Microgreen - possibly stunning development!
- Thread starter CharlieBauer
- Start date
- Status
Heres what showed up in the mail today.
Not really sure what my ultras rating is.
Its seems there a a few models of ultra that meet that spec but it isn't really a spec anymore.
- The one in the box here isn't listed as having that rating at least that I can see.
Is "hecho in mexico" new or the same?
Not really sure what my ultras rating is.
Its seems there a a few models of ultra that meet that spec but it isn't really a spec anymore.
- The one in the box here isn't listed as having that rating at least that I can see.
Is "hecho in mexico" new or the same?
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Heres what showed up in the mail today.
Not really sure what my ultras rating is.
Its seems there a a few models of ultra that meet that spec but it isn't really a spec anymore.
- The one in the box here isn't listed as having that rating at least that I can see.
Read the asterisk note.
Heres what showed up in the mail today.
Not really sure what my ultras rating is.
Its seems there a a few models of ultra that meet that spec but it isn't really a spec anymore.
- The one in the box here isn't listed as having that rating at least that I can see.
Read the asterisk note.
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
...
Is "hecho in mexico" new or the same?
...
Says made in USA.
...
Is "hecho in mexico" new or the same?
...
Says made in USA.
I guess I may have though importado por mexico on the right may mean its sourced there - thats why I asked vs stated. Im too tired from a 500 mile day and another 5 of work after - to walk out to the shed.
UD
UD
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Heres what showed up in the mail today.
Not really sure what my ultras rating is.
Its seems there a a few models of ultra that meet that spec but it isn't really a spec anymore.
- The one in the box here isn't listed as having that rating at least that I can see.
Read the asterisk note.
Yeah I read the asterisk - The XG7317 in the box isn't one of those.
- and that says nothing about 99% efficiency in that line - you know this.
There needs to be a formula on that line - like it used to be on the website.
UD
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Heres what showed up in the mail today.
Not really sure what my ultras rating is.
Its seems there a a few models of ultra that meet that spec but it isn't really a spec anymore.
- The one in the box here isn't listed as having that rating at least that I can see.
Read the asterisk note.
Yeah I read the asterisk - The XG7317 in the box isn't one of those.
- and that says nothing about 99% efficiency in that line - you know this.
There needs to be a formula on that line - like it used to be on the website.
UD
Last edited:
Back to these guys - Ill deal with my fram disappointment later and move on to my MG disappointments.
Ok now they aren't green anymore - ok
Recent build thats good - I bought three and Ill sacrifice one to the cut and paste gods. (who know what it is now after its been changed - again)
I need a good 2" filter cutter. The longacres I have is too large.
UD
Ok now they aren't green anymore - ok
Recent build thats good - I bought three and Ill sacrifice one to the cut and paste gods. (who know what it is now after its been changed - again)
I need a good 2" filter cutter. The longacres I have is too large.
UD
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Yeah I read the asterisk - The XG7317 in the box isn't one of those.
- and that says nothing about 99% efficiency in that line - you know this.
There needs to be a formula on that line - like it used to be on the website.
UD
Fram always has used the asterisk, then you go find the line below with the asterisk for the details ... even on their website. "Formula on that line" ... say what?
*
Yeah I read the asterisk - The XG7317 in the box isn't one of those.
- and that says nothing about 99% efficiency in that line - you know this.
There needs to be a formula on that line - like it used to be on the website.
UD
Fram always has used the asterisk, then you go find the line below with the asterisk for the details ... even on their website. "Formula on that line" ... say what?
*
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
...
I need a good 2" filter cutter. The longacres I have is too large.
...
UD
Doesn’t yours have 2 sets of holes for the bearings?
...
I need a good 2" filter cutter. The longacres I have is too large.
...
UD
Doesn’t yours have 2 sets of holes for the bearings?
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Back to these guys -
Should be interesting as to what is on the inside.Does it say anywhere on the box where they are made?
Back to these guys -
Should be interesting as to what is on the inside.Does it say anywhere on the box where they are made?
Originally Posted By: DuckRyder
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
...
I need a good 2" filter cutter. The longacres I have is too large.
...
UD
Doesn’t yours have 2 sets of holes for the bearings?
Ill check mañana - hope so!
UD
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
...
I need a good 2" filter cutter. The longacres I have is too large.
...
UD
Doesn’t yours have 2 sets of holes for the bearings?
Ill check mañana - hope so!
UD
Originally Posted By: Toptierpao
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Back to these guys -
Should be interesting as to what is on the inside.Does it say anywhere on the box where they are made?
"hecho en mexico" - same no change.
UD
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Back to these guys -
Should be interesting as to what is on the inside.Does it say anywhere on the box where they are made?
"hecho en mexico" - same no change.
UD
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Yeah I read the asterisk - The XG7317 in the box isn't one of those.
- and that says nothing about 99% efficiency in that line - you know this.
There needs to be a formula on that line - like it used to be on the website.
UD
Fram always has used the asterisk, then you go find the line below with the asterisk for the details ... even on their website. "Formula on that line" ... say what?
*
Maybe - but its meaningless without the other rating- and the asterisk below refers to a different filter.
99% efficient @< 20 microns (or similar) is what I want to see associated with my filter the one I bought not the other 3.
How the website used to label it (I think that was it ? )
There is nothing on the box referencing my filter model at all. The incomplete spec references3 other models.
UD
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Yeah I read the asterisk - The XG7317 in the box isn't one of those.
- and that says nothing about 99% efficiency in that line - you know this.
There needs to be a formula on that line - like it used to be on the website.
UD
Fram always has used the asterisk, then you go find the line below with the asterisk for the details ... even on their website. "Formula on that line" ... say what?
*Maybe - but its meaningless without the other rating- and the asterisk below refers to a different filter.
99% efficient @< 20 microns (or similar) is what I want to see associated with my filter the one I bought not the other 3.
How the website used to label it (I think that was it ? )
There is nothing on the box referencing my filter model at all. The incomplete spec references3 other models.
UD
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Maybe - but its meaningless without the other rating- and the asterisk below refers to a different filter.
99% efficient @< 20 microns (or similar) is what I want to see associated with my filter the one I bought not the other 3.
There is nothing on the box referencing my filter model at all. The incomplete spec references3 other models.
UD
I read it the same way as you,it is misleading and they know most will not know or even pay attention to it. Seems like keeping the masses in the dark is the new world order.
On another note,there is no way I would run oil filters to their 15 and 20k mile limits unless you are >85% highway mileage and no more than one year.
Maybe - but its meaningless without the other rating- and the asterisk below refers to a different filter.
99% efficient @< 20 microns (or similar) is what I want to see associated with my filter the one I bought not the other 3.
There is nothing on the box referencing my filter model at all. The incomplete spec references3 other models.
UD
I read it the same way as you,it is misleading and they know most will not know or even pay attention to it. Seems like keeping the masses in the dark is the new world order.
On another note,there is no way I would run oil filters to their 15 and 20k mile limits unless you are >85% highway mileage and no more than one year.
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Yeah I read the asterisk - The XG7317 in the box isn't one of those.
- and that says nothing about 99% efficiency in that line - you know this.
There needs to be a formula on that line - like it used to be on the website.
UD
Fram always has used the asterisk, then you go find the line below with the asterisk for the details ... even on their website. "Formula on that line" ... say what?
*
Maybe - but its meaningless without the other rating- and the asterisk below refers to a different filter.
99% efficient @< 20 microns (or similar) is what I want to see associated with my filter the one I bought not the other 3.
How the website used to label it (I think that was it ? )
There is nothing on the box referencing my filter model at all. The incomplete spec references3 other models.
UD
You're misunderstanding it. The asterisk line is saying what filter models they used during the ISO test. That's very common among filter companies. At least Fram uses 3 different filter models of different sizes to measure the overall efficiency. Some companies just reference one filter that is the largest sized filter they make.
And it's always been xx% for particles >20 microns (greater than 20 microns) ... which if you've ever seen the multiple discussions about that, it essentially means @20 microns and larger.
And, this has never been clearly explained why they use ">20 microns" ... but after studying the ISO 4548-12 test procedure quite a bit it's because that's the way ISO 4548-12 wants the data reported. See below how they use > for all the particle sizes measured during the test.
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Yeah I read the asterisk - The XG7317 in the box isn't one of those.
- and that says nothing about 99% efficiency in that line - you know this.
There needs to be a formula on that line - like it used to be on the website.
UD
Fram always has used the asterisk, then you go find the line below with the asterisk for the details ... even on their website. "Formula on that line" ... say what?
*Maybe - but its meaningless without the other rating- and the asterisk below refers to a different filter.
99% efficient @< 20 microns (or similar) is what I want to see associated with my filter the one I bought not the other 3.
How the website used to label it (I think that was it ? )
There is nothing on the box referencing my filter model at all. The incomplete spec references3 other models.
UD
You're misunderstanding it. The asterisk line is saying what filter models they used during the ISO test. That's very common among filter companies. At least Fram uses 3 different filter models of different sizes to measure the overall efficiency. Some companies just reference one filter that is the largest sized filter they make.
And it's always been xx% for particles >20 microns (greater than 20 microns) ... which if you've ever seen the multiple discussions about that, it essentially means @20 microns and larger.
And, this has never been clearly explained why they use ">20 microns" ... but after studying the ISO 4548-12 test procedure quite a bit it's because that's the way ISO 4548-12 wants the data reported. See below how they use > for all the particle sizes measured during the test.
Originally Posted By: Toptierpao
I read it the same way as you, it is misleading and they know most will not know or even pay attention to it. Seems like keeping the masses in the dark is the new world order.
It's not misleading when you understand it.
I read it the same way as you, it is misleading and they know most will not know or even pay attention to it. Seems like keeping the masses in the dark is the new world order.
It's not misleading when you understand it.
Uncle Dave, you make a good point. I have a stash of Ultra filters, but mine are XG9688. So is my application 99% > 20 microns? It should be if it's made of the same material, but my application is not reference in the asterisk. Not trying to split hairs. Either way, I still like my Ultra's and I know they are well made for now. With this global economy, next year they could be making them in China.
I've been a big Japanese OEM fan, and some Denso products are now being made in China, so who know what the future will bring?
Motorking has given me the specifications on my filter, so I'm satisfied with it's efficiency. MY application was recently redesigned for Hyundai. Meaning it was improved......I'm happy and satisfied and won't lose any sleep. For the first twenty-years I was using OEM Denso filters which are rated @ 40 microns.
Respectfully,
Pajero!
I've been a big Japanese OEM fan, and some Denso products are now being made in China, so who know what the future will bring?
Motorking has given me the specifications on my filter, so I'm satisfied with it's efficiency. MY application was recently redesigned for Hyundai. Meaning it was improved......I'm happy and satisfied and won't lose any sleep. For the first twenty-years I was using OEM Denso filters which are rated @ 40 microns.
Respectfully,
Pajero!
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Yeah I read the asterisk - The XG7317 in the box isn't one of those.
- and that says nothing about 99% efficiency in that line - you know this.
There needs to be a formula on that line - like it used to be on the website.
UD
Fram always has used the asterisk, then you go find the line below with the asterisk for the details ... even on their website. "Formula on that line" ... say what?
*
Maybe - but its meaningless without the other rating- and the asterisk below refers to a different filter.
99% efficient @< 20 microns (or similar) is what I want to see associated with my filter the one I bought not the other 3.
How the website used to label it (I think that was it ? )
There is nothing on the box referencing my filter model at all. The incomplete spec references3 other models.
UD
You're misunderstanding it. The asterisk line is saying what filter models they used during the ISO test. That's very common among filter companies. At least Fram uses 3 different filter models of different sizes to measure the overall efficiency. Some companies just reference one filter that is the largest sized filter they make.
And it's always been xx% for particles >20 microns (greater than 20 microns) ... which if you've ever seen the multiple discussions about that, it essentially means @20 microns and larger.
And, this has never been clearly explained why they use ">20 microns" ... but after studying the ISO 4548-12 test procedure quite a bit it's because that's the way ISO 4548-12 wants the data reported. See below how they use > for all the particle sizes measured during the test.
I understand it fine.
They didn't use my filter in the test and there are three that meet the spec- the one in the box must not be one of those or it would be on the box.
They used to be clear - now its marketing speak.
They dont use the formula 99@ efficient @ < 20 microns(or similar) in one line anywhere anymore. There are parts and pieces of numbers and formulas everywhere but not together - and not referencing my filter.
Websites changed as have the boxes.
The box says 3 filters meet the spec all completely different part number some look like a different line up entirely but I have no way of knowing unless I start cross referencing what they say meet spec against what Im actually buying. - none of them the one I bought.
It may be as efficiency as the old one - they just dont state that clearly anywhere anymore- I hope so as I use these filter.
UD
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: UncleDave
Yeah I read the asterisk - The XG7317 in the box isn't one of those.
- and that says nothing about 99% efficiency in that line - you know this.
There needs to be a formula on that line - like it used to be on the website.
UD
Fram always has used the asterisk, then you go find the line below with the asterisk for the details ... even on their website. "Formula on that line" ... say what?
*Maybe - but its meaningless without the other rating- and the asterisk below refers to a different filter.
99% efficient @< 20 microns (or similar) is what I want to see associated with my filter the one I bought not the other 3.
How the website used to label it (I think that was it ? )
There is nothing on the box referencing my filter model at all. The incomplete spec references3 other models.
UD
You're misunderstanding it. The asterisk line is saying what filter models they used during the ISO test. That's very common among filter companies. At least Fram uses 3 different filter models of different sizes to measure the overall efficiency. Some companies just reference one filter that is the largest sized filter they make.
And it's always been xx% for particles >20 microns (greater than 20 microns) ... which if you've ever seen the multiple discussions about that, it essentially means @20 microns and larger.
And, this has never been clearly explained why they use ">20 microns" ... but after studying the ISO 4548-12 test procedure quite a bit it's because that's the way ISO 4548-12 wants the data reported. See below how they use > for all the particle sizes measured during the test.
I understand it fine.
They didn't use my filter in the test and there are three that meet the spec- the one in the box must not be one of those or it would be on the box.
They used to be clear - now its marketing speak.
They dont use the formula 99@ efficient @ < 20 microns(or similar) in one line anywhere anymore. There are parts and pieces of numbers and formulas everywhere but not together - and not referencing my filter.
Websites changed as have the boxes.
The box says 3 filters meet the spec all completely different part number some look like a different line up entirely but I have no way of knowing unless I start cross referencing what they say meet spec against what Im actually buying. - none of them the one I bought.
It may be as efficiency as the old one - they just dont state that clearly anywhere anymore- I hope so as I use these filter.
UD
- Status
Similar threads
