut open their filters and throw them away is the same for all manufacturers. Of course you want to focus on but one.

I am not focusing on any single manufacturer. I am not naming names, I just using the generic term "trash filter" or "Junk". YOU are the one that assumes I am talking about a specific manufacturer when I say JUNK.

Why is that?

Is that manufacturer's low end JUNK and you are therefore just assuming I am talking about that manufacturer?

BITOG has any number of people who cut open filters. What have they found? That is the relative sample that would constitute a "poll". As they use various brands of filters. And pay various amounts for them.

And we have had some of them report problems too, which you convienently ignore. Furthermore, in the end, BITOG members only use a total of .00001% of all filters sold so to try and make any statement based on failure rates in that sample is... well... meaningless.

"Liars, ****ed liars and staticians".

Spew away, but don't expect me to be impressed.

John W. Colby · Jun 15, 2005

quote:

Originally posted by pscholte:
Jackson, MS--While covering the annual Convention of Auto Oil Filter Manufacturers, over 20 radio and TV announcers fainted from the extreme heat and humidity plaguing the deep south. Medical officials said it was the worst case of collapsed filter media they had ever seen.

John W. Colby · Jun 15, 2005

quote:

Originally posted by Gary Allan:

GM will not void your warranty for using a Fram ..or a Warner ..or any other filter. Why? They don't care? ...or it doesn't matter that much? (the point being made on the "suggestive" reason for this)

And with a warrenty of 36K miles (on my Chevy Venture Van) it is pretty clear that no filter at all will not cause failures within the warrenty filter unless a handful of dirt is poured in the oil spout.

So what in the world does that have to do with anything?

On the other hand, would no filter at all cause a seriously worn engine out at 100k miles? That depends of course. It probably would NOT if I changed my oil every 3K miles, and it probably WOULD if I changed my oil every 10K miles (as the oil monitor computer tells me to).

Where does that leave us? That absolute and complete filter failures rarely if ever DIRECTLY CAUSES an engine to just quit working. Thus the filter companies can spew nonsensical "failure rates" with an absolute straight face, because the statistics, while meaningless, are absolutely true.

I love meaningless but true statistics.

Did you know that there is a toxic chemical - di-hidrogen mono-oxygen that is responsible for thousands of deaths every year due to Asphyxiation? It scalds millions of people every year. It causes erosion of our landscape, corrosion of our vehicles, rotting of almost every material it comes in contact with, it is just a nasty thing. But your water company sells it to you, and worst yet YOU BUY IT.

Meaningless but true statistics.

John W. Colby · Jun 15, 2005

quote:

Originally posted by Winston:

quote:

Well, I'll agree that Frams are crapy filters ...and leave it at that.

Click to expand...

Wow, that came out of the blue.

John W. Colby · Jun 15, 2005

quote:

Originally posted by ZR2RANDO:
TimH- 100% there buddy…

Gary- guess that pretty much settles the Fram quality issues. Sorry, I didn’t consider it getting dragged off on a sub-topic..I thought we were actually discussing crap( Fram ) filters.
Wanna talk about cheap Champs now?

This is a topic about crap filters…..

Uhoh, where's FG? Gonne get your butt kiked for that one!

Collapsed filter media revisited

Similar threads