They cheapened them none the less…
And that is a fact… No doubt about it…
Then the bring out a more expensive filter which is like their former best… For more money. Go “blanking” figure..
Fram Ultra, Titanium & Endurance now 98% at 20-30 microns ISO 4548-12
- Thread starter Robvette
- Start date
They cheapened them none the less…
And that is a fact… No doubt about it…
Then the bring out a more expensive filter which is like their former best… For more money. Go “blanking” figure..
To be fair in the last 2-3 years M+H filters have seemingly been a fair amount better. I have a recently made Purolator Pure One filter on my car right now.
However…. We had seen a HIGH number of ffed up Mann Hummel torn filters for awhile there…
The 57356s and few other models were torn rather often…
That was a FACT too…
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2023
- Messages
- 552
The weird thing about those 2 line of filters is the Titanium is several dollars more than the Ultra with the same blend media. It make a lot more sense to save a few dollars and get a new gen Ultra. The Titanium line of filters is kinda in a redundant spot in the product line as its very close in a fifty cent gap to the Endurance which is pretty much the best you can get since the pink media Ultra and Titaniums are phased out.
If First Brands wanted to really cut production cost other than the media, they should start standardizing a lotta tooling such as making those powerflow holes a standard across most of their filter lines since its probably considered as a marginal improvement to their older base plate designs.
Endurance is still a good buy to be fair if you don't want to pay Amsoil prices for the same filter. Though I agree the performance gap and build quality of competition filters are getting closer if not better in some areas.
The Titanuim is an odd ball, because it"s only sold at Advance Auto Parts. Same is true about the Endurance, as it's only sold at Walmart. So the market availability and comparative pricing isn't really apples to apples between thosw two and the Uktra which is available at many places. AAP sets the price of the Titanium, and Walmart sets the price of the Endurance.
No-because they don't have the STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY that the original Ultra's wire backed 2-ply synthetic media had. Remind me how many Ultras you've run to 20,000 miles, on one (or multiple) OCIs? I've done it... As always, my comment is do what you want-but Fram IS NOT WHAT THEY USED TO BE. Or even what they say they are... I did spend some time in engineering school, and I've been a field maintenance tech my entire life (40+ years)-I know trash when I see it!So your "scientific analysis" is they can't perform per Fram's claim because some have been seen here with "wavy pleats". Don't become a forensic investigator, scientist or engineer, lol.
Royal Purple, from royalpurpledirect, is still a valid option if you buy a few. Generally a little less $ than the functionally equivalent Endurance.
Help me understand why wire backing makes a filter better. I thought the metal or nylon center tube/cage provides the required support of the media.
How many of the "trash" filters have you run to 20,000 and have seen them fail? How have they failed?
Zooming out, this thread is kind of funny. Probably 98% of people just go to quick lube places (a lot of them way over mileage) and drive off without even a second thought of the efficiecy of the oil filter that got screwed on. A lot of those cars go for a couple hundred K miles.
So, in the end, probably doesn't matter. Any of these will be fine for a factory recommended OCI.
So, in the end, probably doesn't matter. Any of these will be fine for a factory recommended OCI.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
No, that's part of exactly what I'm considering, which is premised on the accuracy of that screenshot; the requirement to take the numbers on it at face value and not question their legitimacy. To set aside the rift in the 15-micron figures between it and the Ascent data and just accept that it's the size difference in play.
While I'm not questioning the possibility for a blend media to be high efficiency (despite my position on the legitimacy of that screenshot), I AM questioning what amounts to a 10% drop in efficiency with a 0.7" shorter can and subsequently a bit less media. The Royal Purple, which does in fact have less media due to having a shorter media stack inside the can, was 3.3% less efficient in the Ascent testing. Now, different media, certainly, but also synthetic. This should at minimum, raise an eyebrow, and if it doesn't, well, then I don't think there's any value in continuing this conversation.
Last edited:
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
If you read the pinned filter media thread, synthetic media isn't rigid like cellulose/blend media, so it needs something to add structure, which is a mesh backing, either made of wire or polymer. The OG Ultra and most of the other non-Purolator filters use a wire screen. This screen is potted to the end cap material along with the media, keeping it in place. This encircles the centre tube.
Cellulose/blend media is either potted to metal end caps or bonded to fibre ones. In either instance, it's not backed with anything rigid and simply encircles the centre tube. This means that this media can deflect if exposed to considerable dP, particularly if there are large gaps in the pleat spacing, which we saw with Purolator, lending themselves to tearing.
Of course another issue with cellulose/blend media is that it absorbs moisture, which also causes distortion, so if you already have distorted pleats from water uptake, this may increase the likelihood of a tear at a wide pleat space under significant dP.
Synthetic media, held firmly in place by the co-potted screen, and not absorbing moisture, has never, in any of the filter tear-downs on this site, shown to deflect or tear.
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2023
- Messages
- 552
Fair enough, though shipping cost is a factor depending where you live unless you buy enough bulk quantity for free shipping. I rather have em in store to visually inspect before comitting to purchase.
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2020
- Messages
- 298
Regarding Fram’s new ISO 4548-12 claim of “98% at 20 to 30 microns” I actually think this makes more sense than a single claimed micron efficiency.
We know not all filters will test to the exact same ISO 4548-12 efficiency - that’s just not the way it works. Even if different filters are built with identical media - the size differences and design differences result in different ISO 4548-12 results. (Which is part of why I always thought BITOG was placing way to much value on Ascents testing of a single filter in a product line).
This all said - a manufacturer claiming a ISO 4548-12 efficiency range seems more valid than a single number.
Also, I messaged Fram again to compliment the tech rep that corresponded with me Friday and again urge them to update the website and print info:
We know not all filters will test to the exact same ISO 4548-12 efficiency - that’s just not the way it works. Even if different filters are built with identical media - the size differences and design differences result in different ISO 4548-12 results. (Which is part of why I always thought BITOG was placing way to much value on Ascents testing of a single filter in a product line).
This all said - a manufacturer claiming a ISO 4548-12 efficiency range seems more valid than a single number.
Also, I messaged Fram again to compliment the tech rep that corresponded with me Friday and again urge them to update the website and print info:
The wire backing is necessary for a full synthetic media because its soft and cannot maintain its shape otherwise. The ultra isn’t full synthetic media anymore.
That in itself isn’t really an issue. The issue is that the quality of the new fram ultra is lacking. It’s just an over priced average(at best) filter now.
Why would anyone waste money on them anymore?
It's lacking how? In this whole discussion I get why people may wish it still had the wire backing, but you state it is lacking and only an average filter. Why? To me "average" means a filter with average efficiency. Lacking would mean it tears or otherwise mechanically fails and is unable to perform the primary function of filtration.
Where's all the data that they don't hold up? ... wavy pleats prove nothing. Sure, the wire backed Ultra has more structural integrity and it's easy to say it would look better after a long OCI compared to the new Ultra, but where are all the failed non- wire backed Ultras at 10K miles, or even at 20K miles? When I see a list of failed ones like there was for the PureOnes when they were failing/tearing, then I'll give it some notice. You can't just look at a used one and see wavy pleats then conclude it won't make it to 10K, 15K or 20K miles if ran that long.
Last edited:
100% full synthetic media isn't stiff enough on it's own to retain the pleat shape under the force of oil flow (dP).
There have been a few EGs and TGs that have been ran WAY over their up to mileage rating. I think 'Stude ran a TG for some insane amount of miles IIRC.
Good Afternoon Mewbs,
Your comments are spot on. I made a table of the Fram products comparing price to performance and the Titanium is not only redundant but $3.52 more than the Ultra for the same performance (Filtration & Life). If you're a Tough Guard fan, its only $1.80 more to step up to the Ultra and $5.32 to move to a Titanium.
Similar threads
