In defense of Fram

[slalom44]

Originally posted by PreciousBodilyFluids:

quote:

---

Fram says the FL-400S is the same as a PH3600. Both of my enginges use a 3614. Does that mean it won't work?

---

Yes, it will work. According to the Wix cross reference website, PH3614 is compatible with Wix 51348, and PH3600 is compatible with 51516. The two wix filters have the same thread size, same size gaskets, same bypass pressure setting, and same diameter. The only difference is the length of the filter, with the 51516 being 4.828" long and the 51348 being 3.404" long. The Motorcraft filter FL-400S is similar to 51516, but has a silicone ADBV. They're reasonably priced, too.

Look at your filter on your engine. If there's room for a filter 1.4" longer than the one you have on there now, the FL-400S will work fine.

 

[PreciousBodilyFluids]

quote:

---

Ever consider 10-30 HM or 15W-40?

---

Yean, I tried 10/30 Penzoil once on another 22R; leaked about 1 quart a day, where the 20/50 hardly leaked at all. I put 15/40 in the Supra last fall, same result. I really use 20/50 because that's what Toyota says to use though. If they said to use 10/30 I would get new gaskets.

quote:

---

Yes, it will work. According to the Wix cross reference website

---

Well that's what I was looking for. Google is nearly useless now...

"No Filter cross-reference here, but would you like to see our results for naked widgets?!?!"

I had her get one at Walmart while ago, but I'm too sick to change it right now. Summer colds. yum...

 

[tom slick]

the answer to oil starvation on a 22r at startup is to use a remote filter. the oil won't drain out of it and you'll get almost instant oil pressure regardless of what oil filter you use. the startup noise comes from the cam chain slapping it's plastic guides until oil pressure builds up enough to make the cam chain tensioner tighten up the chain. enough of the slapping and the guide will break. there are now aftermarket metal guides to fix the breakage problem.

 

[PreciousBodilyFluids]

tom slick,

Yeah, I'm going to get a metal guide TC when I change mine. I didn't realize that was the main source of the noise though. If that is the case then it's a very good argument for Fram on this motor. When those guides break it can cause serious problems. Perhaps my use of Fram all these years is the reason I've not had to replace my timing chains.

I'll look into the remote for it. Thanks.

[ May 23, 2004, 08:32 PM: Message edited by: PreciousBodilyFluids ]

 

[Mystic]

I will say one thing for FRAM oil filters. There was a post here by Bob in which he talked about how he was able to get extremely low wear using Schaeffer's conventional motor oil and a FRAM oil filter.

What this means I do not know. Does it mean that the quality of an oil filter does not really matter all that much, and flow is more important then filtering ability? Or does it mean that FRAM is better then it looks if you cut a FRAM apart?

 

[PreciousBodilyFluids]

Alright thanks guys. I put the K&N on the Supra and the FL-400S on the truck. The FL-400S is at least as good as Fram for noise and maybe a little better. It makes me wish I still had the idiot light so I could get visual confirmation. Oil pressure is much lower at idle than with the Fram though.

On the Supra oil pressure increased from 38-42 at idle and from 50 to 70 at 3000 over the Fram. This should make the Wife happy because she's always worried that it was "too low". She doesn't know what "too low" is though.

Thanks for helping me get Fram-free!

 

[gerhardb]

quote:

---

Originally posted by motorguy222:
Have you tried Purolator or one of the Champion Labs made filters.SuperTech(made by Champion Labs) at Wal-Mart are good filters.Purolators are also a fine filter.AC Delco would probably be fine to use also.FRAMS are just made cheap,real cheap.

---

The K&N Filter is made by Champion Labs...

I've never has a problem with them... basically the same as the Mobil 1 oil filter, but geared toward better oil flow.

 

[JohnnyO]

On my wife's car I've tried K&N, Mobil 1, AC, and SuperTech filters. The only ones that don't cause rattle at startup are the K&N and M1. I may try a NAPA Gold next time but I'm thinking it's going to rattle too.

 

[Chevy Guy]

I didnt see this mentioned in the Filter test but pressure drop across a filter is not a good way to determine flow or filtering ability. To measure flow, a flow meter is needed, to measure filtering ability, a particulate test is needed. Becuase an oil filter is pumping oil into the system of calibrated oil passages in an engine block, not back to a bucket, pressure drop across the media into an open bucket isnt really telling me anything. This isnt meant to diminish the excellent tests and effort put into them, I'm just trying to understand what the results are telling me.

 

[ZR2RANDO]

Monitoring pressure drop across a filter is a very good way to determine when a filter has reached capacity. Just put a filter inline (with no bypass) with a gauge just before and after, and then watch the pressures as flow (with predetermined particle size and count)is applied.
When that filter starts clogging up the pressure drop will show a visible sharp increase, and flow will decrease and eventually stop. There are devices that can detect paticle count and size that would give exact results if they are needed (they would show that the filter gets more efficient as the filter clogs up, larger particles of course get caught at first, but smaller particles get caught more and more as the filter clogs). Flow tests can show how flow is reduced in relation to time. The pressure drop comparison is an excellent way to compare filters to each other, it is easy to compare the media to each other as long as the effective media area of each filter is known.

 

[Chevy Guy]

quote:

---

Originally posted by ZR2RANDO:
Monitoring pressure drop across a filter is a very good way to determine when a filter has reached capacity. Just put a filter inline (with no bypass) with a gauge just before and after, and then watch the pressures as flow (with predetermined particle size and count)is applied.
When that filter starts clogging up the pressure drop will show a visible sharp increase, and flow will decrease and eventually stop. There are devices that can detect paticle count and size that would give exact results if they are needed (they would show that the filter gets more efficient as the filter clogs up, larger particles of course get caught at first, but smaller particles get caught more and more as the filter clogs). Flow tests can show how flow is reduced in relation to time. The pressure drop comparison is an excellent way to compare filters to each other, it is easy to compare the media to each other as long as the effective media area of each filter is known.

---

Correct, like I said this is a particulate test. The test in question was not. Im curious as to what correlations were determined from this test.

 

[ZR2RANDO]

I would say that the test, as it was done, showed 2 things:
1- The relative values of flow rate ability (maximum capability) of each type of media tested.
2- The relative comparison of pore sizes of the different media tested.

The pressure drop across each filter (even though it is clean/new) is a good point to use for comparison purposes, and intuitively should be a good direct comparison for crud catching ability as well. (It would be cool to see the effect of pleating (2 filters with same area of same media but one with half as many pleats that are twice the depth for example.))

To really test the particle catching capabilities (efficiency/capacity) would of course give more info but I imagine that particle detection gear is pretty far above our budget here...now if we could just borrow some time at our local drug mfgr/oil filter maker...

It would be great if we could run the tests ourselves to verify those claims on the sides of those boxes huh?

 

[Chevy Guy]

quote:

---

Originally posted by ZR2RANDO:
[QB] I would say that the test, as it was done, showed 2 things:
1- The relative values of flow rate ability (maximum capability) of each type of media tested.
2- The relative comparison of pore sizes of the different media tested.

---

If that is the case then it's like saying filtering media can not be improved upon. Everyday we are bombarded with claims of better flow with enhanced filtering capability. By this test, a truly advanced and well performing filter would be deemed inefficient.

 

[ZR2RANDO]

Not sure what this means?..
"By this test, a truly advanced and well performing filter would be deemed inefficient. "

They can make " better flow with enhanced filtering capability" by just using a larger amount of high efficiency media. Any filter has to combine 2 features- flow and filtration, each works against the other. It all depends on the application as to how the two are combined.

 

[brianl703]

quote:

---

Originally posted by PreciousBodilyFluids:
Every engine has starvation on startup. It's just more noticable on the 22R because it has such a noisy valvetrain. The point here is that with Fram it goes away faster than with others.

---

About 8 years ago Ford released a TSB which recommended the use of the FL-820S filter which has a silicone anti-drainback valve. This recommendation was to reduce startup noise on the 2.5L Duratec engine on the 1995 Contour and Mystique. The TSB also mentioned replacing the timing chain guides if an inspection warranted.

Previous version of the oil filter, the FL-820, didn't have a silicone anti-drainback valve.

The old 1995 Contour now has 145,000 miles on it, and I've used nothing but the FL-820S once I read that TSB.

 

[Mamala Bay]

A Vietnam Vet Mechanic once told me that the oil filter is over blown that oil flow was more important. He'd rinse the filter out twice with solvent and says he wants only Fram cause of oil flow??...When you sent out a vehicle in time of war the engines needs OIL FLOW. Can't say if it regards to todays engines but his view was oil flow was more important and filtering of the oil was overblown....

 

[Steve S]

O.K.! it is an opinion.

 

[one3kgt]

Hey, I joined pretty much just to say this....

These are my observations from my own car, I have only used 3 different filters on my car, and only one works...

Fram has a weak check valve(not a bypass) which causes that start up noise on cold starts, normally my car would be off for about 2 days, below 40, before the noise appeared(I used fram when my car was relatively young @65K-80K miles)

K&N, I hate to say it, did even worse. My car was off for 12 hours, before that start up noise appeared. And it was more terrible than I remembered with the fram(135K-136K miles)

With The Stock old style Mitsubishi filters(from denso) I can leave my car off for weeks, and not hear that start up noise. (80K-135K, 136K-147K)

Mitsu changed their filters when I was at 130K miles, so I tried K&N, then I went around to every Mitsu I could find and bought every old filter I could find

As for Fram working on some cars, but others hating it... I think some cars its more important to have strong check valves, especially Mitsu's.

 

[rpn453]

quote:

---

Originally posted by PreciousBodilyFluids:
It causes oil starvation on startup.

---

I wouldn't call it starvation . . . more like it's just a little hungry.

Yeah, I know, that was terrible.

But seriously, I always thought I heard a little more clattering at startup in my '87 Grand Am 2.5L with Fram than with AC Delco, NAPA Silver, or Supertech.

 

[thedawk]

I remeber when I was a teenager back in the 80s and learning all about cars at the time. It's funny because Fram was THE filter of choice back then - both oil and air filters. Maybe it was just small town thinking and mostly ignorance on the part of myself and all of my running buddies. I don't necessarily think Frams are the best anymore after learning about them on this sight. Of course I've ben using them for years now off and on without any problems that I know of.