How important are filtering efficiency specs?
- Thread starter Noey
- Start date
- Status
I can picture particles below a certain size (20 microns) not affecting wear in sleeve bearings with a substantial oil film.
What about cam lobes & lifters, where the film gets very thin?
Of course a timely oil change is the best filter.
What about cam lobes & lifters, where the film gets very thin?
Of course a timely oil change is the best filter.
dnewton3
Staff member
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Surely it isn't going to hurt anything to use a higher end efficiency oil filter. Most of the "wear vs. particle size" articles I've read all basically say that [url=thhttps://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/images/markup_panel/default/bigger.gife][url=thhttps://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/images/markup_panel/default/bigger.gife]thhttps://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/images/markup_panel/default/bigger.gife[/url][/url] more debris (all the way down to 3~5 microns) that can be removed from the oil, the less engine wear there will be.
Will anyone really "notice" it while driving around in their car, even if that car has 100~150K miles on it? Probably not - unless the car was totally abused and the oil was hardly ever changed. But I don't think anyone can prove or justify that not filtering the oil very well will not increase engine wear. It's a matter of by how much, and just how perceivable is it. The only way you'd ever know for sure would to tear down engines, measure everything to the nearest 1/10,000 inch and compare wear along the way as miles piled up using different efficiency filters. Who's going to really do that?
I agree that it does not hurt an engine to use a more efficient filter than what the OEM prescribes.
But I disagree in that is "isn't going to hurt anything", if you are willing to include one's wallet.
I'll paraphrase what Gary Allan used to say, " ... you'll have the best cared for engine in the junkyard ..."
Surely it isn't going to hurt anything to use a higher end efficiency oil filter. Most of the "wear vs. particle size" articles I've read all basically say that [url=thhttps://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/images/markup_panel/default/bigger.gife][url=thhttps://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/images/markup_panel/default/bigger.gife]thhttps://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/images/markup_panel/default/bigger.gife[/url][/url] more debris (all the way down to 3~5 microns) that can be removed from the oil, the less engine wear there will be.
Will anyone really "notice" it while driving around in their car, even if that car has 100~150K miles on it? Probably not - unless the car was totally abused and the oil was hardly ever changed. But I don't think anyone can prove or justify that not filtering the oil very well will not increase engine wear. It's a matter of by how much, and just how perceivable is it. The only way you'd ever know for sure would to tear down engines, measure everything to the nearest 1/10,000 inch and compare wear along the way as miles piled up using different efficiency filters. Who's going to really do that?
I agree that it does not hurt an engine to use a more efficient filter than what the OEM prescribes.
But I disagree in that is "isn't going to hurt anything", if you are willing to include one's wallet.
I'll paraphrase what Gary Allan used to say, " ... you'll have the best cared for engine in the junkyard ..."
Last edited:
I keep my vehicles 15+ years, and just like knowing the filtering (both oil and air) are doing the best job they can possible do. If it costs me $5 more a year that just means I have one less Starbuck's or $5 foot long Subway every year.
flow is allot more important to me then filtration
Originally Posted By: boxcartommie22
flow is allot more important to me then filtration
Right. You've proven that running that rock catcher you use.
Because your high priced,big dollar custom built engines are somehow hindered by today's common oil filters. And using such thick oil like you do you need to lessen all possible resistance,which those steel mesh oil filters provide for you.
Such high stress applications like yours need all the help you can get.
And that steel mesh filter solves all those oiling problems oem's complain about.
Didn't vw have steel mesh filtration in the 70's?
We all know how well those early engines ran,and their durability,but hey,not everyone is as cutting edge right.
flow is allot more important to me then filtration
Right. You've proven that running that rock catcher you use.
Because your high priced,big dollar custom built engines are somehow hindered by today's common oil filters. And using such thick oil like you do you need to lessen all possible resistance,which those steel mesh oil filters provide for you.
Such high stress applications like yours need all the help you can get.
And that steel mesh filter solves all those oiling problems oem's complain about.
Didn't vw have steel mesh filtration in the 70's?
We all know how well those early engines ran,and their durability,but hey,not everyone is as cutting edge right.
If there are efficiency specs (like ISO 4548-12 or beta ratio numbers) listed by a manufacture, I use that information to compare and always go for a pretty high efficiency filter - 95% @ 20 microns or better. Since "flow" demands can be met by any top brand oil filter, I focus on efficiency.
Originally Posted By: jrmason
Does Am$oil even make ANY of their oil filters?
The EAO-80 for example is nothing but a rebadged Donaldson ELF 7349. I'm pretty sure they outsource all their filters, which really contradicts some of their statements in the above link.
I asked that same question about the EaO filters, and was told that Donaldson makes them with Amsoil spec'd media & ratings.
Does Am$oil even make ANY of their oil filters?
The EAO-80 for example is nothing but a rebadged Donaldson ELF 7349. I'm pretty sure they outsource all their filters, which really contradicts some of their statements in the above link.
I asked that same question about the EaO filters, and was told that Donaldson makes them with Amsoil spec'd media & ratings.
Originally Posted By: Noey
Interesting...
20w/50 in an '89 Alfa Spider, 108k miles, as recommended by Alfa.
My old BMW, along with many German cars of the same era, also has 20W-50 recommeded for the ambient temperatures we typically see here during the summer.
I figure that current spec 10W-40 is plenty thick and have posted a UOA to show that it seemed to do just fine in the engine.
WRT filtering efficiency, it depends upon who you ask.
The Japanese OEM filters have pretty low efficiency, although these OEMs could spec any level of efficiency they'd like in these supplier parts.
Makes you wonder whether efficiency is really all that important.
Flow shouldn't be a problem even with the most efficient and restrictive oil filter, something like a P1 with the media intact. Manufacturers aware of all of the variables still supply filters with better flow rates and less efficient media.
I do wonder why.
Interesting...
20w/50 in an '89 Alfa Spider, 108k miles, as recommended by Alfa.
My old BMW, along with many German cars of the same era, also has 20W-50 recommeded for the ambient temperatures we typically see here during the summer.
I figure that current spec 10W-40 is plenty thick and have posted a UOA to show that it seemed to do just fine in the engine.
WRT filtering efficiency, it depends upon who you ask.
The Japanese OEM filters have pretty low efficiency, although these OEMs could spec any level of efficiency they'd like in these supplier parts.
Makes you wonder whether efficiency is really all that important.
Flow shouldn't be a problem even with the most efficient and restrictive oil filter, something like a P1 with the media intact. Manufacturers aware of all of the variables still supply filters with better flow rates and less efficient media.
I do wonder why.
Originally Posted By: circuitsmith
I can picture particles below a certain size (20 microns) not affecting wear in sleeve bearings with a substantial oil film.
What about cam lobes & lifters, where the film gets very thin?
Of course a timely oil change is the best filter.
"In one of our previous studies it was observed that engine oil samples collected from fleet vehicles after 12,000 mile drain interval showed 10-15 % lower friction and more importantly, an order of magnitude lower wear rate than those of fresh oils."
That means a lot to me. One must realize that by changing their oil unnecessarily early they are doing their engine a disservice.
http://papers.sae.org/2007-01-4133/
I can picture particles below a certain size (20 microns) not affecting wear in sleeve bearings with a substantial oil film.
What about cam lobes & lifters, where the film gets very thin?
Of course a timely oil change is the best filter.
"In one of our previous studies it was observed that engine oil samples collected from fleet vehicles after 12,000 mile drain interval showed 10-15 % lower friction and more importantly, an order of magnitude lower wear rate than those of fresh oils."
That means a lot to me. One must realize that by changing their oil unnecessarily early they are doing their engine a disservice.
http://papers.sae.org/2007-01-4133/
Hand wringing over the efficiency of an oil filter is a waste of time. The Japenese OE filters that everyone always gets all worried about because of their "low" efficiency compared to some gucci filter are generally good enough to keep an engine happy for several hundred thousand miles with even the most cavalier approach to maintenence.
- Status
Similar threads
