Fram Ultra, Titanium & Endurance now 98% at 20-30 microns ISO 4548-12

Robvette

Robvette

Joined
Dec 20, 2020
Messages
298
I am bummed and disappointed, but, I can't say that I am surprised. Read this conversation all the way to the end. I really pressed this technical support person. I asked them to double confirm 98% at 20-30 microns per ISO 4548-12.

My guess is that the filters that do still have the metal backed media are actually 99%= at 20 micron and that all new "premium" Fram filters are being built to with different materials and will be 98% at 20-30 microns per ISO 4548-12.

You can see in the conversation below that at 4:45pm we were signing off ... and that's when I asked if he is 100% certain about 98% at 20-30 microns per ISO 4548-12.

I definitely invite other BITOG members to contact Fram to see if you receive the same information.
98 at 20 to 30_Page_1.jpg

98 at 20 to 30_Page_2.jpg

98 at 20 to 30_Page_3.jpg

98 at 20 to 30_Page_4.jpg
 
First Brands Fram-cheaping out and lying their [CENSORED]S off since the day they bought the company! When they ran off motorking/Jay Buckley I figured this would happen! What happened to "the new design is better than the old (OG Ultra) design"? That's right-it was bull excrement. Waiting for Fram's defenders... 3... 2... 1...:poop:
 
Fram’s website is still showing 99% at 20 microns. So this is not true now? Has it ever been true since First Brands cheapening or has the Ultra been downgraded yet again?
 
Last edited:
bullwinkle said:
First Brands Fram-cheaping out and lying their [CENSORED]S off since the day they bought the company! When they ran off motorking/Jay Buckley I figured this would happen! What happened to "the new design is better than the old (OG Ultra) design"? That's right-it was bull excrement.
Click to expand...

Exactly right, you cant believe anything they say.
 
I'm wary of filters are rated at an efficiency figure of less than 99%, such as the FRAM Extraguard and Toughguard, 95% at 25 micron. It makes you wonder if they are 99% efficient at any micron size, or if there always enough unfiltered oil bypassing around the element that they're still only 95% at 50+ micron.

Anyway, for these filters rated at 98%, it could be that they were tested to the standard beta ratio of 75, which is 98.7% efficiency, and the number was rounded down at some point.

If you look at the individual data sheets for PurolatorOne filters, the efficiency varies between models. It's probably the same for other filter manufacturers. It seems that FRAM is basing their marketing claims on their most efficient models.
 
twX said:
I'm wary of filters are rated at an efficiency figure of less than 99%, such as the FRAM Extraguard and Toughguard, 95% at 25 micron. It makes you wonder if they are 99% efficient at any micron size, or if there always enough unfiltered oil bypassing around the element that they're still only 95% at 50+ micron.

Anyway, for these filters rated at 98%, it could be that they were tested to the standard beta ratio of 75, which is 98.7% efficiency, and the number was rounded down at some point.

If you look at the individual data sheets for PurolatorOne filters, the efficiency varies between models. It's probably the same for other filter manufacturers. It seems that FRAM is basing their marketing claims on their most efficient models.
Click to expand...
Their marketing claims have always been based on three different models, @ZeeOSix and I discussed this previously, as it was better than what other manufacturers were doing.

We have data for the 99%+ figure for the OG Ultra from Ascent, everything since has been a bit of a "trust me bro" from First Brands, though, taken at face value, the cheapening of the Ultra was not supposed to matter, since efficiency was stated to have been maintained at the same level. Who knows if that's the case now though.

Anyway, can't go wrong with the OG Ultra if you can find them. That pink media is the cat's ass.
 
twX said:
I'm wary of filters are rated at an efficiency figure of less than 99%, such as the FRAM Extraguard and Toughguard, 95% at 25 micron. It makes you wonder if they are 99% efficient at any micron size, or if there always enough unfiltered oil bypassing around the element that they're still only 95% at 50+ micron.
Click to expand...
Every oil filter is 99% efficient at some particulate micron size. 😄 Fram Ultra and Endurance are rated at 99+% @ 20u. Ascent ISO 4548-12 testing showed the OG Ultra even beat that claim. If there was a lot of dirty oil bypassing the filter media during the ISO test, there's no way a filter could maintain that high of efficiency over the whole test duration. Maybe filters that rate poorly in the ISO test have leaky bypass valves, and that contributed (along with less efficiency media) to make it rate poorly in the ISO efficiency test.

twX said:
Anyway, for these filters rated at 98%, it could be that they were tested to the standard beta ratio of 75, which is 98.7% efficiency, and the number was rounded down at some point.
Click to expand...
ISO 4548-12 doesn't test to a "standard beta ratio" of any beta. The dust spec is called out, with other specs, and the filter is tested. The resulting efficiency data then determines it's overall average efficiency from new to near fully loaded at the end of the test. Just like Ascent did the ISO 4548-12 tests in this thread (posted for others who haven't seen it).

Would you all like to see ISO 4548-12 Oil Filter Lab Testing Comparison, Efficiency & Capacity, Pressure vs Flow, Bubble Point, and Burst?

I have this as a “watched” thread, so if you do happen to start a new one, could you put a note or link in this one to direct followers to the new thread? Thanks!! Yes, no problem I can do that.
bobistheoilguy.com

twX said:
If you look at the individual data sheets for PurolatorOne filters, the efficiency varies between models. It's probably the same for other filter manufacturers. It seems that FRAM is basing their marketing claims on their most efficient models.
Click to expand...
As @OVERKILL pointed out, Fram uses 3 different sized filters in most of their filter lines. If the media is the exact same in all model/sizes in a specific model line, then only the size (ie, total media area) would have an impact on the filter's efficiency.
 
Last edited:
Maybe there are a few odd-ball small sized Ultra, Titanium and Endurance filters that don't quite make the 99+% @ 20u. I think the Fram on-line chat guy was being honest, but he my not know everything and obviously can't share inside engineering info. Fram could not be sued over any of their efficiency claims unless someone can specifically prove that the filters they reference don't test per their claims. As pointed out, Ascent's test showed the OG Ultra tested better than Fram's claims.
 
Robvette said:
Instead of paying $13 for a Fram Titanium or Endurance I’ll opt for the $4.28 OEM filter with the exact same efficiency
Click to expand...
Have Ascent test some for you. I'd bet between the filters speced for your engine, the Frams would do better than that AC Delco.
 
^^^ Based on the various posted Purolator/M+H filter spec sheets, that would be going backwards if looking for efficiency. As I pointed out in a few other threads, Purolator's spec sheet for their reference 30001 filter shows worse efficiency than what Purolator claims on their website. That actually could get them sued. 😄
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Al
Documentation on Fram Ultra Filters
Replies
13
Views
1K
fantastic
BrendanC
OG Fram Titanium FS3593a C&P
2
Replies
31
Views
1K
Plawan
M
The Great Oil Filter Cross-Spec Mystery
Replies
13
Views
4K
mphilleo
7
Is this filter really 10 microns? At what efficiency? Or is it a mystery (Sierra Marine 18-7758)
Replies
15
Views
2K
oil pan 4
B
Fram Extra Guard 95% efficiency > 20 microns at $3.50 a filter for PH7317 with Amazon Subscribe and Save.
Replies
14
Views
3K
fantastic
Back
Top