Fram Endurance / Walmart End of Life ?

It’s not the seating of the plastic valve itself….
It’s the seating of the spring plate as it sits on the filter top that has shown gaps using a flashlight.
For me, it’s a nothing burger…but for most here it’s “catastrophic”.
The final test is what’s in the used oil…and you’ve demonstrated the filter works as advertised.
Exaggerating about exaggeration !
 
I actually looked at one of the Fram filters close up (we put three of the Endurance filters into use during the last "family vehicle servicing") and found that the casting seam on the plastic bypass valve is no longer present. It's totally smooth, for a good seal on the valve. It's a marked manufacturing improvement.
You talking about no leaf spring metal stamping "ruffles" were seen? You have some photos?
 
I think I forgot to put in the most important results from that 3,330-mile sample supported by the Fram Endurance FE7317, namely the ISO 4406 numbers: 24/22/15.
If you look at the ISO particle count data in the table and graph below (from UOAs posted on this board), the Purolator Boss had an ISO code of 24/21/15 ... basically the same as your FE7317. But the OG Ultras (with a good leaf spring seal design) has an ISO code of 23/17/12 and 23/18/11. The FE is suppose to be as efficient as the OG Ultra (99+% @ 20u), but doesn't seem to be based on your ISO cleanliness code. Leaking ruffled leaf spring perhaps?

My interest is in the last one, as the first two are for particles >4 and >6 microns, respectively. That "15" is for particles greater than 14 microns, which to me is the more important of the three. @Jim Allen came up with an ISO number of "17" as an average for new oil in quart bottles via testing and obtaining data from other means. This means the Fram Endurance kept the oil "cleaner than new" for particulates greater than 14 microns, while the oil held the smaller and much smaller particles in suspension until the next oil change.
I'd like to see the clean oil ISO report. I doubt new oil in the bottle is really that dirty.

1752984602257.webp
 
USER=103610]@Glenda W.[/USER] , what engine, oil and time or miles-in-use combination generated the data for that chart? Definitely curious for more context.

OF
Member @twX was gracious enough to compile all the UOA particle count data posted and average by filter. Yours performed the same as a Boss indicating it does indeed have a leak.

IMG_6056.webp
 
You talking about no leaf spring metal stamping "ruffles" were seen? You have some photos?
No, I used an LED flashlight (with an extension used for inspecting a pistol barrel) but didn't take a picture. Not sure what you're talking about in terms of "ruffles."

In the end, it doesn't matter. It could be made of all the things people visually like or dislike when they cut open a filter, but I've come to the conclusion that a UOA is what matters. The filter performed well.
  • "The particle count is 24/22/15 and low insolubles show the oil filter did a great job keeping oxidized solids in check."
  • "Metals are in great shape after 3,330 miles on this oil."
The filter could be painted up to look like an Andy Warhol pop art soup can and have "ruffles" or other feature. At that price point and exhibited performance, it's a solid value.

I'd like to see the clean oil ISO report. I doubt new oil in the bottle is really that dirty.
Link to Jim Allen's Post

OF
 
Leakage point and ruffles below. Thank you for the particle count!! As suspected 15 brings a leaking Endurance to around OEM levels. A non leaker would most likely perform like the Amsoil(same filter) around 12.5.

IMG_6058.webp


IMG_6057.webp


IMG_6059.webp
 
Last edited:
That particular filter (yours), the bypass valve spring is badly bent. That's terrible.

Don't know what the function of the "ruffles" are. The sealing point on that particular design is the short cylindrical portion that pushes into the steel cap of the filter, not where those corrugations ("ruffles") are. The "ruffles" are a red herring in this examination.

That bypass housing / spring looks like somebody stepped on it, picked it up and assembled the filter with it. That is the focus item.

I had a used Endurance in the corner of my garage, so I opened it up. Same corrugations ("ruffles"), but this one wasn't bent like yours. It took effort to unseat the short cylindrical sealing surface of the valve from the filter steel end cap.

I put it back, and tried the same "test" you did. No "light leakage." Sorry, no pic, because all I got was the flashlight illumination at the bottom of the image, no light through the filter media (it was used, ergo dark), and no light through the valve or its spring steel assembly. So, instead of a cell phone, I tried using my Canon R7, and same result.

If that is truly the way that valve came out of your sample filter, that points to a significant QA issue during assembly. Mine was working, but yours was not. But, then again, this is a statistical sample of only two items.

Still, no filter should leave the factory looking like that.

I ran three vehicles on these filters for this test run (along with a NOS Mobil 1 M1-207) before switching back to my usual filter (AmSOil Ea15k13), but those used Fram filters are long gone since my last set of oil changes so I don't have the opportunity to open them up.

BTW, the M1-207 posted the same ISO numbers, but over a 6,500-mile interval with the recommendation to run the oil to almost 10,000 miles (in my case, that's a full year.) Here is an excerpt from the Mobil 1 data pull:

Capture1.webp

Both filters performed similarly, but knowing that you could purchase an Endurance with that bypass valve housing issue you described and illustrated, that's not good. Mine wasn't leaking, yours had an open floodgate.

Again, I'm not usually in the habit of pulling apart filters. I just get test results from an operating engine.

Also, that table you provided shows a Fram Ultra; it's not the same filter; however, it may be subject to the same QA issues in assembly.

And again, regarding the table: what engine type(s), and how long was the oil run, and under what conditions? The context is important. My samples were pulled from operating J35 V6 engines for the described miles intervals with mostly stop-and-go driving conditions, relatively few freeway miles.

OF
 
Last edited:
That particular filter (yours), the bypass valve spring is badly bent. That's terrible.

Don't know what the function of the "ruffles" are. The sealing point on that particular design is the short cylindrical portion that pushes into the steel cap of the filter, not where those corrugations ("ruffles") are. The "ruffles" are a red herring in this examination.

That bypass housing / spring looks like somebody stepped on it, picked it up and assembled the filter with it. That is the focus item.

I had a used Endurance in the corner of my garage, so I opened it up. Same corrugations ("ruffles"), but this one wasn't bent like yours. It took effort to unseat the short cylindrical sealing surface of the valve from the filter steel end cap.

I put it back, and tried the same "test" you did. No "light leakage." Sorry, no pic, because all I got was the flashlight illumination at the bottom of the image, no light through the filter media (it was used, ergo dark), and no light through the valve or its spring steel assembly. So, instead of a cell phone, I tried using my Canon R7, and same result.

If that is truly the way that valve came out of your sample filter, that points to a significant QA issue during assembly. Mine was working, but yours was not. But, then again, this is a statistical sample of only two items.

Still, no filter should leave the factory looking like that.

I ran three vehicles on these filters for this test run (along with a NOS Mobil 1 M1-207) before switching back to my usual filter (AmSOil Ea15k13), but those used Fram filters are long gone since my last set of oil changes so I don't have the opportunity to open them up.

BTW, the M1-207 posted the same ISO numbers, but over a 6,500-mile interval with the recommendation to run the oil to almost 10,000 miles (in my case, that's a full year.) Here is an excerpt from the Mobil 1 data pull:

View attachment 290475
Both filters performed similarly, but knowing that you could purchase an Endurance with that bypass valve housing issue you described and illustrated, that's not good. Mine wasn't leaking, yours had an open floodgate.

Again, I'm not usually in the habit of pulling apart filters. I just get test results from an operating engine.

Also, that table you provided shows a Fram Ultra; it's not the same filter; however, it may be subject to the same QA issues in assembly.

And again, regarding the table: what engine type(s), and how long was the oil run, and under what conditions? My samples were pulled from operating J35 V6 engines for the described miles intervals with mostly stop-and-go driving conditions, relatively few freeway miles.

OF
The sealing surface is on the top ring where the ruffles sit. Fram use to have a seal there on the OG Ultra’s.

IMG_6060.webp
 
Last edited:
Here’s the master thread on the Endurance.

Nobody is saying it’s “catastrophic” it’s just not the efficiency you’re paying for IMO. It’s a manufacturing/QC defect.

 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom