My E-core filter report, with pics

[Filter guy]

This report is in four parts:

Part One: The basics

2003 Ford Taurus
Date of sample: July 27th, 2005
Total miles on vehicle at time of sample - 31378
Miles since last oil and filter change- 6770
( 5,400 highway miles, 1,370 city miles)
E-core filter part number used ST 3600
Type of oil used: Mobil 1 synthetic 0-20W

Part Two: Oil Analysis

I have had four consecutive oil analysis done on my engine. If you do oil analysis it is best when you compare your current result versus your previous results to get an indication of what is going on within your engine.

WearCheck USA has done all of my analysis for this engine. So the testing methods are consistent. The sampling methods are inconsistent because I have used different locations to change my oil, which means different mechanics. So that can have some of an effect on the oil analysis results.

There are three categories for their test:
Wear, Contaminant, and Fluid. All three for this sample came back as “normal”. I will list them individually and show the previous sample result first, then the current reading last. The numbers are generally in PPM ( parts per million):

Contamination:
Silicon- 27--24
Potassium- 3.3.--0.0
Sodium- 6.1--6.8
Fuel (%)- less than 2.0-- less than 2.0
Glycol- none–none
Water- less than 0.1– less than 0.1
Soot–0–0
Sulfation–22–0
Nitration–16–95

Oil Condition:
Boron–124–137
Barium–0.0–0.0
Calcium–2562–3188
Magnesium–17–18
Molybdenum–72–84
Sodium–6.1–6.8
Phosphorus–780-977
Sulfur–1981–2335
Zinc–922–1072
Visc@100 C–9.75–10.28
Oxidation–39–0
TAN–( not tested) –5.67

Wear:
Iron–8.4–8.4
Nickle–1.3–0.9
Chromium–0.8–0.8
Titanium-- 0.2–0.2
Copper– 5.8–11
Aluminum–3.5–3.8
Tin–0.0–0.0
Lead–24–27
Silver–0.0–0.0


There are bar graphs on the back of the report for Iron, Aluminum, Copper, Lead, Silicon to chart the total testing. There is also a particle count chart which I can not duplicate. But at 10 microns the chart shows 14,000 ppm’s, at 20 microns the chart shows 700 ppm’s.

As for the TAN testing, I had that done two samples ago. That report after going 9,198 miles between oil changes came back at 3.60. Which is near oil breakdown. The current test is 5.67 which is well within the safety range of the oil.

( I'll add the other two shortly , if you're one of the first to read this....)

 

[Steve S]

Do the E cores have the same filter material depending on house brand name ?

 

[Filter guy]

Part Three: Filter testing

This is where I took the benefit that consumers do not have. Due to my contacts at Champ in engineering I asked , and was given permission, to send my E-core filter back for testing to check filter life. They were to return the filter back intact. My goal was to have Lube Owner cut my filter open and then we both look at the element with the testing results in hand. Then take pictures of the cut open filter. Lube Owner never confirmed he would cut my filter open. As it ended up, Champ cut my filter open and returned it to me.

Below is the test report on my E-core filter it had the “old” gasket. Not the newer wider one. I had no leaks on my filter during it’s use.:

SUBJECT TEST REPORT NO. 2296
PAGE 1 of 1

ST 3600 Flow Restriction -

REPORTED BY LAB
DATE 8/29/2005


Filter Tested: Filter manufactured on 10/04/04.


Test Criteria:
Flow Restriction: SAE HS806-2001, RFO 3 oil, 180F, 20 cSt, 1 -18 gpm.
Element Integrity : SAE HS806-2001 (bubble point).

Results:

Flow Rate - gpm Sample #1 - psi

2--------------------0.6
3--------------------1.0
6--------------------2.0
9--------------------3.0
12-------------------4.2
15-------------------5.6
18-------------------7.0


Results:

1st Bubble Leak

2 in. w.c.


Comments:
Filter was still serviceable. Element integrity test supports functionality of filtration. Differential pressure suggests engine in vehicle produces low levels of contaminant indicative of a vehicle with the noted mileage.


Explaination:

Champ did a flow restriction test. This indicates the differential pressure drop across the filter element. My filter by-pass setting is 8-11psid. So in theory when this test is run you look for the restriction level of your filter versus the opening pressure of the by-pass valve. You can look at various flow levels to see the chances of your filter going into full by-pass mode during operation. All filters go into by-pass at startup.

Now when the test report was done, the engineer could not believe how “low” my filter tested at 3 gpm based on miles run. So they cut my filter open because they “thought” there was a chance the element integrity may have been compromised. ( what this means in laymen terms is that maybe a pleat or the endcap was not sealed properly. And this happens in metal endcap filters as well).

So Champ decided to run a Bubble Point test. Which means they had to cut open the filter to test the element integrity. This test uses a water column to test internally the element for any leaks through the media ( holes, tears, rips ) or the end caps. My element passed the test. There was nothing wrong with it, as pictures will show. But the test will find any breach that the human eye can not see.

What this report basically ended up accomplishing is to tell me my engine has very little contaminants that the filter is exposed to. Champ has continuous field testing on E-core filters. I discussed my results with the engineer. Champ has filters come back from test vehicles with a lot more restriction than my filter tested and a lot more miles. Which is why they thought there may have been a problem with the element. Actually, the element did it’s job...there just wasn’t much of a job to do!

Which brings me to all the questions of how long will my filter last or what about those OEM’s with 10,000 mile change intervals. I can say on my engine that my filter would have lasted 3-4 oil changes before I would have any concern. Or maybe as much as 25,000 miles or more. The problem is my oil won’t last that long.

BUT, this is where the big debate goes when others post pictures of “bad” elements. Every filter, regardless of brand, does it’s job. The end result one see’s when the filter is cut open is nothing more than what has transpired –with that individual engine –since the filter was installed.

Unless you know the full specifics of the engine mileage, miles since last oil change, an oil analysis, type of use, etc..people have a tendency to be overly dramatic and generalize based on lack of information.

I am fortunate because of my work and connections to get answers on my oil and filters.

So in order to appease some who might think that my test is some sort of fluke or whatever, I will offer for someone from this forum who uses a Champ made filter, preferably an E-core or Clicker style by-pass , to have the same flow restriction test performed on their filter element. Preferably by someone who does oil analysis but that is not requirement. You will need to post the results for all to see when you get the report. Send me a PM if you are interested. I can only do this for one person, as I do not want to tie up Champs lab equipment. I’m sure you can understand.

 

[Filter guy]

Part Four: The pictures.

There are five pictures.

Picture one: The complete filter with lab sticker from testing.

Picture two: The component parts.

Picture three: The nylon center tube area.

Picture four: The element pleats and end caps

Picture five: The element seam.

It is picture five that I want to explain. Many have seen pictures of Champ filters ( or cut open your own). You will always see this. Why is that? There are generally three methods of seaming the two sides of the media together. One is to overlap the two pleats and have the glues that are cured in the end caps hold the ends of the media in place. The second is to use a metal clip which is a machine process to clip the two ends together.

The third is the way Champ does it. To take the two ends of the media and put them into a seamer which glues the two ends of the media together, the full length of the pleat. The way this is accomplished is through pressure applied by rollers. It is the roller that spaces the one pleat with the seamed element. So you will always see one pleat with a gap. That’s the roller that did that. Champ builds approximately 500,000 filters per day. You do the math as far as whether or not this process has been tested and works. Champ has been building filters since 1955 this way. Again, do the math..

[ September 07, 2005, 07:57 AM: Message edited by: Gary Allan ]

 

[motorguy222]

How can one trust Champ to tell the truth if they do send you a filter for testing?

I and probably others are leary of some company practices.

 

[Filter guy]

quote:

---

Originally posted by motorguy222:
How can one trust Champ to tell the truth if they do send you a filter for testing?

I and probably others are leary of some company practices.

---

You want my filter to look for yourself?

It may be hard to see in the picture but I knew someone would ask this silly question.

So I took a tool and "marked" my filter with the letter "M" directly above the "P" in Super Tech. Doubt Champ even noticed.

But that is also why I have offered, if you read the full report, for someone else to send a filter back and have this done for theirs.

And btw....Champ never sent me any filter(s)..I bought mine at Walmart.

 

[motorguy222]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Filter guy:

quote:

---

Originally posted by motorguy222:
How can one trust Champ to tell the truth if they do send you a filter for testing?

I and probably others are leary of some company practices.

---

You want my filter to look for yourself?

It may be hard to see in the picture but I knew someone would ask this silly question.

So I took a tool and "marked" my filter with the letter "M" directly above the "P" in Super Tech. Doubt Champ even noticed.

But that is also why I have offered, if you read the full report, for someone else to send a filter back and have this done for theirs.

And btw....Champ never sent me any filter(s)..I bought mine at Walmart.

---

I am not implying that Champ sent you a filter.

In your post you stated that one could send you a filter for testing.

If you read my post again,you will see that I am asking how one can trust Champ to tell the truth about a filter if one does send you a filter for testing.

I am asking whether or not one can trust Champ to truthfully tell someone if their filter has failed.

You have connections,they may tell you the truth but will they do so again,especially if the filter in question has failed.

The question you called silly is not silly.

It is a question that deserves an answer,not an insult.

 

[Filter guy]

In the first place , my filter didn't fail. Nor was there an engine claim against the filter.

So what difference does that make to Champ when they test my filter? I had an idea that my filter was going to come out fine.

As you live in Kentucky, maybe I'll select you and you can drive over and take a day out of your life and watch your filter tested. Just to make sure there's no funny business.

 

[Big O Dave]

I just want to make sure you're the real FG before I keep reading...

 

[Filter guy]

Nah..I wouldn't..

Only been in the biz since 1982. Currently concentrating on Industrial Filtration..
hydraulics, pnuematics, and compressor filters..
Was just out in LA and San Diego..and El Centro..two weeks ago..

Where's gary with my pics..

 

[Bio-T]

Filter guy,

Thanks for your input on this. It is very interesting and informative. We finally have some real data from the lab on FF filters and it is impressive.

Again, thanks for the information that you provide and the time you spend on here to relay that info. It is nice to have this type information.

 

[Ugly3]

Interesting report. Clearly the flow is really great. I was disappointed in the particle count.

An M1 filter run about 5,000 miles reported:

>2 microns = 757
>5 microns = 280
>10 microns = 77
>15 microns = 30
>25 microns = 7
>50 microns = 0

I guess all filters are not created equal.

 

[G-MAN]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Filter guy:
[QB]Flow Rate - gpm Sample #1 - psi

2--------------------0.6
3--------------------1.0
6--------------------2.0
9--------------------3.0
12-------------------4.2
15-------------------5.6
18-------------------7.0

---

Trying to understand your table here: 7 gpm at 18psi?

 

[Gary Allan]

quote:

---

An M1 filter run about 5,000 miles reported:

>2 microns = 757
>5 microns = 280
>10 microns = 77
>15 microns = 30
>25 microns = 7
>50 microns = 0

---

Err...you sure about them numbers there, Ugly3?? They're below virgin numbers ..and I seem to recall a couple of members that had worse numbers (still great) with bypass filters on their rigs

 

[Filter guy]

quote:

---

Originally posted by G-Man II:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Filter guy:
[QB]Flow Rate - gpm Sample #1 - psi

2--------------------0.6
3--------------------1.0
6--------------------2.0
9--------------------3.0
12-------------------4.2
15-------------------5.6
18-------------------7.0

---

Trying to understand your table here: 7 gpm at 18psi?

---

I do believe that should have been PSID...as the test was for restriction and that's a typo in the report heading.

I'll varify today..

 

[Gary Allan]

I thin` that it's gpm/psid

So at 2 gpm ... 0.6 psid


Looks about right to me ..at least for the "normal" flow rates (9 gpm and below)

That's some healthy flow there.

 

[MADMIKE]

Thanks Filter Guy! I've always thought all this e-core hysteria was unfounded speculation. I've used Champ filters under several different brand names for decades with no problems and my engines always outlasted the rest of the car. Thanks for being a balanced voice of reason to keep the fear and scare mongers at bay!

 

[goodvibes]

I wasn't going to use an e-core until they'd been around for a while. I always liked the design and am a believer in the KISS principal. Just wanted Champion to get through any teething pains on a new design. Seems like all is good now. Maybe it always was but my comfort level has now been reached. Thanks Filter Guy.

 

[kanling]

I notice in the pictures that there are faint horizontal "clean stripes" in the media. Are these where the media rests against the nylon cage? If so, it supports my theory that media blocked by a portion of a center tube without holes (in traditionally designed filters) is essentially useless. That would mean a lot more effective filtering area for an E-core with wide openings in the nylon cage.

 

[Gary Allan]

quote:

---

I notice in the pictures that there are faint horizontal "clean stripes" in the media. Are these where the media rests against the nylon cage? If so, it supports my theory that media blocked by a portion of a center tube without holes (in traditionally designed filters) is essentially useless. That would mean a lot more effective filtering area for an E-core with wide openings in the nylon cage.

---

I washed out the image to get a view of the center tube ..and it appears that you're correct...or so I reason