If I drove the xB or Corolla in my sig more, I could do 20K on a Microgard/Service Pro/etc. XL filter easily-they historically put virtually no debris in the filter. I've posted a 19,700 mile multiple oil changes only OCI on the xB that took 3 years (on an OG Ultra XG3600)-it looked like another 20K was possible! The PG EX filters (especially. vietnam made ones) look almost as good.
Microgard Select vs Wix at Oreilly
- Thread starter Carlostrece
- Start date
- Status
I’ve seen a 13k Carquest Premium c&p here that still looked new! Then a torn 5k Ultra….
It "goes further" because the Wix XP media is so inefficient that it takes twice as long to get to its holding capacity rating. In the mean time, it's allowing a lot of debris to go through and also slough off the media and into the oiling system. Reference Ascent's ISO testing.
Filters do not need to be inefficient for them to "go further". Obviously you're only looking at efficiency only & not the filter as a whole. The WIX XP has more advanced media than a Microgard regardless of efficiency. Consequently able to go 20,000 miles, well beyond a Microgard. Efficiency is another aspect though when selecting your preferred filter.
Last edited:
No they don't have to be as shown by the OG Ultra, Titanium, etc filters that have high efficiency and high holding capacity. I was talking specifically about the Wix XP and any other filters similar to it that are rated for a long use OCI, but is inefficient at filtering debris. The main point being that just because it's rated for high miles usage doesn't mean it's "top tier". But of course "top tier" means 10 different things from 10 different people, but for me it's far from "top tier".
I just don't look at efficiency, but how I look at it is that a "filter" is suppose the filter, so for me the efficiency is very near the top of the requirements to make it stand out as "top tier".
Why would you describe the Wix XP media as "more advanced" than the MicroGard Select or any other filter? "More advanced" doesn't mean anything if it's performance isn't very good.
As I've mentioned before, an inefficient filter with 50-60% @ 20u efficiency (ie, Wix XP) used for 20K miles isn't doing what I'd want a 20K filter to do because its efficiency is way too low and would allow much more debris to go past it and into the engine. An inefficient filter like that might be fine for 5K OCIs, but not for much longer OCIs or for using it for 2 or 3 OCIs without changing it out.
Look, Most people shopping for a filter are going to perceive a 20k filter as a higher tier than a 5-10k Microgard. Longer service interval is going to be one of the most important aspects over efficiency for most people. Oreilly's & Service shops are not BITOG nor the majority of buyers. You're looking at it from a BITOG perspective in which that is not most of a consumers way of thinking when shopping for an oil filter. Or the fact that Oreilly's & other places deem the WIX XP higher tier than Microgard.
20,000 miles on an oil filter isn't bad performance. Most folks look at service intervals rather than efficiency & would deem the XP a higher tier than Microgard.
From a service & marketing perspective the XP is higher tier due to buyers placing more emphasis on service interval than efficiency. Again, Most buyers aren't bitog's.
Yes, There are exceptions.
Yes, only based on the mileage rating - but that's only half of the filter's performance. That on-line Fleetguard training course should have touched on the same aspects. If they really knew the efficiency of the XP you think some might change their minds when they get the full story? Some people don't care much about efficiency, and I don't care if they don't care ... not my engines.
If they really know how a very low efficiency filter could impact their engine wear over the long term, they may change their mind ... again, without the full story people are misinformed and blind about a products performance.
Of course, and they are going on reputation and the touting of Wix saying it's their "top tier" oil filter. Yet, Wix has zero efficiency information about the XP on their website. If you call them, they will say the XP's efficiency is "proprietary". Maybe some people hearing that might think it must be some kind super-duper oil filter if it's so good that the efficiency is a "secret", lol.
It is bad performance for that long of use when the efficiency is 50-60% @ 20u. Their mistake not understanding that the longer the OCI the better it is to have higher efficiency, not lower. I could design a filter that could be rated to go 50K miles with efficiency at 25 @ 40u (but not ever tell anyone that information) and claim it's a "top tier" filter because you'd only have to change it 5 times in 250K miles.
Last edited:
Better go put in your complaints to the HR department anywhere they deem WIX XP "Higher Tier".
I don't care what they do, only that I know what their products really are. Others can be fooled if they want.Better go put in your complaints to the HR department.
Meanwhile, You spent all this time talking about WIX XP.I don't care about Wix.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
OK, but you said you agreed with the guy, and expressed that opinion on BITOG, while seemingly acknowledging here (on BITOG) now that it would not be a "Top Tier" filter by BITOG standards
The XP, objectively, is a very poor oil filter. That is, it does not do a very good job at its primary purpose: filtering oil, when compared to other products. I think those on here who, using that standard, contest its status as a "top tier" filter, are quite right in doing so.
I know they've eliminated some of the reinforced poly backing on some filters. That's not a great move in my opinion.
but the XP is known for not only the backing but the full synthetic media.. and afaik that is now gone.
You're the one who claimed it was "top tier" ... it's really not unless you only look at the mileage rating. Based on that thinking, I want one with a 50K mile rating (without knowing the actual efficiency), then it would be "top tier" on steroids.Meanwhile, You spent all this time talking about WIX XP.
Are you a Wix XP user? Why else would you be trying to defend that it's "top tier"?
Last edited:
You're incorrect, I never said it was "Top Tier".
Well, that would be pretty lousy IMO. Seems more cheapening going on.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
True, your description was "higher tier":You're incorrect, I never said it was "Top Tier".
fantastic said:
But ultimately it's the same argument regarding efficiency whether we use "higher" or "top" here, because the Microguard has higher efficiency than the XP.
- Status
Similar threads
