Getting ready for the first oil change on a new Ford escape 2.0 ecoboost oem filter is the fl-910s.. It looks to be a great filter anyone using them over say a win or m1
Fl-910s on Ecoboost
- Thread starter CompGUY
- Start date
- Status
switch to an FL-400s. Same filter...just longer.
I will look to see if the larger filter will fit
Give the Ford engineers some credit and use the specified 910s. A larger filter equates to more flow resistance, which may not be helpful. What would you be trying to gain?
I suppose an M1 may theoretically be a superior filter, but for the price, quality and availability, Motorcraft is hard to beat.
I suppose an M1 may theoretically be a superior filter, but for the price, quality and availability, Motorcraft is hard to beat.
Both the FL-910S and FL-400S are the bomb IMO. If you're spec'd for the FL-910S give it a shot and see what it looks like afterwards. We use them on my son's Chrysler 2.4 without issue.
I recently cut one open here:
Motorcraft FL-400S and FL-910S cut open
I recently cut one open here:
Motorcraft FL-400S and FL-910S cut open
I really like the metal cremp on the 910..
I rarely use oem filters but the motorcraft look pretty decent.. Thanks
Originally Posted By: KCJeep
Both the FL-910S and FL-400S are the bomb IMO. If you're spec'd for the FL-910S give it a shot and see what it looks like afterwards. We use them on my son's Chrysler 2.4 without issue.
I recently cut one open here:
Motorcraft FL-400S and FL-910S cut open
I rarely use oem filters but the motorcraft look pretty decent.. Thanks
Originally Posted By: KCJeep
Both the FL-910S and FL-400S are the bomb IMO. If you're spec'd for the FL-910S give it a shot and see what it looks like afterwards. We use them on my son's Chrysler 2.4 without issue.
I recently cut one open here:
Motorcraft FL-400S and FL-910S cut open
dnewton3
Staff member
My 2.5L Fusion uses the FL910 filter style; I use the Wix 51348 often for this application. I'm impressed with those little filters.
I would advised against using a non-spec'd filter on a new vehicle while under warranty. Even though the possibility of a problem is remote, it gives the OEM wiggle room to place the issue into your garage, and make you prove it wasn't the problem.
I completely agree that the FL910 and FL400 are generally interchangeable, if the space allows.
But, I'll also note that for any normal OCI, there is essentially no performance difference in the two filters as far as engine wear protection. Today's lubes and engines run so clean, that the filters are secondary in protection. They are not worthless by any means, but they are not the first line of defense. Up-sizing a filter really does nothing overall in a normal OCI.
Going off the reservation, so to speak, in regard to lube and filter choices, places the burden of proof upon the user. While it does not relieve the OEM of their responsibilities, it places the efforts required to prove what happened (and more importantly "why") on the shoulders of he who chooses to stray from the recommended products. This is all about M/M Act law and case law decisions.
IMHO - it is not worth the risk, even though remote, to use non-approved products during warranty.
I would advised against using a non-spec'd filter on a new vehicle while under warranty. Even though the possibility of a problem is remote, it gives the OEM wiggle room to place the issue into your garage, and make you prove it wasn't the problem.
I completely agree that the FL910 and FL400 are generally interchangeable, if the space allows.
But, I'll also note that for any normal OCI, there is essentially no performance difference in the two filters as far as engine wear protection. Today's lubes and engines run so clean, that the filters are secondary in protection. They are not worthless by any means, but they are not the first line of defense. Up-sizing a filter really does nothing overall in a normal OCI.
Going off the reservation, so to speak, in regard to lube and filter choices, places the burden of proof upon the user. While it does not relieve the OEM of their responsibilities, it places the efforts required to prove what happened (and more importantly "why") on the shoulders of he who chooses to stray from the recommended products. This is all about M/M Act law and case law decisions.
IMHO - it is not worth the risk, even though remote, to use non-approved products during warranty.
Originally Posted By: Danh
Give the Ford engineers some credit and use the specified 910s. A larger filter equates to more flow resistance, which may not be helpful. What would you be trying to gain?
Please explain how more media area (larger filter) would decrease flow ("increase flow resistance" in your words)? Not calling you out here but the reverse is actually true; more media area equals more flow, or less resistance to flow.
General pontification:
While I agree the quest for larger filters is seldom a worthwhile endeavor for the vast majority of those who do it, there are some benefits to a larger filter in a general sense. The obvious ones are: increased contaminant capacity (for an extended OCI/FCI); more oil capacity; a reduction in differential pressure proportional to the differences in size (media area) between the spec'ed filter and the replacement (assuming the same or similar media).
The downsides relate mostly to the return on the extra investment. If you utilize the extra capacity in some tangible way, then you can get a payback, but if you don't, it's simply wasted money.
If you are under warranty, it's also a potential issue when filing a warranty claim with the OEM. Also, if the filter were to fail (and even the best of them do on occasion), would the filter mfr. stand behind it and replace your engine if it came to that? They'd have an easy out if you were running a non spec'ed filter.
Relating to payback on what would largely be considered the best reason for a larger filter, the increase in contaminant capacity, I polled several engineers in the filter industry about how much filter capacity is used in the passenger car and light truck venues over an average OCI/FCI. The answer was around 50%. Unless you have a special situation, that kind of negates the need for more capacity for most of us.
I'm not really "for" or "against" this in general. From a technical standpoint, there is little to decry but I think the choice should be made knowing all the facts and weighing the minor risks and costs vs the rewards.
Give the Ford engineers some credit and use the specified 910s. A larger filter equates to more flow resistance, which may not be helpful. What would you be trying to gain?
Please explain how more media area (larger filter) would decrease flow ("increase flow resistance" in your words)? Not calling you out here but the reverse is actually true; more media area equals more flow, or less resistance to flow.
General pontification:
While I agree the quest for larger filters is seldom a worthwhile endeavor for the vast majority of those who do it, there are some benefits to a larger filter in a general sense. The obvious ones are: increased contaminant capacity (for an extended OCI/FCI); more oil capacity; a reduction in differential pressure proportional to the differences in size (media area) between the spec'ed filter and the replacement (assuming the same or similar media).
The downsides relate mostly to the return on the extra investment. If you utilize the extra capacity in some tangible way, then you can get a payback, but if you don't, it's simply wasted money.
If you are under warranty, it's also a potential issue when filing a warranty claim with the OEM. Also, if the filter were to fail (and even the best of them do on occasion), would the filter mfr. stand behind it and replace your engine if it came to that? They'd have an easy out if you were running a non spec'ed filter.
Relating to payback on what would largely be considered the best reason for a larger filter, the increase in contaminant capacity, I polled several engineers in the filter industry about how much filter capacity is used in the passenger car and light truck venues over an average OCI/FCI. The answer was around 50%. Unless you have a special situation, that kind of negates the need for more capacity for most of us.
I'm not really "for" or "against" this in general. From a technical standpoint, there is little to decry but I think the choice should be made knowing all the facts and weighing the minor risks and costs vs the rewards.
I believe I will be staying oem while in the factory warranty period..
dnewton3
Staff member
Jim makes excellent points; I concur.
If one is out of warranty, and there is a large varied fleet that use the same gasket and thread pitch, then commonzing to a single filter for the sake of simplicity might be useful. Normal OCIs really are not going to show any benefit to the actual use; the equipment won't sense any tangible advantage. The advantage isn't to the equipment; it's to the person. Convenience, price, or a longer OCI is where a bigger filter might pay off.
I would caution however, that not only does warranty play into the OEM process, but ALSO the filter maker warranty. Even aftermarket filter makers will often deny warranty if you don't follow their recommendations.
If one is out of warranty, and there is a large varied fleet that use the same gasket and thread pitch, then commonzing to a single filter for the sake of simplicity might be useful. Normal OCIs really are not going to show any benefit to the actual use; the equipment won't sense any tangible advantage. The advantage isn't to the equipment; it's to the person. Convenience, price, or a longer OCI is where a bigger filter might pay off.
I would caution however, that not only does warranty play into the OEM process, but ALSO the filter maker warranty. Even aftermarket filter makers will often deny warranty if you don't follow their recommendations.
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
I would caution however, that not only does warranty play into the OEM process, but ALSO the filter maker warranty. Even aftermarket filter makers will often deny warranty if you don't follow their recommendations.
This should not be forgotten. The only brand of filter where I would even consider routinely oversizing would be Hastings/Baldwin, where their site actually lists the upsize filter number. At least there, there is some indication of which to use and a hint from the manufacturer that it will work and is acceptable. With other filters, you're doing all the research on your own.
I would caution however, that not only does warranty play into the OEM process, but ALSO the filter maker warranty. Even aftermarket filter makers will often deny warranty if you don't follow their recommendations.
This should not be forgotten. The only brand of filter where I would even consider routinely oversizing would be Hastings/Baldwin, where their site actually lists the upsize filter number. At least there, there is some indication of which to use and a hint from the manufacturer that it will work and is acceptable. With other filters, you're doing all the research on your own.
For these two filters they use the top/spring loaded bypass valve. This takes up a considerable amount of space within the filter. That reason, along with having more oil in the car, is why I like the FL-400S.
- Status
