I was at WalMart tonight and after seeing online of a possible filter change in the ST9972 I just had to check it out. For just $2.97 each for these filters look the same at the Fram XG9972 that I paid $10.97 on Amazon. Well you know me I bought all seven on the shelf for my 2019 Toyota Sienna SE Premium. Impressive at this price. I never would go 10k miles on any oil for I change mine every six months regardless of miles. Nice value for under $3. See pictures and let me know your opinions.
I saw a picture on Walmart website of a filter change of the ST9972. Impressive!
- Thread starter CDB
- Start date
US made, and it looks good. Win win.
Since the discovery of this ST cartridge application, been discussed often on the oil filter subforum. It's quickly become a popular cartridge for Toyota cartridge users. It has been a unicorn of sorts, but checking a couple days ago, other ST cartridges have shown up with the same construction, including but not limited to the GM Ecotec engine cartridge. Hard to beat for ~$3.
Looks very close to the Fram XG9972 of which are white and not pink media anymore. I am quite surprised at t it for under $3.
Yes Indeed! Will get more when I am back at Walmart
Pink XG media gone with the cheapening of the Ultra XG media by First Brands. I'm thinking these ST cartridges still made by First Brands, Champ or Fram. Yes, wire backed media ~$3, a deal. How long it will continue, hard to say. First Brands makes changes regularly now. Was surprised to see it now used in other ST cartridges.
Last edited:
Interesting, I usually just buy the OEM Toyota filter from Walmart for my mom's Sienna. Maybe I'll go with ST this time. I use an ST oil filter in the 06 Accord. 0 issues so far
I have an older one from 2023 and it was like pictured below. It is about 2cm shorter that others so I never used it. Plus the plastic ends block so filter media flow in my opinion. I went to another Walmart and got 7 more and so I believe I am good for life for I still have Fram XG9972 as well
dnewton3
Staff member
The construction of many recent ST filters seems to be fairly robust, appearing desirable. Unfortunately, the filtration efficiency leaves something to be desired.
OTOH ... given the potential leak paths in other brands, I'm not sure that the above critique even matters these days. Pretty much most filters are a far cry from what we BITOGers find acceptable.
OTOH ... given the potential leak paths in other brands, I'm not sure that the above critique even matters these days. Pretty much most filters are a far cry from what we BITOGers find acceptable.
dnewton3
Staff member
This is a great example of assumptions made manifesting into opinions which likely have no real basis for complaint. I'll explain ...
Your complaint is that the large overlap of the top and bottom caps on the sides of the media "block media flow", in your opinion.
Question: How do you know that the engineers who designed this filter didn't take that overlap into account when they calculated the surface area available for flow?
My point being that the engineer(s) who spec'd this out probably took into account the overlap and found the resultant surface area sufficient for the required flow. Why do you assume that the media covered by the end caps is compromising the flow required for the application; it's likely that area wasn't intended to be included in the flow.
I see these kinds of assumptions all the time. People want to find errors to complain about, and yet don't consider the possibility that the characteristic they worry about was already accounted for in the design criteria.
I've seen the same type of assumption about filtration life, especially when it comes to air filters. People assume that filters are calculated at 100% of the total capability of flow when new, and so as they age (load with particulate) they will always be at some value less than acceptable for the design requirements of the application. But that's just ignorant of how products are designed, typically.
Example: If an air filter is intended for an application which consumes a maximum of 600 CFM, then the air filter isn't designed for 600 CFM when new. Rather, it's probably capable of 800 CFM when new, and then the flow degrades as it loads. Maybe the intended lifecycle is 30k miles, and the filter would reasonably be expected to drop 150 CFM over that lifecycle. So at the END of it's intended cycle, it would still flow 650 CFM for an application that only requires 600 CFM max.
DON'T AUTOMATICALLY ASSUME that the condition you view is the best-case and it only gets worse from there. It's is quite likely that the engineer(s) took into account the various criteria and adjusted the product for lifecycle degradation and/or attribute restrictions.
Last edited:
Does the 2 cm shorter include the center extender rings shown? As for endcaps, the media wrap type nylon caps shown are used on many cartridge applications, highly doubtful it would have any effect on flow. The big key is, does the earlier version filter well in the Toyota housing, not too long? If so imo good to go. As for efficiency of the new ST cartridge, I'd feel pretty confident saying at least as good as the OEM, and likely better. Fwiw, if I owned a cartridge application vehicle and the ST cartridge media type available as shown and a good fit in housing, I'd use them.
Thanks CDB for the photos. It's a very encouraging sign for Super Tech filters. Many store chains nowadays do the due diligence in reviewing their store brands to make sure quality is the same or better than name brands. My hope is that Walmart has noticed the decline in quality of the First Brand filters (in general) and could at some point use another manufacturer whose main focus is quality improvement rather than cheapening the product.
Last edited:
I used nothing but ST cartridge filters for 110K on my daughters dodge and although they were twisted, which was normal for the 3.6. They always held up. And she ran them way longer than I ever would have. The olm was just a recommendation to her!
Like how people seem to always comment on oil filter base plate holes. Lots of big holes "looks" better and gives the impression that the filter is going to work better. Sure it will reduce the overall dP across the filter some (a few PSI at most), but the difference is very small compared to the total dP of the oiling system and doesn't really matter with a PD oil pump. Yet, 90% of the filter buyers will most likely pick the filter with more or bigger inlet holes without knowing anything more about it.
So my neighbor asked me to do a quick oil change today on his daughter's car. Ran to wallyworld real quick for a filter and the only one they had in stock was the supertech. I often don't use supertech but did notice these are wire backed. Filter seems pretty nice quality for the under $3 bucks at walmart. Has this filter always been like this or is this new? For the money it's not bad at all
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2023
- Messages
- 1,434
Yes, these seem quite decent. Here’s another post from last year:
I was checking out filters at Walmart today and I inspected the new version of the Supertech 10k rated 9972 made for Toyotas. I was impressed.
It’s wire backed, has a metal crimp seam, very good pleat spacing, and perfect gluing.
The box says it’s still rated 99% at 30 microns, but given what I’m seeing here I wouldn’t be surprised if it were actually better than that and they just haven’t changed the printing on the boxes. This is about the closest thing I have found to the Fram Endurance and Amsoil filters. And it’s only $3.
Here are some pics:
...
It’s wire backed, has a metal crimp seam, very good pleat spacing, and perfect gluing.
The box says it’s still rated 99% at 30 microns, but given what I’m seeing here I wouldn’t be surprised if it were actually better than that and they just haven’t changed the printing on the boxes. This is about the closest thing I have found to the Fram Endurance and Amsoil filters. And it’s only $3.
Here are some pics:
