MicroGreen filter

[kschachn]

Originally Posted By: pbm
I believe it was BITOGer DBMaster who ran MGs in his Mazda and went 30K (on the oil...changing the MG every 10K) without issue and had good UOAs...

Yes, and when asked, he stated he never tested the oil from when he didn't run the filter. As a result there was nothing to compare it against, he may just as well have had identical results with the same oil but a different filter.

 

[UncleDave]

Microgreen replied to a poster here what they claim their 4548-12 number is.

this is their reply to - Ihatetochangeoil

The full flow filter is 99%@20 microns. The microdisk is rated 99%@5 micron. The 2 micron rating of the microdisk is captured through oil analysis and you can even find customers who have posted their results on BITOG. The Fram Ultra that you mention lists their efficiency as 99%@ >20 microns on the page link you listed. We’re not trying to start anything, but it’s worth mentioning since that is a slight contrast vs. what is being stated below and many filters would be able to claim 99% @ >20 microns.

For what it's worth, the title to my email was "Microgreen filters efficiency ratings per ISO 4548-12."




UD

 

[DuckRyder]

Originally Posted By: UncleDave
... then we have firsthand evidence here they have won more fleet contracts as we've seen one come on a car a well known poster bought at a fleet auction (put there by accident I think not).

...


Unless you know how that specific fleet is managed, that really doesn’t prove anything... It could simply have been what that vehicles driver put on it...

 

[UncleDave]

The Orange county data posted does say how they manage it in their annual report.



UD

 

[DuckRyder]

Originally Posted By: UncleDave
The Orange county data posted does say how they manage it in their annual report.



UD



But is that where the “car a well known poster bought at a fleet auction” came from?

 

[UncleDave]

No its not.

RambleJams bought a Saturn from a fleet auction that came with a Microgreen on it.

The Orange county data is a separate piece of data.

UD

 

[DuckRyder]

Originally Posted By: UncleDave
No its not.

RambleJams bought a Saturn from a fleet auction that came with a Microgreen on it.

The Orange county data is a separate piece of data.

UD


My point is that someone buying a car from a fleet auction with a Microgreen on it doesn’t prove anything unless you know what fleet owned it and how that fleet is managed.

 

[UncleDave]

In this case we don't know how it was used only that it was used.

What it does prove is the fleet manager in charge of that auto chose the microgreen filter.

It did not purchase itself and screw itself onto the car.


UD

 

[DuckRyder]

Originally Posted By: UncleDave

In this case we don't know how it was used only that it was used.

What it does prove is the fleet manager in charge of that auto chose the microgreen filter.

It did not purchase itself and screw itself onto the car.


UD


It doesn’t prove that at all.

Some fleets the “fleet manager” gives the driver a schedule and it is entirely up to the driver to perform the maintenance and submit the expense or use the company supplied card for said expenses,

So without knowing who owned it and how they manage it you cannot say any thing other than that car had a micro green filter on it.

Your claim that that proves Microgreen “ won more fleet contracts” is flat out ludicrous and calls into question ALL of the other data provided by you.

 

[oil_film_movies]

Originally Posted By: DuckRyder
Your claim that that proves Microgreen “ won more fleet contracts” is flat out ludicrous and calls into question ALL of the other data provided by you.
Thats nonsense. UncleDave has provided 4548-12 data someone got directly from MicroGreen. You don't believe it? Then you don't believe anything any filter maker tells you I guess. Too much cynicism. MicroGreen is still in business, selling to fleets and the public, thats for sure.

http://hsevi.ir/RI_Standard/File/5578 is the 4548-12 spec, and I can see why MicroGreen tested the microfilter disc separately since test dust sizes would be different vs. the main media.

The fleet data rules. Simple as that. Real world "dust" hitting the filter is not fully simulated with 4548-12.

Unanswered though is whether a Fram Ultra would provide just as clean oil in 10k usage intervals.

 

[DuckRyder]

Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies
Originally Posted By: DuckRyder
Your claim that that proves Microgreen “ won more fleet contracts” is flat out ludicrous and calls into question ALL of the other data provided by you.
Thats nonsense. UncleDave has provided 4548-12 data someone got directly from MicroGreen. You don't believe it? Then you don't believe anything any filter maker tells you I guess. Too much cynicism. MicroGreen is still in business, selling to fleets and the public, thats for sure.

http://hsevi.ir/RI_Standard/File/5578 is the 4548-12 spec, and I can see why MicroGreen tested the microfilter disc separately since test dust sizes would be different vs. the main media.

The fleet data rules. Simple as that. Real world "dust" hitting the filter is not fully simulated with 4548-12.

Unanswered though is whether a Fram Ultra would provide just as clean oil in 10k usage intervals.




What is nonsense is that such flawed logic is held out as proof, so no I don’t believe anything he post, he has zero credibility with me after making such a spurious claim.

 

[UncleDave]

Poster mentioned it was purchased out of a managed fleet and professionally maintained - but I did not expect you to actually do any legwork before replying with personal attacks.

All data was provided by third parties only posted by me.

Attack them with supposition and skepticism at your leisure.


UD

 

[UncleDave]

Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies
Originally Posted By: DuckRyder
Your claim that that proves Microgreen “ won more fleet contracts” is flat out ludicrous and calls into question ALL of the other data provided by you.
Thats nonsense. UncleDave has provided 4548-12 data someone got directly from MicroGreen. You don't believe it? Then you don't believe anything any filter maker tells you I guess. Too much cynicism. MicroGreen is still in business, selling to fleets and the public, thats for sure.

http://hsevi.ir/RI_Standard/File/5578 is the 4548-12 spec, and I can see why MicroGreen tested the microfilter disc separately since test dust sizes would be different vs. the main media.

The fleet data rules. Simple as that. Real world "dust" hitting the filter is not fully simulated with 4548-12.

Unanswered though is whether a Fram Ultra would provide just as clean oil in 10k usage intervals.




I use the word "evidence"- people put the word "proof" in my mouth. Talk about untrustworthy behavior worthy of completely ignoring someone.

It's my belief after looking at the data that the device works very slowly, Steve Kirchner mentioned once i a vid it would take 5K miles to fully clean a dirty sump - implying they tested it.

The flow % has been discussed and its always a very small number like 1-3% .

This would take a very long 4548-12 run to simulate hitch is likely why they don't focus on this, but on a regimen instead.

The guys here are away interesting selectively focusing on some data yet completely ignoring and changing the burden of proof when confronted with other data.

Seemingly and usually otherwise smart guys lose their ability to use google when it comes to this filter.


UD

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies
Unanswered though is whether a Fram Ultra would provide just as clean oil in 10k usage intervals.


It would be interesting to see a UOA with a particle count between those two filters after 10K of use on the same engine with the same brand/weight of oil.

 

[spasm3]

Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies
Unanswered though is whether a Fram Ultra would provide just as clean oil in 10k usage intervals.


It would be interesting to see a UOA with a particle count between those two filters after 10K of use on the same engine with the same brand/weight of oil.


I'd like to see it at 3-5k as filters filter better over time. Theoretically they filter the least efficient when new.

 

[DdDd]

Can somebody please point out to me where this magical unicorn of a micro filter is located on their cartridge filters? You know, the kind of filter cropping up on most modern vehicles sold today?

What I see (and I may be blind here) is a green foam sock over a normal synthetic fiber filter. And said magical sock is what filters to five microns? Sounds like some K&N engineering right there...

I wonder why Fram or Purolator who also make synthetic filters don't recommend 30k mile OCIs. Could it be because it is patently reckless to suggest this when OEMs insist otherwise? You know, the same OEM who is going to deny your warranty claim?

It's also interesting how their "guarantee" in essence only covers defects in the filter. Damage caused by 30k OCIs is mentioned nowhere in their promises.

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Seemingly and usually otherwise smart guys lose their ability to use google when it comes to this filter.

Why are we reduced to Googling anything about the filter when the manufacturer should be supplying standardized test data that can be compared to other filters on the market? Since we are supposed to "Google" for our data about this filter, I searched for sintered Teflon filter media. What is the sintering density I'm supposed to look at to determine the filtering ability of the filter? I also Googled "oil filters", which one of those results gives me the filtering efficiency of the main element? I also Googled "external filtering sock", which one of those results tells me that the sock used on their cartridge filters won't weaken and sag like the one in the picture?

I'll tell you how it really is, seeming and usually otherwise smart guys lose their ability to think in a logical manner when it comes to this filter. Not you specifically, but it seems as though people who denigrate and dismiss any filter that doesn't provide ISO filtration data (OEM, Denso, etc.) somehow think that a singular email to one poster on an Internet board is suddenly all that ever needs to be provided. Did microGreen ever answer you when you asked for the same data? Did they ever answer me? If that data was so readily available to one person who asked, why isn't it available to others that ask the same question? Even more, if the answer is such an awesome answer that blows everyone else away, why not publish that answer on your website and in your literature?

 

[goodtimes]

So this unproven theory oil filters filter better with use is now gospel through repeating it over and over?
MG says a lot about the testing, no graphs I can see, but they even put the disk on other filters and in 40 miles 85% more 5 micron particles were filtered out over the standard filters. They say. I believe they did that from the way they describe it.
The same can be said for any information, the filter rep says 80% @ 5 microns and everyone believes it. He says. Amsoil draws a graph. No one knows if any of it is true. Someone asks for data on the phone, and the data becomes fact. No it doesn't, not to me.
Then a guy on here with no agenda that it is his product he is selling, actually tests the Ultra against his Toyota copy filter, with data from Blackstone, and when the particle count is in favor of the copy filter, the thread becomes quiet. Interesting psychology more than anything.

 

[DBMaster]

I've been using MG for three years now - 10K per filter, 30K OCI. Did a UOA at the end of the first run - oil used was M1 AFE 0W-20. UOA came back decent, with adequate TBN remaining. I've posted the UOA several times already so look for it if you really want to see it. I buy the filters on sale, pay no more than $10 each, and use them with confidence. Too much analysis paralysis around here.

 

[UncleDave]

Originally Posted By: DdDd
Can somebody please point out to me where this magical unicorn of a micro filter is located on their cartridge filters? You know, the kind of filter cropping up on most modern vehicles sold today?

What I see (and I may be blind here) is a green foam sock over a normal synthetic fiber filter. And said magical sock is what filters to five microns? Sounds like some K&N engineering right there...

I wonder why Fram or Purolator who also make synthetic filters don't recommend 30k mile OCIs. Could it be because it is patently reckless to suggest this when OEMs insist otherwise? You know, the same OEM who is going to deny your warranty claim?

It's also interesting how their "guarantee" in essence only covers defects in the filter. Damage caused by 30k OCIs is mentioned nowhere in their promises.


Im with you on the cartridge filter- the sock makes little to no sense to me as to how it could provide an extended sump, even if changed 3 X.

Your statement about their warranty s not what I find when I look.

http://www.microgreenfilter.com/Site/Customer-Service/warranty.aspx

SOMS Limited Warranty

We stand behind our product, but in the unlikely event that your vehicle is damaged as a result of using the microGreen filter, SOMS Technologies LLC (SOMS) offers protection. Our limited warranty covers the use of the microGreen filter throughout the extended service life that we have recommended, up to the cost of replacing the engine.

Thats a fairly strong statement.

UD