How about this study...interesting anyways.
- Thread starter Greaser
- Start date
- Status
Thanks for the post. I guess the only question I have is how does the reduction truly affect the overall wear. That is are you removing symptoms or the cause of more wear
I am certainly not downing a bypass filter, but considering the increased risks for loss of your oil system with the rresultant negative effect on warranty I am fearful. But thats just old worry-wart me
Very interesting report,
I am anxious to see the "rest of the story" as relates to the size of particles, instead of the values in ppm relating to "all of them". SIZE matters here.
Also I am not convinced based on his explanation that he is not reading additives in the ppm levels.
Particle size will be critical in explaining the results among others.
Thanks for sharing this informative data
Greaser ! This guy must be rich or is really good at fabricating data .
I am anxious to see the "rest of the story" as relates to the size of particles, instead of the values in ppm relating to "all of them". SIZE matters here.
Also I am not convinced based on his explanation that he is not reading additives in the ppm levels.
Particle size will be critical in explaining the results among others.
Thanks for sharing this informative data
Greaser ! This guy must be rich or is really good at fabricating data .
Good stuff but it really needs particle size. It would be a shame if he went to all that effort and didn't collect particle size data.
It does seem there's a lot of stuff in around the few micron range where the bypass filter works. Interestingly this fits nicely with a recent post on this board where the particle counts soared in the (I think it was) 5 micron range.
[ February 16, 2003, 07:02 PM: Message edited by: Rick in PA ]
It does seem there's a lot of stuff in around the few micron range where the bypass filter works. Interestingly this fits nicely with a recent post on this board where the particle counts soared in the (I think it was) 5 micron range.
[ February 16, 2003, 07:02 PM: Message edited by: Rick in PA ]
Hey Rick in PA I need to ask a question. Can you email me at [email protected]
Still it wasn't done under laboratory conditions,and the guy has access to the equipment...so what the heck
I'd do the study also if I were in his shoes.
Go back to the link once in a while...he's updating constantly
so it kinda goes bypass > mobil 1 > fram.
Except for the lack of particle size data, I think his testing methods are better than the lab tests. The lab tests don't take into account engine vibration and jolts and jostles that you get in real-life driving.
Nahh..should have had 4 EXSACT contaminated samples of oil...run 1 sample thru each filter, at engine temperature of working oil...same amount of time...then check for complete flow(before and after time was up on the filter in question),wear metals,particle size,etc...then you are talking testing
The average level of all particulates measured in a clean motor oil are in the 3000 to 4000 ppm level , of which 90+ % are less than 10 um.
When and if this fellow ever breaks down this test by size of particles to show the difference between normal particles and "bad" particles we, (IMHO) will see that the particles cleaned so efficiently by the bypass make only incremental difference in the wear and subsequent life of his 4.0L 6 cylinder.
But if you are "Patman picky "
, you may sleep better at night to have motor oil so clean as to be able to drink it !
It amazes me that Frank will change his oil at 5000 mile intervals after seeing the results and cleanliness of his setup, what a waste of time , natural resources and ultimately his money.
When and if this fellow ever breaks down this test by size of particles to show the difference between normal particles and "bad" particles we, (IMHO) will see that the particles cleaned so efficiently by the bypass make only incremental difference in the wear and subsequent life of his 4.0L 6 cylinder.
But if you are "Patman picky "
It amazes me that Frank will change his oil at 5000 mile intervals after seeing the results and cleanliness of his setup, what a waste of time , natural resources and ultimately his money.
Patman
Staff member
"Patman Picky", hey, can we trademark that phrase?
I must think in simple terms like this guy does. I see his point so clearly. We drain our oil at 3,000 miles not because the oil is worn out, because it is dirty. It was actualy dirty most of the 3000 miles. Did we determine that at 3,000 is is too dirty, or that the dirt particles are too large?
His objective, plain and simple, is to find the best way to filter that dirt out durring the 3000, so there is less to drain out after.
Less dirt is a good thing.
His objective, plain and simple, is to find the best way to filter that dirt out durring the 3000, so there is less to drain out after.
Less dirt is a good thing.
Thanks Terry..I've been lurking for a few months but my E mail was down so couldn't get my password.I'm sorry if I came on a little strong with the Mobil filter thingy,but I guess it was a few months of pent up rants I had to release...I feel better nowquote:
Originally posted by Terry:
Greaser welcome to our world !
- Status
Similar threads
