microGreen Filtration

[Ramblejam]

Full-flow element removes between 25-40 microns
Second-stage microfilter between 2-5 microns

10-20 micron material is what's doing the most damage over time.

While a Fram Ultra effectively filters in this range (94% @ 10 microns, 99% @ 20 microns), it would appear from a cursory evaluation that the microGreen is relying entirely upon their second-stage to capture anything in this range. With only a very small volume of oil going to the microfilter, wouldn't that leave the most damaging material in circulation for a very long time?

 

[CT8]

Most of todays vehicles last 300,00- miles if driven that much. I wonder why the obsession with fancy oil filters bypass filters , Boutique oils because this isn't the 1960's. Unless you rebuild the auto trans your self the car isn't worth the rebuild cost on a 15 year old car..

 

[AirgunSavant]

People like to read specs in their rocking chairs and love to be pumped up with hype....
Most here like to split hairs too. MG is about being green- running the oil out to 30K. But that said
you can run one Ultra easily out to 25K in a new car vs 3 MG filters to get to 30K. I guess this will excite the pencil pushers to see the savings.
Things don't need to make sense to attract the public.......

Originally Posted By: CT8
Most of todays vehicles last 300,00- miles if driven that much. I wonder why the obsession with fancy oil filters bypass filters , Boutique oils because this isn't the 1960's. Unless you rebuild the auto trans your self the car isn't worth the rebuild cost on a 15 year old car..

 

[UncleDave]

Originally Posted By: Ramblejam
Full-flow element removes between 25-40 microns
Second-stage microfilter between 2-5 microns

10-20 micron material is what's doing the most damage over time.

While a Fram Ultra effectively filters in this range (94% @ 10 microns, 99% @ 20 microns), it would appear from a cursory evaluation that the microGreen is relying entirely upon their second-stage to capture anything in this range. With only a very small volume of oil going to the microfilter, wouldn't that leave the most damaging material in circulation for a very long time?




I dont sweat that as the full flow filter also has its beta rate that it will catch smaller particles at.

The 1-3% flow to the microdisk wont take long to circulate through there at the rate an engine turns oil.

Conversely one could say in an extended OCI one might worry as much or more about the accelerating buildup of particles from 2-20 that can increase TBN depletion.



UD

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Originally Posted By: Ramblejam
Full-flow element removes between 25-40 microns
Second-stage microfilter between 2-5 microns

10-20 micron material is what's doing the most damage over time.


I dont sweat that as the full flow filter also has its beta rate that it will catch smaller particles at.

UD


Did anyone actually hear from Micorgreen what the rated efficiency was of both stages? Ie, xx% @ 25 um for main element and xx% @ 2 um for the second bypass stage.

Just listing a micron size that the filter can catch without a corresponding efficiency percent really means nothing.

 

[Johnny2Bad]

The finer the filter, the sooner it clogs, so some small micron value might not achieve what you think it will. When the overflow valve opens you filter nothing. You should use a reasonably well regarded filter and stop worrying about it.

 

[Johnny2Bad]

Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix


Did anyone actually hear from Micorgreen what the rated efficiency was of both stages? Ie, xx% @ 25 um for main element and xx% @ 2 um for the second bypass stage.

Just listing a micron size that the filter can catch without a corresponding efficiency percent really means nothing.


Bingo

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: Johnny2Bad
The finer the filter, the sooner it clogs ...


Basically true with cellulose media. Not always true with today's full synthetic and semi-synthetic media. Depth filtering gives both high efficiency and high holding capacity.

 

[Nate1979]

When they decide to post real specs instead of looking like a slick marketing site with lots of claims and nothing to back it up, I will take them serious. Until then I consider them no better than a snake oil company who refuses to post real verified specs.

 

[UncleDave]

Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Originally Posted By: Ramblejam
Full-flow element removes between 25-40 microns
Second-stage microfilter between 2-5 microns

10-20 micron material is what's doing the most damage over time.


I dont sweat that as the full flow filter also has its beta rate that it will catch smaller particles at.

UD


Did anyone actually hear from Micorgreen what the rated efficiency was of both stages? Ie, xx% @ 25 um for main element and xx% @ 2 um for the second bypass stage.

Just listing a micron size that the filter can catch without a corresponding efficiency percent really means nothing.


I believe we did, dont recall but it was standard synthetic blend stuff.

Remember the efficacy/claims discussion- the filter achieves the claim regardless. Who else makes a 30K sump claim?

Snake Oil?

We have tested proof it works as claimed, by blackstone labs testing.


Show us a test with contrary data and your opinion may some more weight behind it that it does currently.

UD

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: UncleDave

Snake Oil?

We have tested proof it works as claimed, by blackstone labs testing.

Show us a test with contrary data and your opinion may some more weight behind it that it does currently.

UD


Not making any "snake oil" claim. I'm just asking IF Mircogreen actually gave efficiency numbers, and if so what were they? If they didn't then why not?

I'm betting if a Fram Ultra was changed every 10K for 30K miles you'd get the same results on a UOA from Blackstone.

 

[UncleDave]

you didnt- Nate did.

We had a poster get a number back from them with this data in the myriad of MG threads here. It was pretty good

I think if Fram could do it they would have likely marketed it as capable of that - they dont- they dont even suggest you deviate from the manufacturers OCI interval at all.

UD

 

[Nate1979]

Yes, I state again and will every time that their website looks like a snake oil website. If they have posted efficiency numbers from the correct ISO test I will be happy to see them. I don't recall it but may have missed it.

 

[UncleDave]

You can ask for and state what you wish, but you cant show anyone here their claim is misleading because the data posted shows its not.




UD

 

[oil_film_movies]

Thing is, despite MicroGreen's evasiveness with specs, parallel filtration is simply a great idea.
Truckers have this principle of filtering available. http://hastingsfilter.com/Literature/Brochures/F601.pdf

 

[WobblyElvis]

Correct me if I'm wrong here but..
If a regular filter is lets say 97% efficient at removing particles of 20 microns and also %90 efficient at removing 10 micron particles, would it not be about %80 efficient at removing 5 micron particles?
Just guessing at these numbers. If this is true, wouldn't virtually all of the harmful particle be removed from the oil within a few minutes of running. Doesn't the entire volume of oil pass through the filters several times a minute? Even if a regular filter is only %50 efficient at 5 microns it's going to remove those particles very quickly.
Why is there a need for a special filter?

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies
Thing is, despite MicroGreen's evasiveness with specs, parallel filtration is simply a great idea.
Truckers have this principle of filtering available. http://hastingsfilter.com/Literature/Brochures/F601.pdf


Look at the efficiency graph on page 3. Looks like the special "bypass" design doesn't gain any efficiency over the "OE" filter they are comparing it to.

It gains capacity and better cold oil flow (less delta-p across the media).

 

[UncleDave]

Originally Posted By: oil_film_movies
Thing is, despite MicroGreen's evasiveness with specs, parallel filtration is simply a great idea.
Truckers have this principle of filtering available. http://hastingsfilter.com/Literature/Brochures/F601.pdf


Hastings, does it, Baldwin does Cummins does it.....

Im not at all satisfied with not having a 4548-12, but I can't say it doesn't do what they claims as our evidence says it does.

UD

 

[UncleDave]

Originally Posted By: WobblyElvis
Correct me if I'm wrong here but..
If a regular filter is lets say 97% efficient at removing particles of 20 microns and also %90 efficient at removing 10 micron particles, would it not be about %80 efficient at removing 5 micron particles?
Just guessing at these numbers. If this is true, wouldn't virtually all of the harmful particle be removed from the oil within a few minutes of running. Doesn't the entire volume of oil pass through the filters several times a minute? Even if a regular filter is only %50 efficient at 5 microns it's going to remove those particles very quickly.
Why is there a need for a special filter?


Particle removal becomes worse as the particles reduce in size in a non linear fashion - not 1-1

The reason is no other combo has proven to keep the sump in tact over 3 filter and 30K.

What other claim out there matches this much less tests out independently?

UD

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Particle removal becomes worse as the particles reduce in size in a non linear fashion - not 1-1


This is basically how the different types of media filter. Particle micron size on x-axis and filtering efficiency % on y-axis.



Originally Posted By: UncleDave
The reason is no other combo has proven to keep the sump in tact over 3 filter and 30K.

What other claim out there matches this much less tests out independently?


Just because nobody else has "proved" it doesn't mean there are other very efficient oil filters out there that would give the same results as the Microgreen. If the Ultra does 80% @ 5 microns (basically the red synthetic curve above) I'm betting it's going to give indistinguishable performance compared to the Microgreen.