Yeah, probably not the only reason, but certainly a big one. Cummins Filtration already carries over 8,000 SKUs today and pass car would create even more complexity...our path to market is mostly geared at HD markets anyways.
Are you sure?
That's not how I was instructed on the matter, but I'm also open to being corrected too. I'll check with legal to see if there are any nuances there that specific to the markets we serve today. One thing I've learned with some of the large off-highway OEMs is that many of them offer maintenance programs for buyers of brand new equipment, often times for the first couple of years after brand new, that covers free maintenance events so there's really no incentive for changing to aftermarket product with a brand new machine anyways. As soon as that program is over though, that's when it may benefit a user to opt for upgraded filtration.
Thanks for all that info in Post #12. I was wondering if any tests were done to compare the efficiency of lab tested filters (per an industry standard like ISO 4548-12 or similar) to correlate oil cleanliness and engine wear rates in the field with the use of different efficiency oil filters. I know there have been studies done in the past and have found and read a few studies (Cummings and Pall Corporation I believe, and a few SAE studies).
In the 2012 you lay under the filter to change it... On my diesel I'm not sure it makes a huge difference, other cars I agree...Good question. Cummins Filtration and DAVCO have a strategic alliance...DAVCO makes the housings, Cummins Filtration supplies the Elemax filter elements that go in the housings. Even the private branded Detroit Diesel filter elements are made by Cummins Filtration, in fact. DAVCO makes a range of Pro series housings for different vehicle/equipment applications...DieselPro, FuelPro, IndustrialPro and SeaPro. Typically DAVCO units are more expensive than the competitive offerings from Racor/Parker, but the DAVCO/Fleetguard combo is capable of much longer service intervals with higher filtration efficiency/water separation efficiency.
I used them on my '06 5.9 Ram 3500, the last one I put on is still on it (sold the truck to my brother, he would bring it over to change the oil). It worked fine for me. Assuming the 6.7 ISB has the same specs as the 5.9?
I suspect the difference between the LF9028 and LF16035 are very minimal. I see that the LF9028 is a StrataPore + Venturi Combo filter, which we still make a lot of HD lube filters using that technology...it was very popular through the 2000's in many Fleetguard lube filters. I'll check the technical specs on the LF16035 tomorrow when I'm on my work computer to see if I can see any major differences, but gut check tells me you'd be fine using the LF9028. Is there a reason you want to try the other one out?
Only reason I got a couple was a previous 6.7L Cummins owner had traded in on a Powerstroke. He had four LF9028 left over plus, four FS53000 fuel filters. All for $100, I couldn’t hand him the money fast enough
.Hey there. I can dig into this next week when I'm on my work laptop...should be able to pull some detailed specs for you.
