Decision Time, Would like some input from the forum

Joined
Oct 15, 2011
Messages
471
Location
East TN
Lol I don't measure the weight of ash left from the hydrogen furnace destruction of the media. My bad. They all filtered the oil. Is that better?
 
Joined
Dec 26, 2005
Messages
18,684
Location
Upper Midwest
"Worked fine" doesn't really mean much of anything when it comes to oil filters. If it didn't show any signs of failure after its use (with a cut open for inspection), then it "worked fine", but tells you nothing about how it actually performed at keeping the oil clean - its main purpose.
True. By that measure an empty can with no filtering media would work fine.
 
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Messages
28,969
Location
PNW
Lol I don't measure the weight of ash left from the hydrogen furnace destruction of the media. My bad. They all filtered the oil. Is that better?
A piece of cheese cloth or a fine screen can filter too. Maybe just go back to just a piece of screen for an oil filter like the VW bug days in the 60s. 😄
 
Joined
Oct 15, 2011
Messages
471
Location
East TN
Since both of the posters above want to bloviate about empirical vs anecdotal rather than answering the op's question of "Considering if I'm doing 4-5K intervals, would there be any real-world difference?" Maybe its time to prune this thread. Or time for people to answer the op's question and show why any of the filters he asked about would be of any different outcomes in use.
 

Speedy3861

Thread starter
Joined
Jun 15, 2021
Messages
84
Location
Central Pennsylvania
Since both of the posters above want to bloviate about empirical vs anecdotal rather than answering the op's question of "Considering if I'm doing 4-5K intervals, would there be any real-world difference?" Maybe its time to prune this thread. Or time for people to answer the op's question and show why any of the filters he asked about would be of any different outcomes in use.
That would be greatly appreciated
 
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Messages
28,969
Location
PNW
Since both of the posters above want to bloviate about empirical vs anecdotal rather than answering the op's question of "Considering if I'm doing 4-5K intervals, would there be any real-world difference?" Maybe its time to prune this thread. Or time for people to answer the op's question and show why any of the filters he asked about would be of any different outcomes in use.
Go search the web and SAE studies and similar about engine wear vs oil cleanliness. It's been discussed for years in the Oil Filter forum. Cleaner oil is always better than dirtier oil, so one way to ensure that is to use a high efficiency oil filter. I'm still waiting for a study that proves otherwise. Buy one less Big Mac a year and put it towards a good 99% @ 20μ oil filter.

Or just slap any specified filter on an pour in any specified oil. I run oil and filters on my vehicles based on years of information boil down here and my own research, but not gonna recommend the same because everyone should choose based on their own product research and education. The products the OP wants to use will work fine for 5K and beyond. Then it's into hair splitting territory, which is also a thing on BITOG. ;)

 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 15, 2011
Messages
471
Location
East TN
I'm glad we were able to agree. You said "The products the OP wants to use will work fine for 5K and beyond." I said "All of those filters I've used, they all seemed to work fine, I'd see no difference from my perspective."
I have used microgreen, amsoil ea, Pure one and other purported high efficient filters in a quest to lessen the appearance of my oil when changing it and nothing seemed to help much. I have done used oil tests and its not a mechanical issue, its just that tgdi motors and my 2.0t theta 2 in particular is very sooty and has obvious gas in the oil. I run 2 catch cans and a lap3 uncle chip 93 octane tune. The oil comes out black like a diesel in 3500 miles, I've started leaving it in for 5k. I use only higher quality synthetic oil.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Messages
28,969
Location
PNW
I'm glad we were able to agree. You said "The products the OP wants to use will work fine for 5K and beyond." I said "All of those filters I've used, they all seemed to work fine, I'd see no difference from my perspective."
When it comes to filters I go for high efficiency, high holding capacity and low delta-p (ie, a good flower). Why assume a lesser filter is keeping the oil clean enough to mitigate any wear that a better filter could better ensure - that's my logic for my stuff anyway.

"All seemed to work fine" may not be as good as comparing measured ISO 4548-12 efficiency numbers, and ISO particle counts. And visual appearance of used oil doesn't tell you much of anything about its actual cleanliness, only an ISO particle count can.
 

Speedy3861

Thread starter
Joined
Jun 15, 2021
Messages
84
Location
Central Pennsylvania
Logic would dictate that the most efficient filters, ie: a 99%/25 micron vs a 99%/30 micron, would be the most flow restrictive. In real practice I doubt there would be any meaningful difference. After surveying the local options and availability, I've decided to go with the Mobil1 0W-20 EP and stay with the M110A filters as the price/availability situation favors that combination. I may try some Royal Purple filters at some point if feasible. It's unfortunate that in my immediate area, say within a 25-30 mile radius, that the availability of some products, like PPP and Edge EP is so limited. The outlets like NAPA, Federated, etc, don't seem to have consumer-friendly pricing as their primary mission seems to be as jobbers for dealers and independent repair shops. Locally, Advance seems to have more aggressive consumer prices and decent availability. Lately, both Advance and AZ are really promoting STP & Fram branded oils and filters. Those of us who prefer the Mobil1, Pennsoil or Castrol products have to shop carefully and watch the sales.
 
Joined
Dec 26, 2005
Messages
18,684
Location
Upper Midwest
Logic would dictate that the most efficient filters, ie: a 99%/25 micron vs a 99%/30 micron, would be the most flow restrictive. In real practice I doubt there would be any meaningful difference. After surveying the local options and availability, I've decided to go with the Mobil1 0W-20 EP and stay with the M110A filters as the price/availability situation favors that combination. I may try some Royal Purple filters at some point if feasible. It's unfortunate that in my immediate area, say within a 25-30 mile radius, that the availability of some products, like PPP and Edge EP is so limited. The outlets like NAPA, Federated, etc, don't seem to have consumer-friendly pricing as their primary mission seems to be as jobbers for dealers and independent repair shops. Locally, Advance seems to have more aggressive consumer prices and decent availability. Lately, both Advance and AZ are really promoting STP & Fram branded oils and filters. Those of us who prefer the Mobil1, Pennsoil or Castrol products have to shop carefully and watch the sales.
One might come to that erroneous conclusion if you didn't know how the media type affected it.
 
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Messages
28,969
Location
PNW
Logic would dictate that the most efficient filters, ie: a 99%/25 micron vs a 99%/30 micron, would be the most flow restrictive.

Test data says otherwise. It's funny how people form misconceptions about oil filter efficiency and flow without ever seeing any data on the subject matter.

 

Speedy3861

Thread starter
Joined
Jun 15, 2021
Messages
84
Location
Central Pennsylvania
One might come to that erroneous conclusion if you didn't know how the media type affected it.
There are so many variables, type of media, thicknesses, actual filter area, volume of canister, spin-on vs replaceable element, the actual viscosity of different weight oils, temperature and undoubtedly more. Other than testing a specific filter using a specific engine at normal operating temperature with a specific oil. Even then there's more variables, age of oil, actual pressure and it's usage, new vs after 5000 miles. Is there a somewhat standardized method of testing filters for flow & restriction? Other than having a basic understanding of physics, how do you make a comparison and come to a conclusion that's valid?
 
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Messages
28,969
Location
PNW
There are so many variables, type of media, thicknesses, actual filter area, volume of canister, spin-on vs replaceable element, the actual viscosity of different weight oils, temperature and undoubtedly more. Other than testing a specific filter using a specific engine at normal operating temperature with a specific oil. Even then there's more variables, age of oil, actual pressure and it's usage, new vs after 5000 miles. Is there a somewhat standardized method of testing filters for flow & restriction? Other than having a basic understanding of physics, how do you make a comparison and come to a conclusion that's valid?
ISO 4548 (has 12 different sections), has been used for over 20 years in the filter industry all over the world (it's an International standard) to measure oil filter performance and quality - more than "somewhat" a standard I'd say. ISO 4548-12 is specifically for filter efficiency testing.

Regardless of all the variables, IMO a filter that is higher in efficiency, has more holding capacity and less delta-p per flow is better than one that isn't. People are always trying to find the "best" oil and air filters ... so why not also with oil filters - it's one of the pieces that make up the trifecta of keeping an engine in good health. Sure, some people don't care about the using the "best" products, but only go for "good enough" that usually (but not always) cost less than the higher priced products that can be shown to be somewhat better.
 
Last edited:

Speedy3861

Thread starter
Joined
Jun 15, 2021
Messages
84
Location
Central Pennsylvania
ISO 4548 (has 12 different sections), has been used for over 20 years in the filter industry all over the world (it's an International standard) to measure oil filter performance and quality - more than "somewhat" a standard I'd say. ISO 4548-12 is specifically for filter efficiency testing.

Regardless of all the variables, IMO a filter that is higher in efficiency, has more holding capacity and less delta-p per flow is better IMO than one that isn't. People are always trying to find the "best" oil and air filters ... so why not also with oil filters - it's one of the pieces that make up the trifecta of keeping an engine in good health. Sure, some people don't care about the using the "best" products, but only go for "good enough" that usually (but not always) cost less than the higher priced products that can be shown to be somewhat better.
Interesting, given the ISO 4548, that you usually don't see any real hard data on consumer oil filters. So price "should" be the indicator using the "buy once, cry once" formula, logically a $15-25 filter should offer better protection than a $3 one. Generally, the price, type of media, construction, rating, % of efficiency is the only thing we have to make comparisons, other than manufacturer advertisements & claims, endless YouTube video comparisons testing with improvised setups. You're correct, some, not all, want the best available, that's one of the values of this forum, it's still hard separating fact, fiction, rumor, opinion and reputation. Sometimes adequate, better & best get blurred, but generally good and cheap don't come in the same box. Retired from a long career in Biomedical Engineering where we have specific tests for most everything including the instruments we test with. I do appreciate the guidance and suggestions here, some based on experience, some actual testing. Sometimes it's difficult choosing from the top of the pyramid as well, this forum is truly helpful.
 
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Messages
28,969
Location
PNW
Also, keep in mind that higher efficiency oil filters do more good the longer the OCI is because wear from contaminated oil boils down to the cleanliness level times the number of times the sump volume is pumped through the engine over the OCI. I typically will use an oil filter that is at least 95% @ 20u even on short OCIs. Using high efficiency oil filters surely can't hurt anything except costing you a few dollars more every filter change.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Dec 26, 2005
Messages
18,684
Location
Upper Midwest
Interesting, given the ISO 4548, that you usually don't see any real hard data on consumer oil filters. So price "should" be the indicator using the "buy once, cry once" formula, logically a $15-25 filter should offer better protection than a $3 one. Generally, the price, type of media, construction, rating, % of efficiency is the only thing we have to make comparisons, other than manufacturer advertisements & claims, endless YouTube video comparisons testing with improvised setups. You're correct, some, not all, want the best available, that's one of the values of this forum, it's still hard separating fact, fiction, rumor, opinion and reputation. Sometimes adequate, better & best get blurred, but generally good and cheap don't come in the same box. Retired from a long career in Biomedical Engineering where we have specific tests for most everything including the instruments we test with. I do appreciate the guidance and suggestions here, some based on experience, some actual testing. Sometimes it's difficult choosing from the top of the pyramid as well, this forum is truly helpful.
Only some manufacturers report the results. If filtering efficiency is important to your purchasing decision then I would definitely suggest you purchase a brand that takes the time to report the results. Price would not be directly correlated to efficiency.

Given that it's not really difficult choosing from the top of the pyramid.
 
Joined
Sep 10, 2010
Messages
3,194
Location
GA.
Our 2.0T's oil gets changed every 3K and no more than 6 months on 5/10w30. Other than that, it gets M1HM 10w30 (higher HT/HS than regular 10w30) or 5W-40. The 2.0Nu came with 5w20 from the factory and i have used both 20 and 30.
*Wife's new Kia Solstice 2.0L Nu engine can take 5W20 , 5W30 or 10W30 oil weights (ditto for my '17 Sonata 2.4L although it won't see 5W20 ever again in that engine) ... I have decided to use 5W30 synthetic in the new Solstice so I only have to buy one grade of oil between my '17 Sonata 2.4L and the new Solstice 2.0L Nu .
 

FZ1

Joined
Feb 7, 2008
Messages
4,841
Location
Texas
So, what I've gleaned from all this is the Mobil1 0W-20 EP & M110A I put in my wife's CRV should give better results than the AFE I've been using in regards to resistance to dropping out of grade and resisting the effects of dilution. The M110A is ok, but the Purolator Boss might be a bit better. As far as my CRV, at 13k, I should consider trying the Castrol Edge 0W-20 EP and Boss or Royal Purple filters. Either oil should work, but the Castrol is more consistent in it's formulation. With the 1.3% dilution I've experienced, probably 4k changes would be prudent as well as a UOA for both to confirm improvement. I think the AFE is off the table for future use in the CRV, even though it did well in my Civics, just doesn't seem to have the base stock fortitude for Honda's 1.5t in the CRV. I've used nothing but the M110A filters for years, but now there may be a better choice.

Thanks for the information and advice. I'll try to post back after the next UOA.
Think you are correct. I've run both 0w-20 EP and AFE in my 2.4 Camry. My Camry is smoother, initially, with the AFE, but. the AFE seems to thin more quickly than the EP. I just extracted my AFE at about 2700 miles of many short, hot, drives. Let us know if you "feel" any difference with the EP vs. the AFE.
 
Top