New Oil Filter Study
- Thread starter Boomer
- Start date
- Status
Quote:
Odd that the FRAM PH5 ExtraGaurd and FRAM HM5 High Mileage filters graded differently... They're identical filters right down to the filter paper. Only difference is one has some useless goo in the middle and the other does not.
That's a good point, and it's not close either, about 15 filter grades different. I think there's plenty to be skeptical about in the results of this one time home lab test. Good catch.
Odd that the FRAM PH5 ExtraGaurd and FRAM HM5 High Mileage filters graded differently... They're identical filters right down to the filter paper. Only difference is one has some useless goo in the middle and the other does not.
That's a good point, and it's not close either, about 15 filter grades different. I think there's plenty to be skeptical about in the results of this one time home lab test. Good catch.
Originally Posted By: ltslimjim
lol, NG/WIX has always been on par with Purolator in my book. They've always been priced as middle of the road filters. The best filters in the study, the Amsoil, K&N, Royal Purple etc. are all the priciest filters. If the study is accurate, their final grades correspond well to actual filter price, with the Fram's best filters perhaps being the only few 'shockers', though most knew they were solid products.
+1. As stated earlier, perhaps you get what you pay for.
lol, NG/WIX has always been on par with Purolator in my book. They've always been priced as middle of the road filters. The best filters in the study, the Amsoil, K&N, Royal Purple etc. are all the priciest filters. If the study is accurate, their final grades correspond well to actual filter price, with the Fram's best filters perhaps being the only few 'shockers', though most knew they were solid products.
+1. As stated earlier, perhaps you get what you pay for.
Originally Posted By: Capa
+1. As stated earlier, perhaps you get what you pay for.
Yes, in the end that's what you have to go with. I can only take their words so far from filter studies, and everyone's application is different.
If I recall, some models from certain brands/grades of filter do better vs. another, that may be a better filter for another car...unfortunately you really have to compare all of the filters that are spec'd(or larger that will fit) to know where you should go. Not just picking blindly because of the brand of preference ALL of the time. IMO.
+1. As stated earlier, perhaps you get what you pay for.
Yes, in the end that's what you have to go with. I can only take their words so far from filter studies, and everyone's application is different.
If I recall, some models from certain brands/grades of filter do better vs. another, that may be a better filter for another car...unfortunately you really have to compare all of the filters that are spec'd(or larger that will fit) to know where you should go. Not just picking blindly because of the brand of preference ALL of the time. IMO.
I'm surprised no one has commented yet on this FRAM spec:
"Total inlet opening area (mm²)"
All the Frams (except the Racing) are around 150, while the test average for all the other filters looks to be 250 and up.
"Total inlet opening area (mm²)"
All the Frams (except the Racing) are around 150, while the test average for all the other filters looks to be 250 and up.
Interesting, but no one should ever compare media weight and area between synthetic filters and cellulose filters. The synthetic fiber is so much thinner that you get more "holes" of much finer mesh than a cellulose filter without even going for much depth that they are not comparable.
And I'd like to see the end of the cardboard Fram. I've never seen one where the cardboard sealed (some I've posted, but gotten tired of posting so many with the same defect) against the center tube or valve. He (she) doesn't show us that).
And I'd like to see the end of the cardboard Fram. I've never seen one where the cardboard sealed (some I've posted, but gotten tired of posting so many with the same defect) against the center tube or valve. He (she) doesn't show us that).
I think the grading system has some major flaws but a cool write up none the less. It did confirm (based on the pics mostly) some of my feelings about oil filters. Napa gold (wix), Pure one, and mobil 1 make some awesome filters!
Was any one else kinda unimpressed by the Baldwin filter? I was expecting a little more from it.
Was any one else kinda unimpressed by the Baldwin filter? I was expecting a little more from it.
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2010
- Messages
- 1,663
There are other factors to be had here to folks IMO. This test seemed to focus just on filtration, which obviously is the aspect of an oil filters job. BUT, I would like to have seen flow rates as well. Some filters not only filter better but provide better flow as well. I know when I run the K&N Filter on my car vs the OEM (Denso) there is less lifter tick. My guess is the oil pressure is better with the K&N filter vs OEM. That is my guestimate anyway. Also, filter build quality. The K&N, Royal Purple filters are probably the most durable of the group, thus the added premium when you pay.
It was a interesting test, and took allot of time and allot of money to do. In the end, it all depends on your car, driving habbits, where you drive your car (race, off road) plays a huge role in what filter to buy. When I take my Evo on the track the Tech check there always likes to see a K&N with safety wire tied. So I use that filter when I go to the track, and OEM (Denso) for the street. So application specifics vary cost for sure.
It was a interesting test, and took allot of time and allot of money to do. In the end, it all depends on your car, driving habbits, where you drive your car (race, off road) plays a huge role in what filter to buy. When I take my Evo on the track the Tech check there always likes to see a K&N with safety wire tied. So I use that filter when I go to the track, and OEM (Denso) for the street. So application specifics vary cost for sure.
Would someone please post links to these other oil studies I keep seeing referenced? Thanks!
For the record as an engineer with a little bit of SAE background, I think this was a really great effort. It's no industry-backed SWRI white paper, but better than anything else I've seen before.
(Glad I've switched to an oversized Amsoil Ea for 25k FCI's... Just stocked up on GC to try it out via the current Autozone deal, and will put the silver Napa TG filter on my g/f's car with some of the Penn Plat I've been stocking up on).
For the record as an engineer with a little bit of SAE background, I think this was a really great effort. It's no industry-backed SWRI white paper, but better than anything else I've seen before.
(Glad I've switched to an oversized Amsoil Ea for 25k FCI's... Just stocked up on GC to try it out via the current Autozone deal, and will put the silver Napa TG filter on my g/f's car with some of the Penn Plat I've been stocking up on).
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2002
- Messages
- 39,798
I didn't read all of either the published study nor all your posts, but some of those filters had to be identical yet got different scores. The CQ should have been either a NG or PS ..yet matched neither in score ..and not just for price.
For all we know it's a process variance that could drift the other way next round.
For all we know it's a process variance that could drift the other way next round.
Originally Posted By: BeerLube
Would someone please post links to these other oil studies I keep seeing referenced? Thanks!
Here's the one by river_rat done not long ago. https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/posts/1693153/
If you don't feel like reading all 33 pages (worth it!), his summary information is posted here!
As has been pointed out here several times now, the results of the OP's linked study can't be considered reliable. It's one test, some of exactly the same media, showing very different results.
Would someone please post links to these other oil studies I keep seeing referenced? Thanks!
Here's the one by river_rat done not long ago. https://bobistheoilguy.com/forums/posts/1693153/
If you don't feel like reading all 33 pages (worth it!), his summary information is posted here!
As has been pointed out here several times now, the results of the OP's linked study can't be considered reliable. It's one test, some of exactly the same media, showing very different results.
Originally Posted By: sayjac
With some time to look closer, I now believe it is the amount of contaminate used. Meaning that the 30um results are based on the author's rating of the images on the filter paper.
As others have mentioned, skeptical of results showing the Classic performing better (substantially) than a P1. But this particular one time experimental procedure, doesn't change my opinion of P1. For those that remember, river rat also did his own experimental oil filter study in which the P1 did well. I suspect those that liked P1 for price for filtration will continue to do so, and for those that didn't, this will do nothing to change their mind either.
I agree. He's using photographic images to subjectively rate filters. River_rat's study is still the gold standard.
With some time to look closer, I now believe it is the amount of contaminate used. Meaning that the 30um results are based on the author's rating of the images on the filter paper.
As others have mentioned, skeptical of results showing the Classic performing better (substantially) than a P1. But this particular one time experimental procedure, doesn't change my opinion of P1. For those that remember, river rat also did his own experimental oil filter study in which the P1 did well. I suspect those that liked P1 for price for filtration will continue to do so, and for those that didn't, this will do nothing to change their mind either.
I agree. He's using photographic images to subjectively rate filters. River_rat's study is still the gold standard.
+2 for the last two comments.
Greases oil filter study has some what vanished but I found some of the filter info posted on this site http://www.offshoreonly.com/forums/general-q/86056-oil-filter-study.html
Originally Posted By: steve20
Great info--thanks for sharing
Wonder how many STP filters will be ripped from their mounting pads with utter disgust after reading this? Pobably get used for target practice as well
Steve
P1 user
Well, here's one! Just recently changed my oil, and after seeing the pics of the end caps coming off of the STP filter, I swung by Pep Boys and picked up a Purolator.
Now, I don't have one of those spiffy oil filter cutters, but I managed to cut the STP open with a band saw without losing very many fingers. My first discovery is that this appears to be one of the dreaded ecore filters, is that right?
The second picture shows part of the end cap peeled off. It came off fairly easily, but I don't think it would necessarily have come off during normal use. I'm guessing it would have lasted through a 5000 mi. OCI, but I feel better about the Purolator.
BTW, this is my first post, so please be gentle.
Great info--thanks for sharing
Wonder how many STP filters will be ripped from their mounting pads with utter disgust after reading this? Pobably get used for target practice as well
Steve
P1 user
Well, here's one! Just recently changed my oil, and after seeing the pics of the end caps coming off of the STP filter, I swung by Pep Boys and picked up a Purolator.
Now, I don't have one of those spiffy oil filter cutters, but I managed to cut the STP open with a band saw without losing very many fingers. My first discovery is that this appears to be one of the dreaded ecore filters, is that right?
The second picture shows part of the end cap peeled off. It came off fairly easily, but I don't think it would necessarily have come off during normal use. I'm guessing it would have lasted through a 5000 mi. OCI, but I feel better about the Purolator.
BTW, this is my first post, so please be gentle.
Yes, it's an ecore. As you implied, felt endcap peeling back 'easily', if it didn't come off during the OCI, likely doesn't mean much. Champ designed filters
Your replacement filter, Classic/P1 should serve you well for it's intended 5k or interval, or your cars recommended oci for driving profile.
Your replacement filter, Classic/P1 should serve you well for it's intended 5k or interval, or your cars recommended oci for driving profile.
This will solve every question about how a filter looks inside. Great find!
Originally Posted By: sayjac
Yes, it's an ecore. As you implied, felt endcap peeling back 'easily', if it didn't come off during the OCI, likely doesn't mean much. Champ designed filters
Your replacement filter, Classic/P1 should serve you well for it's intended 5k or interval, or your cars recommended oci for driving profile.
That STP was only on for ~500 miles. I replaced it with a Purolator after seeing the pix of ecores.
Yes, it's an ecore. As you implied, felt endcap peeling back 'easily', if it didn't come off during the OCI, likely doesn't mean much. Champ designed filters
Your replacement filter, Classic/P1 should serve you well for it's intended 5k or interval, or your cars recommended oci for driving profile.
That STP was only on for ~500 miles. I replaced it with a Purolator after seeing the pix of ecores.
archive.org has the spreadsheet from the "grease" study
Btanchors, you need to push the filter to 10k miles. I don't think 5k is loading it up enough to show the filters true performance. The particle counts mean much much more than bench testing since running engine's viscosity and temp swings can vary results.
I do like this GM oil filter study. Dump the writers opinion and 5 filters stick out: RoyalPurple, Amsoil, FramExtended, with honorable mentions to K&N and M1.
I too am surprised at the P1 results. Grease study showed it to be a pretty good filter.
Btanchors, you need to push the filter to 10k miles. I don't think 5k is loading it up enough to show the filters true performance. The particle counts mean much much more than bench testing since running engine's viscosity and temp swings can vary results.
I do like this GM oil filter study. Dump the writers opinion and 5 filters stick out: RoyalPurple, Amsoil, FramExtended, with honorable mentions to K&N and M1.
I too am surprised at the P1 results. Grease study showed it to be a pretty good filter.
- Status
