Fram XG6607 cut open - 10200mi

[flatlander757]

Ran this filter on my 2011 Mazda2 for two OCIs... both on Castrol Edge 0W20. That also means this filter saw 103 autocross runs. 41 in the first OCI and 62 on the second.











No problems found... but MAN the filter media is tiny!

Sorry I didn't get super clear pics and didn't really tear into the filter more... was a bit pressed for time and also had no gloves and [censored] lighting... so yeah. No notable amount of anything in the media.

I went back to a Fram Toughguard because frankly I felt weird NOT changing the filter, and can't justify buying an Ultra for 5k intervals. When I do 5k in 2-2.5 months. If I DO run an Ultra again, it'll be the 7317 for it's slightly larger size. I'll probably entertain the idea of doing a 10k oil+filter interval in the winter when I'm not redlining it every weekend or two.

The first time I put the XG6607 on, my thinking was using a smaller filter(that is adequately rated to go 15k on this car) would mean less "unchanged" oil when the oil gets dumped but filter reused.

A UOA will be sent off shortly so we'll see how that comes out. No problems expected, though I'm curious to see if anything has changed since the car's been tuned/rev limit raised to 7500rpm, and this is the most autocross runs I'll have had on a sample yet. Also this is the first sample taken with Castrol 0W20 as opposed to Pennzoil Platinum 0W20 previously used.


And for your viewing pleasure... a photo of the car in question... because why not?

 

[ZeeOSix]

Yep, next time upsize it to the XG7317 if you have some room to do so. The XG7317 is ~1" longer which will give a good increase in media area. The filter looks good for the paces it was put through.

 

[Revving2Redline]

I think you made a good decision. Nice car. Been running 0w20 Castrol Magnatec or Edge and no issues on my 15' Civic.

 

[bubbatime]

0w20 on an autocross racer? I'd use 5w30 syn, but that's me.

 

[slacktide_bitog]

One filter, one OCI! Especially on a tiny filter like that!

 

[blupupher]

That is a tiny filter!

Also, why u kill the cone?

 

[KingCake]

Originally Posted By: bubbatime
0w20 on an autocross racer? I'd use 5w30 syn, but that's me.


Good thing we have people like you that know better than a legion of Mazda engineers.

 

[RooflessVW]

Originally Posted By: blupupher
That is a tiny filter!

Also, why u kill the cone?


Did you see that cone? Bad attitude. Sometimes they're just asking for a good smack.

 

[tig1]

Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Yep, next time upsize it to the XG7317 if you have some room to do so. The XG7317 is ~1" longer which will give a good increase in media area. The filter looks good for the paces it was put through.


The problem with the Fram Ultra, as I see it, is the lack of filter pleats to start with. Amazing how few there are.

 

[bubbatime]

Originally Posted By: KingCake
Originally Posted By: bubbatime
0w20 on an autocross racer? I'd use 5w30 syn, but that's me.


Good thing we have people like you that know better than a legion of Mazda engineers.


Yeah, because those Mazda engineers, that get told by management to make 0W20 work because of CAFE requirements, totally envisioned that their 110HP car would be raced and beat on autocross tracks. Yeah that's the ticket.

0W20 is a ridiculous choice for a "race car" that sees endless runs at redline.

 

[flatlander757]

Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Yep, next time upsize it to the XG7317 if you have some room to do so. The XG7317 is ~1" longer which will give a good increase in media area. The filter looks good for the paces it was put through.



That'll probably be the plan if I do a 10k oil change over the off season.

Originally Posted By: bubbatime
0w20 on an autocross racer? I'd use 5w30 syn, but that's me.



To be honest, auto-x isn't THAT hard on an engine. It's 45ish seconds of driving like a nut, hit redline normally just once. Times 4-6 runs.

This last time 40 or so runs were from a test and tune all in one day. No problems with ticking or anything.

I WILL probably run a 0W30 next time as I'm planning on doing a track day sort of event in November... That'll be conditions that are more abusive and likely warrant a change.


Originally Posted By: KingCake
Originally Posted By: bubbatime
0w20 on an autocross racer? I'd use 5w30 syn, but that's me.


Good thing we have people like you that know better than a legion of Mazda engineers.



To be fair to Bubbatime, this same engine is spec'd for 5w30 and even 10w40(maybe 5w40? Memory is fuzzy) in other markets around the world.


Originally Posted By: rooflessVW
Originally Posted By: blupupher
That is a tiny filter!

Also, why u kill the cone?


Did you see that cone? Bad attitude. Sometimes they're just asking for a good smack.






Originally Posted By: bubbatime
Originally Posted By: KingCake
Originally Posted By: bubbatime
0w20 on an autocross racer? I'd use 5w30 syn, but that's me.


Good thing we have people like you that know better than a legion of Mazda engineers.


Yeah, because those Mazda engineers, that get told by management to make 0W20 work because of CAFE requirements, totally envisioned that their 110HP car would be raced and beat on autocross tracks. Yeah that's the ticket.

0W20 is a ridiculous choice for a "race car" that sees endless runs at redline.





So far all UOAs have come back and support no issues FWIW. I am nervous about running a 20wt oil at an upcoming track day, something else will most likely go in for that.




The silicone spike coincided with an air filter change FWIW. Otherwise everything is well below universal averages. All the above was PP 0W20 and Purolator basic, then PureOne, then Fram TG in chronological order if memory serves me right. Two of those OCIs have about 30 runs each, one has no runs at all, just daily driving.

I'll be sending this current sample off in the next week or so and will post in the appropriate forum when I get the results back.

 

[slybunda]

Seems like a strong engine for autocross stuff. What engine size is it and are you running any mods or cooling upgrades?

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: tig1
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Yep, next time upsize it to the XG7317 if you have some room to do so. The XG7317 is ~1" longer which will give a good increase in media area. The filter looks good for the paces it was put through.


The problem with the Fram Ultra, as I see it, is the lack of filter pleats to start with. Amazing how few there are.


It's a 2-layer full synthetic media, which has 'depth filtering', so the surface area might not be as high as old cellulose media. Having a rating of 15K miles of use should tell you something about the holding capacity of the media.

 

[tig1]

Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: tig1
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Yep, next time upsize it to the XG7317 if you have some room to do so. The XG7317 is ~1" longer which will give a good increase in media area. The filter looks good for the paces it was put through.


The problem with the Fram Ultra, as I see it, is the lack of filter pleats to start with. Amazing how few there are.


It's a 2-layer full synthetic media, which has 'depth filtering', so the surface area might not be as high as old cellulose media. Having a rating of 15K miles of use should tell you something about the holding capacity of the media.


So why have pleats at all? Maybe the toilet paper filter is really the way to go. No pleats at all.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: tig1
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: tig1
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Yep, next time upsize it to the XG7317 if you have some room to do so. The XG7317 is ~1" longer which will give a good increase in media area. The filter looks good for the paces it was put through.


The problem with the Fram Ultra, as I see it, is the lack of filter pleats to start with. Amazing how few there are.


It's a 2-layer full synthetic media, which has 'depth filtering', so the surface area might not be as high as old cellulose media. Having a rating of 15K miles of use should tell you something about the holding capacity of the media.


So why have pleats at all? Maybe the toilet paper filter is really the way to go. No pleats at all.


Because having pleats gives more surface area than no pleats. The oil flow direction in those toilet paper filters is longitudinal (top to bottom), not radial like in a normal spin-on oil filter.

 

[tig1]

The problem with the Fram Ultra, as I see it, is the lack of filter pleats to start with. Amazing how few there are. [/quote]

It's a 2-layer full synthetic media, which has 'depth filtering', so the surface area might not be as high as old cellulose media. Having a rating of 15K miles of use should tell you something about the holding capacity of the media.[/quote]

So why have pleats at all? Maybe the toilet paper filter is really the way to go. No pleats at all. [/quote]

Because having pleats gives more surface area than no pleats. The oil flow direction in those toilet paper filters is longitudinal (top to bottom), not radial like in a normal spin-on oil filter.[/quote]

So I guess the more pleats a filter has the better the filter. I'm good with that.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: tig1
So I guess the more pleats a filter has the better the filter. I'm good with that.


If you're comparing the same exact filter (ie, one XG is larger than the other), then more pleats would probably have some advantages. But, as noted the media type and performance has a lot to do with number of pleats, which translates in to total media area. It's been discussed many times here that full synthetic media filters in a different manner than cellulose media. Less area in full synthetic can easily out perform more media in cellulose.

Also keep in mind that 'number of pleats' is also misleading in the sense that a filter with 'more pleats' may not always mean it has more total area. The depth of the pleats plays a large factor in what the total media area actually is.

 

[flatlander757]

Originally Posted By: slybunda
Seems like a strong engine for autocross stuff. What engine size is it and are you running any mods or cooling upgrades?


It's a 1.5l DOHC all aluminum engine that is rated 100hp/98tq stock.


Mine has a DDMWorks intake with Corksport air duct, Dynotronics remote tuning, and a Racingbeat cat back(which is honestly just for noise... The thing is near silent without it making it tougher to rev match).

No cooling upgrades or anything... Autocross really isn't that taxing overall. It's basically spirited driving in 45-60 second spurts.


FWIW the B-Spec series Mazda2s are pretty similar with intake, cat back, tune, and just a sandwich type oil cooler added. They reportedly go 30k+ miles of road course abuse between rebuilds. They're pretty stout. I think most teams run 5W30 in one flavor or another. Road racing has considerably different demands than those of autocross.