Fram Endurance Flashlight Test in canister

[Glenda W.]

Ask him to correct the other two models, and where the original info came from, if you can or want to. Good plan to go to the top. Literally false advertising.
So no Fram, Purolator, and for me anything made in China or Vietnam. Unfortunately many people have stashes of filters they now don’t like.

Looks like only Korea is left for you unless Donaldson or Fleetguard make passenger car filters.

 

[RazorsEdge]

Certified rock catcher. How many years have they been getting away with this….

Yeah as much as I liked the Boss oil filter,at this point it's not going to be one that I personally use going forward.

I've used a Microguard Select so far and will be trying the Pentius xl oil filter.

 

[Fair enough]

Looks like only Korea is left for you unless Donaldson or Fleetguard make passenger car filters.

Zoro is pretty good for Baldwin. Found not good center hole punching on my Pentius plxl. I’m sure it will be dismissed as that’s how it is on product forums.
Add up the time spent, since you have now decided, why does it continue day in and day out. I may post a pic with my new China made cheap little iphone microscopes. But why.

 

[ZeeOSix]

^^^ What's wrong with them? Let's see a photo or two of those badly punched Pentius center tube holes. No mass produced oil filter is manufacturing problem free, but some are better than others as we see here.

 

[Glenda W.]

Zoro is pretty good for Baldwin. Found not good center hole punching on my Pentius plxl. I’m sure it will be dismissed as that’s how it is on product forums.
Add up the time spent, since you have now decided, why does it continue day in and day out. I may post a pic with my new China made cheap little iphone microscopes. But why.

Post up Pentius pics. If there’s bad QC we want to see. I don’t play favorites.

 

[RazorsEdge]

Zoro is pretty good for Baldwin. Found not good center hole punching on my Pentius plxl. I’m sure it will be dismissed as that’s how it is on product forums.
Add up the time spent, since you have now decided, why does it continue day in and day out. I may post a pic with my new China made cheap little iphone microscopes. But why.

Clear and in focus please

 

[Fair enough]

Post up Pentius pics. If there’s bad QC we want to see. I don’t play favorites.

Maybe, but you remember I posted clear pictures of the downsized PH4967, and people couldn’t believe it even with pictures? They make up stories this and that, but there is the picture. They still can’t believe it. So what is the incentive to make the time and materials effort? To get questioned if it’s true? About zero incentive. It’s a small sharp metal point coming from a punched hole. Not going on my engine. You are free to look at yours, I may or may not take a picture when I have extra time, and nothing to watch on tv.
I didn’t figure you play favorites.

 

[ZeeOSix]

It’s a small sharp metal point coming from a punched hole.

But will it break off easily if poked with something you can get on it? Jagged or rough edges on punched holes or formed louvers doesn't mean anything unless there are barely hanging chads on the edges that could actually break off during use. I've actually had a few filters with a hanging chad, and when poked it broke off, so that wasn't good. It's another thing I look for inside the center tube while inspecting the filter well before use.

 

[Glenda W.]

Maybe, but you remember I posted clear pictures of the downsized PH4967, and people couldn’t believe it even with pictures? They make up stories this and that, but there is the picture. They still can’t believe it. So what is the incentive to make the time and materials effort? To get questioned if it’s true? About zero incentive. It’s a small sharp metal point coming from a punched hole. Not going on my engine. You are free to look at yours, I may or may not take a picture when I have extra time, and nothing to watch on tv.
I didn’t figure you play favorites.

Unfortunately you’ll always get people who are so brand loyal they won’t believe anything. Some even take it to the next level and excuse tears and leaks. I for one would appreciate you posting pics of any defects you find. It’s important to have a track record of defects here for those of us who keep track.

 

[Alien]

I still think the filters BR tested had dirty oil leakage past ruffled leaf springs which brought their efficiency down to the level of the Boss.

I thought that as well, but when I looked at the particle counts, I don't think the leak theory holds water (or oil ):

If the oil had leaked around the filter media, I think we would see higher particle counts in all of the sizes, not just the smallest size.

 

[Glenda W.]

I thought that as well, but when I looked at the particle counts, I don't think the leak theory holds water (or oil ):

View attachment 259567

View attachment 259568

View attachment 259569

If the oil had leaked around the filter media, I think we would see higher particle counts in all of the sizes, not just the smallest size.

IMO the BR results are all over the place. We have filters that are identical with different results, we have multiple 99%@20 micron filters with different results, then we have a known rock catcher knocking it out of the park. The leakage theory is as good as any with possible different size leaks. Or this is simply proof that ISO standardized testing is the only way to get repeatable accurate results.

 

[Fair enough]

IMO the BR results are all over the place. We have filters that are identical with different results, we have multiple 99%@20 micron filters with different results, then we have a known rock catcher knocking it out of the park. The leakage theory is as good as any with possible different size leaks. Or this is simply proof that ISO standardized testing is the only why to get repeatable accurate results.

Thinking it over, the president of Purolator, or whatever the title, didn’t know what was on his or her own website. They called tech and they said 46 microns, same as they tell everyone.
In there somewhere are the people in the USA who performed the efficiency testing, and came up with the numbers. Or the ones who fabricated the numbers?
It isn’t quite over yet, if you are fair. Does not add up.
The standardized test is what it is, a lab test with concentrated test dust. Developed on best effort basis to mimic reality. Its not the same as modern clean running engines filtering oil. Also, something does not add up. They did the best they could to make a lab test, but is it reality?

 

[Glenda W.]

Thinking it over, the president of Purolator, or whatever the title, didn’t know what was on his or her own website. They called tech and they said 46 microns, same as they tell everyone.
In there somewhere are the people in the USA who performed the efficiency testing, and came up with the numbers. Or the ones who fabricated the numbers?
It isn’t quite over yet, if you are fair. Does not add up.
The standardized test is what it is, a lab test with concentrated test dust. Developed on best effort basis to mimic reality. Its not the same as modern clean running engines filtering oil. Also, something does not add up. They did the best they could to make a lab test, but is it reality?

I understand where your coming from but for me it’s over. I will not be supporting Purolator/M+H for various reasons including the efficiency debacle. It’s obvious the company has many problems going on.

BR is great youtube entertainment. No other value to me. Others seem to make decisions based on his results which I also find entertaining, but it’s a free country.

 

[Alien]

We have filters that are identical with different results

I assume you are talking about the Endurance, Royal Purple, and Amsoil filters. Whip City demonstrated convincingly in one of his analyses that at least two of them have different backing material on their media. He also mentioned that the media looked like it had been marked with different colored inks. Since they use different backing material and are color coded differently, the media may be different as well, which would explain the different results in the BR tests.

 

[ZeeOSix]

One thing I don't like about the BR "efficiency ranking" test is they only compare half of the PC data - ie, only particles 21u and larger. They need to show all the PC data ranges. They send the oil samples out for an ISO PC, so they have the data. They should also send each of the samples to two different labs that perform the ISO PC for repeatability comparison.

 

[Glenda W.]

I assume you are talking about the Endurance, Royal Purple, and Amsoil filters. Whip City demonstrated convincingly in one of his analyses that at least two of them have different backing material on their media. He also mentioned that the media looked like it had been marked with different colored inks. Since they use different backing material and are color coded differently, the media may be different as well, which would explain the different results in the BR tests.

Good to know!! Did they look different under the microscope at 100x?
They all claim 99%@20 I believe.

 

[ZeeOSix]

I thought that as well, but when I looked at the particle counts, I don't think the leak theory holds water (or oil ):

View attachment 259567

View attachment 259568

View attachment 259569

If the oil had leaked around the filter media, I think we would see higher particle counts in all of the sizes, not just the smallest size.

If you look at just the Royal Purple, Boss, Ultra and Endurance, one could say they all "rank" close to each other for the limited PC range data. Yet, we know what the ISO 4548-12 efficiency rating is of those 4 filters, and the Boss does not rank up with the other 3 in the ISO 4548-12 by a long shot. The Ascent ISO test also shows that. In fact, Ascent tested the same model of the Boss as shown in a M+H Spec Sheet dated in the same time period Ascent did his testing that show that Boss ISO 4548-12 being 99% >46u. I've posted that info side by side in other threads. Ascent showed that Boss was a bit better than the spec sheet showed, but it was still a far cry from the Royal Purple and Ultra he also tested along with the Boss. So all other data points to the Boss not ranking up with the RP, Ultra and Endurance like it did in BR's tests. BR's test is the only one showing that, and of course people latch on to that YouTube test not knowing the rest of the story or anything much about ISO 4548-12 efficiency test specs.

The RP, Ultra and Endurance all have leaf springs that have shown to have pretty good air gaps between the leaf spring and metal end cap (and no fiber gasket on the Ultra anymore) that can leak dirty oil past the media. So any leakage, and the level of that leakage would certainly hurt the ISO efficiency, and also show up in the BR test. It's been estimated that those ruffled leaf springs could leak 10% to 15% of the flow volume going through the filter. So if those 3 filters with leaf springs had some level of leaky leaf springs, and the Boss doesn't (no leakage, but just inefficient media), then that could be why they all ranked closer to each other than the ISO 4548-12 ranks them. Yet people believe a non-official efficiency test on YouTube vs the official world wide used since 1999 ISO test procedure data.

 

[ZeeOSix]

If the oil had leaked around the filter media, I think we would see higher particle counts in all of the sizes, not just the smallest size.

There are a lot less larger particles in the oil, so you lose comparison sensitivity as you look at larger and larger particles. That's why BR should be showing the entire range of the particle count data, not just the 21u and greater range.

 

[Alien]

Good to know!! Did they look different under the microscope at 100x?
They all claim 99%@20 I believe.

They do look a little different. The Fram looks more like chopped media (like microglass): you can see the ends of some of the strands, while the Amsoil looks more like media where it is almost all the same strand (like Fleetguard's Stratapore). The variance between the strand thickness is also different. So it is possible that the media is not the same. But I am far from an expert.

 

[Alien]

So any leakage, and the level of that leakage would certainly hurt the ISO efficiency, and also show up in the BR test. It's been estimated that those ruffled leaf springs could leak 10% to 15% of the flow volume going through the filter.

So why did the leaks that you hypothesis only allow particles less than 38 microns to leak in all three filters?