Help me pick an oil filter - Mazda SkyActive

In general when I owned a Japanese car ( was then a new 2014 Subaru WRX) I always felt better using the OEM brand as at first the OEM filters were made in Japan but that same year Subaru for the US market contracted with FRAM to make the OEM filters ( FOR THE USA MARKET ONLY) The japan filters were still supplied on the new car and in the Japan market, At that point I researched and found a WIX that the by-pass pressure spec was correct so I used the WIX!
I know nothing about Mazda but you can find out who makes the OEM Mazda filter, If Its made in Japan I would use that. I love WIX filters but I would make 100% the WIX spec ( all of the Specs ) Is what the OEM calls for.
 
For a 3500-4500 mile oci, why not run the endurance/ultra xg6607? For a short oci like that, i don't think a longer filter does anything for you.
Well, it reduces the speed at which oil pressure builds, but usually this trade off of larger filters is trivial in these size ranges.
 
The 51356 Wix is basically the 7317 Honda can.

If you have the height space for this can, run it.

If you don’t have the height but you have some width room, step up to the 51334 Wix or 3985 Fram size.

If you have both height and width wiggle room, run the Mahle/Tennex S2000 filter.

If you have neither height nor width wiggle room, just run the 6607 size.
 
Well, it reduces the speed at which oil pressure builds ...
Only time an extension of time to build oil pressure due to an oil filter (not including an initial start-up after an filter change) would be if the filter ADBV is allowing oil to drain down from the engine galleries and filter, or if the filter is super restrictive and caused the oil pump to hit well into pressure relief and thereby cut way back on oil flow volume to the oiling system.
 
Only time an extension of time to build oil pressure due to an oil filter (not including an initial start-up after an filter change) would be if the filter ADBV is allowing oil to drain down from the engine galleries and filter, or if the filter is super restrictive and caused the oil pump to hit well into pressure relief and thereby cut way back on oil flow volume to the oiling system.
Not necessarily. I’ve tested this actually in a professional setting.

More volume in the system lowers the bulk modulus. This makes the system less “hydraulically stiff”.

The measured rate of pressure rise vs flowed volume is less than calculated. This is because calculations assume equal stiffness which real parts don’t have.

For example, you can replace a run of -12 hose in a hydraulic system with an equal length of -16 hose, and you will measure lower restriction but find that it takes longer to build pressure. Restriction is better but pressure delay is worse, even with no air present.

It’s simply a function of the total volume that must be pressurized and how “stiff” it is hydraulically. Larger volumes lose modulus.

Incidentally, this is primarily how air in the filters cause oil pressure delay. Air is a fluid and will transmit pressure just like oil will. It’s just that air is so much more compressible that it takes more oil displacement to build pressure against it. Hence the delay.

The underlying physics are the same whether the bulk modulus decrease happens because of the fluid being more compressible (air), or because the fluid container increases in volume.

So, if all else is equal, even with zero air present, a larger filter can takes longer to build pressure. At the scale of PCMO filters, it’s in the order of milliseconds and not significant, imo. But it is nonetheless a very real and measurable phenomenon.

At the scale of the engines I do for work, where filters hold 3 or 4 gallons of fluid, it’s a quite significant thing that I have to design and engineer around.
 
Not necessarily. I’ve tested this actually in a professional setting.

More volume in the system lowers the bulk modulus. This makes the system less “hydraulically stiff”.

The measured rate of pressure rise vs flowed volume is less than calculated. This is because calculations assume equal stiffness which real parts don’t have.
Just changing the size of the oil filter (which in this case isn't much of a change), shouldn't impact the "hydraulic stiffness" of the entire system when you're only talking about 80 PSI of pressure to begin with, not 1000s of PSI.

For example, you can replace a run of -12 hose in a hydraulic system with an equal length of -16 hose, and you will measure lower restriction but find that it takes longer to build pressure. Restriction is better but pressure delay is worse, even with no air present.

It’s simply a function of the total volume that must be pressurized and how “stiff” it is hydraulically. Larger volumes lose modulus.
Hose ... like in rubber hose? If so, then rubber hose flexes with internal pressure. At the pressure in an automotive oiling system, the oil is pretty much acting as incomprehensible.

Incidentally, this is primarily how air in the filters cause oil pressure delay. Air is a fluid and will transmit pressure just like oil will. It’s just that air is so much more compressible that it takes more oil displacement to build pressure against it. Hence the delay.
A leaking ADBV is going to cause air in the system. That's why I keep saying the increase in time to see full oil pressure is most likely due to the ADBV leaking.

So, if all else is equal, even with zero air present, a larger filter can takes longer to build pressure. At the scale of PCMO filters, it’s in the order of milliseconds and not significant, imo. But it is nonetheless a very real and measurable phenomenon.

At the scale of the engines I do for work, where filters hold 3 or 4 gallons of fluid, it’s a quite significant thing that I have to design and engineer around.
Yes, in the context of an automotive engine, the filter size isn't going to show any perceivable delay (by watching the oil light on the dash) in building oil pressure if the oiling system and filter all stay 100% filled with oil. If it was theoretically milliseconds in difference due to the filter size, then it really doesn't matter in this case.
 
The new xp oil filters aren’t even full synthetic anymore so I wouldn’t go with those. The only difference now is the micron rating. Wix is 95@20 and the XP is 99@25
Can't find a Wix 57002XP anywhere. Even Wix filters website doesnt show it. All places that used to carry it say " out of stock".
 
I had lots of miles on a Fram Ultra on a 2.5L Skyactive engine.

I hold the record @ 73K miles.

Engine still runs fine and doesn’t burn any oil.
 
I just talked to Mazda Customer Service. Trying to get answer on if it is ok to run a non Mazda filter that has an ADV on a skyactiv engine. Explained to her that some people think running a filter with an ADV may hurt the oil flow in the skyactiv engine, and that Wix came out with a unique filter, without an ADV, just for the skyactive engine.
She put me on hold while researching the Mazda data.
When she came back, she said Mazda recommends using Mazda filters WITH an ADV.
I told her Mazda filters for the skyactiv engine don't have an ADV, and that is why I called with my question.
She repeated what she told me before. I told her I had seen videos of someone cutting open a Mazda 1wpe-14-302, and they were surprised there was no ADV.
She kept insisting Mazda data said to use a Mazda filter WITH an ADV.
I have to believe she probably read it wrong.
Anyway, I will just buy a Mazda 1wpe-14-302 at the dealership, since the Wix 57002XP was the only non ADV one with synthetic media, and they are out of stock everywhere.
 
Just saw this special at my Mazda dealer. Wow, what a deal!

Screenshot_20250521_131353_Chrome.webp
 
I just talked to Mazda Customer Service. Trying to get answer on if it is ok to run a non Mazda filter that has an ADV on a skyactiv engine. Explained to her that some people think running a filter with an ADV may hurt the oil flow in the skyactiv engine, and that Wix came out with a unique filter, without an ADV, just for the skyactive engine.
She put me on hold while researching the Mazda data.
When she came back, she said Mazda recommends using Mazda filters WITH an ADV.
I told her Mazda filters for the skyactiv engine don't have an ADV, and that is why I called with my question.
She repeated what she told me before. I told her I had seen videos of someone cutting open a Mazda 1wpe-14-302, and they were surprised there was no ADV.
She kept insisting Mazda data said to use a Mazda filter WITH an ADV.
I have to believe she probably read it wrong.
Anyway, I will just buy a Mazda 1wpe-14-302 at the dealership, since the Wix 57002XP was the only non ADV one with synthetic media, and they are out of stock everywhere.
Hummm ... weird. Maybe they were mistakenly leaving out the ADBV on some of those filters during production. 🤷‍♂️

The bottom line is no soft rubber ADBV that can be opened with hardly any force from the powerful PD oil pump is going to impede any oil flow to the oiling system.
 
Back
Top Bottom