Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Quote:
Its one of the better comparisons I've seen.
In your opinion of an amateur presentations? I'll agree. The photos are top notch and the site is well constructed.
Unfortunately you never saw Grease's filter study where one member, who is an engineer at PALL Filtration put a bunch of filters through a battery of tests. Swatches of media tested for flow at given pressures, bubble machine testing, etc. I really wish I had saved the pages. Not so much for the content, which could be subject to change, but for the legit procedural techniques used in testing.
Quote:
Interestingly, two performance filter brands that are manufactured by Champion Labs still use the old design. They are Mobil 1 and K&N. Examples of each purchased in 2008 were not "Ecore" filters."
This is opinion based on ..what? Visual observation? I saw Big Foot and he resembles Charlton Heston as depicted in the remake of The Planet of the Apes. I posted it on the internet ..and you can quote me.
Quote:
I never mentioned RP in the post you quoted.
With a real big smile on my face ..and kindly asked ..are you a "rhyme and meter" anal retentive nitpicker? Does it really make any difference the I (big EYE sound) put RP in with M1 ..which totally appears to be an identical filter?
Quote:
Edit: The Mobil 1 EP is not just marketed as an "endurance" filter. It is also marketed as a performance filter. From their own site:
Mobil 1 Extended Performance Oil Filters
* Designed for today's longer service intervals.
* Removes more contaminants than conventional filters using an advanced synthetic fiber blend filter media.
* High-capacity design stores more contaminants (two times the capacity of the leading brand).
* Reduces resistance to oil flow while improving filter efficiency.
* Withstands up to five times the normal system operating pressure.
Will 3 out of 5 points in the marketing presentation work? The FIRST 3 out of 5
Quote:
To me that reads like high performance marketing.
Well, it depends on your context of "high performance". Are you talking the filter or the application that it's installed on? Sure the filter "performs" well. Is it intended for HIGH PERFORMANCE use? ..and I'll even say that it can be BOTH ..but that's not the question. What do you mean?
Fram's HP line are poorly filtering high performance filters. You're not putting M1 in with them, are you?
Now look at the K&N marketing. Only someone ignoring the company's target market could possibly NOT see that it's intended for the (would be) street rodding crowd.
..and, again, you may in fact be correct. It's just that there's been absolutely no bona fide evidence that the M1 and K&N are merely different cans with the same internals (media). I would hope for someone other than the tech line phone sitter just getting on to the next phone call to fill in his day.
I have provided more evidence to show that they are both based on the same Champ designs, which another member has confirmed as well (while noting a small variation in the K&N implementation, which is more than you have offered to refute that they are not.
You instead choose to beat a dead horse by, having been the one to dispute the fact, persist in demanding more proof, all the while offering nothing of your own to prove otherwise - when you are the one who took issue with it to begin with (and yes, I will nitpick about the fact that you somehow interjected RP into a post of mine, when I had not even mentioned them and have no familiarity with them).
That 3 of the first 5 sentences talk of its endurance properties, does not negate the fact that its also marketed as a performance filter, nor are the two mutually exclusive - as you seem to be so hung up on.
Gary is it that hard to admit you might have gotten it wrong on the M1 filter - just as you did by reading RP into my post when it was never mentioned? Or is that pill so hard to swallow that you instead have to go to the lengths of contortions your last post has provided us with?
-Spyder
Quote:
Its one of the better comparisons I've seen.
In your opinion of an amateur presentations? I'll agree. The photos are top notch and the site is well constructed.
Unfortunately you never saw Grease's filter study where one member, who is an engineer at PALL Filtration put a bunch of filters through a battery of tests. Swatches of media tested for flow at given pressures, bubble machine testing, etc. I really wish I had saved the pages. Not so much for the content, which could be subject to change, but for the legit procedural techniques used in testing.
Quote:
Interestingly, two performance filter brands that are manufactured by Champion Labs still use the old design. They are Mobil 1 and K&N. Examples of each purchased in 2008 were not "Ecore" filters."
This is opinion based on ..what? Visual observation? I saw Big Foot and he resembles Charlton Heston as depicted in the remake of The Planet of the Apes. I posted it on the internet ..and you can quote me.
Quote:
I never mentioned RP in the post you quoted.
With a real big smile on my face ..and kindly asked ..are you a "rhyme and meter" anal retentive nitpicker? Does it really make any difference the I (big EYE sound) put RP in with M1 ..which totally appears to be an identical filter?
Quote:
Edit: The Mobil 1 EP is not just marketed as an "endurance" filter. It is also marketed as a performance filter. From their own site:
Mobil 1 Extended Performance Oil Filters
* Designed for today's longer service intervals.
* Removes more contaminants than conventional filters using an advanced synthetic fiber blend filter media.
* High-capacity design stores more contaminants (two times the capacity of the leading brand).
* Reduces resistance to oil flow while improving filter efficiency.
* Withstands up to five times the normal system operating pressure.
Will 3 out of 5 points in the marketing presentation work? The FIRST 3 out of 5
Quote:
To me that reads like high performance marketing.
Well, it depends on your context of "high performance". Are you talking the filter or the application that it's installed on? Sure the filter "performs" well. Is it intended for HIGH PERFORMANCE use? ..and I'll even say that it can be BOTH ..but that's not the question. What do you mean?
Fram's HP line are poorly filtering high performance filters. You're not putting M1 in with them, are you?
Now look at the K&N marketing. Only someone ignoring the company's target market could possibly NOT see that it's intended for the (would be) street rodding crowd.
..and, again, you may in fact be correct. It's just that there's been absolutely no bona fide evidence that the M1 and K&N are merely different cans with the same internals (media). I would hope for someone other than the tech line phone sitter just getting on to the next phone call to fill in his day.
I have provided more evidence to show that they are both based on the same Champ designs, which another member has confirmed as well (while noting a small variation in the K&N implementation, which is more than you have offered to refute that they are not.
You instead choose to beat a dead horse by, having been the one to dispute the fact, persist in demanding more proof, all the while offering nothing of your own to prove otherwise - when you are the one who took issue with it to begin with (and yes, I will nitpick about the fact that you somehow interjected RP into a post of mine, when I had not even mentioned them and have no familiarity with them).
That 3 of the first 5 sentences talk of its endurance properties, does not negate the fact that its also marketed as a performance filter, nor are the two mutually exclusive - as you seem to be so hung up on.
Gary is it that hard to admit you might have gotten it wrong on the M1 filter - just as you did by reading RP into my post when it was never mentioned? Or is that pill so hard to swallow that you instead have to go to the lengths of contortions your last post has provided us with?
-Spyder
Last edited: