Heavier=Better oil filter quality?

[BigD1]

ACDelco PF52 is the oil filter recommended in my owners manual. Have various filters that crossed to the PF52, and all fit my car, so I just weighed them all on very accurate digital postal scales that always matches weight with my local post office. Why did I weigh them? Like my wife says, "Cause I can can."

ACDelco PF52(non ecore)--9.7 oz.

ACDelco PF52E(ecore)--7.9 oz.

Luberfiner PH51A(ecore)--8.1 oz.

Fram PH3980(orange can)--9.2 oz.

Purolator PureOne PL24011--9.4 oz.

NAPA Gold 1036/Wix 51036--9.8 oz.

Fram XG3980(Ultra synthetic)--12.8 oz.

 

[3800Series]

Maybe a better shell. The Fram Ultra is a good filter and noticably heavier in the hand then other brands.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Hard to base filter quality on the weight IMO.

 

[UNC151]

I think this may have some (potential) merit at least with regards to construction. When I compare a Motorcraft FL-2051s with a WIX 57151, the WIX is substantially heavier and I know the WIX has wire backed filter media.

 

[bullwinkle]

Somewhat-I did a weight measurement on Cummins 5.9 oil filters not too long ago, the Bosch Distance Plus was the heaviest-but the media wasn't quite as good as Fleetguard Stratapore or Venturi, RP, Donaldson Endurance, etc. (syn blend).

 

[Nate1979]

I would say this would be one of the least important ways to judge an oil filter quality.

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted By: Nate1979
I would say this would be one of the least important ways to judge an oil filter quality.


One of them, yes.

Reminds me of the subjective quality feel between the parts for my BMW and those for my Asian cars. A lot of times the "big beefy superior German engineered" part looks like it will survive the next war, and yet fails way before the lighter and less substantial Japanese part.

 

[UNC017]

Not necessarily. It depends on where the weight is. wire-backed synthetic media is heavier than cellulose or semi-synthetic media, but a thicker shell and base is also heavier and doesn't contribute to filtration efficiency (although if debris damage- eg. low-hanging filter, or burst strength is a concern it still might matter to you.)

For example, a Purolator Synthetic probably weighs about the same as an equivalent Mobil 1. But the Mobil 1 has the weight in the shell and base, whereas the PSL has it in the wire-backed media (Purolators have a relatively thin shell compared to other brands, but I've never heard of one bursting- I think the other brands practice a certain amount of overkill just to get a heftier feeling filter).

 

[goodtimes]

The Fram Ultra I measured is average or below average in can thickness, .013" appx, same as Purolators I have measured. Others are thicker. I would say .013 is thin, does the job but saves the manufacturer material cost. It might be the media mesh and the baseplate like others have said.

 

[SilverC6]

Weight could be an indicator of better construction as long as similar technologies are being used in each filter.

With the same size cellulose media filter, more weight could predict more good stuff being in the can, like metal endcaps, coil springs, and more filter media.

But it's better to look at the overall construction of each filter and then pick the one that best meets your definition of "good."