Ive heard the horror stories of how the Nissan OEM oil filters are made by Fram. My cousin just bought a 2012 Murano, so i checked out the oil filter, and to my surprise, it said made in Japan. Does this sound like a qulaity filter?
Nissan Murano oil filter
- Thread starter mobilaltima
- Start date
- Status
What's the part number? I wonder if it could be a filter supplied by DENSO. From what I understand, Nissan has used them off and on.
The factory filter on my Nissan was a Made in China 15208 65F0D with cardboard end-caps. I'm not necessarily sure that means it was made by Honeywell/Fram though.
The factory filter on my Nissan was a Made in China 15208 65F0D with cardboard end-caps. I'm not necessarily sure that means it was made by Honeywell/Fram though.
Run OEM during warranty and then P1s after if you are worried about the timing chans.
i cant recall the part number, but yeah they got free oil changes and tire rotations for 5 years, so i wont be changing the oil in it for a while
Last edited:
I'm sure the Nissan OEM filter will do the job nicely. Up in Canada, though, I don't see the wisdom in paying OEM filter prices for a filter with fiber endcaps (regardless of country of origin) when I can buy a Wix for around $8 or $9 or so (depending how often Wix plays with their stupid catalog), a Hastings for a buck or so less, or a Bosch for under $5.
dnewton3
Staff member
I would suspect the OEM filter from the factory is a quality unit and not an "el-cheapo" ...
That being said, my BIL has approximately 150k miles on his Murano, and uses the OCOD exclusively. No problems as of yet. It's anecdotal, but just as valid as any other experiences. I don't care for the OCOD, but I fully admit there are millions of them out there in service and they do a decent job.
I personally prefer a filter with better, more robust construction. I think most off-the-shelf filters do a reasonable job when it comes to media efficiency; it's construction that I'm more interested in. Media efficiency is over-blown in my opinion, when viewing it from a "normal" operational cycle.
Allow me to be specific:
Two vehicles that I was personally involved with had two similar events; overheating due to failed water pumps by wives that continued to drive until true overheating failure.
One car was a 1992 Taurus Vulcan 3.0 that had about 160k miles on it at time of failure; it was my work-mate's wife's car. The engine had nothing but Mobil 1 oil and premium filters it's whole life. Upon teardown to mill heads and rebuid, we (my buddy and I) were astounded to see how nice and clean the heads were, and could still see the cross hatching in the cylinders. The cam bearing journals spec'd out nicely and the lobes were in great shape. Mobil 1, we were convinced, had done a great job through the normal OCI durations. We became synthetic believers.
Then, about a year later, my wife did the exact same thing in her 1995 Villager (Nissan Maxima drivetrain). ARGHHHHHHH! Same conditions (overheating due to water pump failure). Except, I had run nothing but "normal" oils and filters. We feared the worst because we belived "normal" oils just we not going to hold up as well. But guess what ... The exact same conditions (cam specs, lobe conditions, cylinder cross-hatching, etc) were in my engine, and I had used nothing but normal oils for 130k miles. Talk about total shock, and having to re-examine our view of lubes! The "normal" oils and filters had protected the engine every bit as well as the "premium" oils and filters. My work-a-day engine was every bit as clean and with low wear, as his "baby'd" engine.
My point is this:
If you follow the "normal" OEM OCI plans, and don't have an engine with known dastardly issues, then any "normal" oil and filter will do just fine. You can use a PureOne or EaO filter that will show excellent lab results in an ISO test, but the reality in the engine bay does not always manifest into those glaring differences. Most of the engine OEMs spec out a filter that more than well-enough protects the engine during "normal" OCI durations. The media efficiency really isn't the end-all-be-all issue many play it out to be. Sure - I agree that we all want good filtration to make the equipment last. What I'm saying is that way more often than not, the OEM spec'd components do just that. No one "needs" a PureOne or EaO for the normal service intervals. They might "want" it, but they don't "need" it any more than they "need" synthetics for normal applications either.
So - to come full circle to the OPs quest, I'd say this. The OEM filter is probably good enough to make the engine far outlast one's desire to own it. Most of the decent brand name filters will also achieve the same result.
That being said, my BIL has approximately 150k miles on his Murano, and uses the OCOD exclusively. No problems as of yet. It's anecdotal, but just as valid as any other experiences. I don't care for the OCOD, but I fully admit there are millions of them out there in service and they do a decent job.
I personally prefer a filter with better, more robust construction. I think most off-the-shelf filters do a reasonable job when it comes to media efficiency; it's construction that I'm more interested in. Media efficiency is over-blown in my opinion, when viewing it from a "normal" operational cycle.
Allow me to be specific:
Two vehicles that I was personally involved with had two similar events; overheating due to failed water pumps by wives that continued to drive until true overheating failure.
One car was a 1992 Taurus Vulcan 3.0 that had about 160k miles on it at time of failure; it was my work-mate's wife's car. The engine had nothing but Mobil 1 oil and premium filters it's whole life. Upon teardown to mill heads and rebuid, we (my buddy and I) were astounded to see how nice and clean the heads were, and could still see the cross hatching in the cylinders. The cam bearing journals spec'd out nicely and the lobes were in great shape. Mobil 1, we were convinced, had done a great job through the normal OCI durations. We became synthetic believers.
Then, about a year later, my wife did the exact same thing in her 1995 Villager (Nissan Maxima drivetrain). ARGHHHHHHH! Same conditions (overheating due to water pump failure). Except, I had run nothing but "normal" oils and filters. We feared the worst because we belived "normal" oils just we not going to hold up as well. But guess what ... The exact same conditions (cam specs, lobe conditions, cylinder cross-hatching, etc) were in my engine, and I had used nothing but normal oils for 130k miles. Talk about total shock, and having to re-examine our view of lubes! The "normal" oils and filters had protected the engine every bit as well as the "premium" oils and filters. My work-a-day engine was every bit as clean and with low wear, as his "baby'd" engine.
My point is this:
If you follow the "normal" OEM OCI plans, and don't have an engine with known dastardly issues, then any "normal" oil and filter will do just fine. You can use a PureOne or EaO filter that will show excellent lab results in an ISO test, but the reality in the engine bay does not always manifest into those glaring differences. Most of the engine OEMs spec out a filter that more than well-enough protects the engine during "normal" OCI durations. The media efficiency really isn't the end-all-be-all issue many play it out to be. Sure - I agree that we all want good filtration to make the equipment last. What I'm saying is that way more often than not, the OEM spec'd components do just that. No one "needs" a PureOne or EaO for the normal service intervals. They might "want" it, but they don't "need" it any more than they "need" synthetics for normal applications either.
So - to come full circle to the OPs quest, I'd say this. The OEM filter is probably good enough to make the engine far outlast one's desire to own it. Most of the decent brand name filters will also achieve the same result.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
You can use a PureOne or EaO filter that will show excellent lab results in an ISO test, but the reality in the engine bay does not always manifest into those glaring differences.
It is kind of amusing how the P1 is given grief, as of late, for not being a long drain filter. Not that long ago, aside from the EaO and the K&N, the P1 didn't have a lot of competition in the "long drain" market and would often be the filter of choice. Now, we have some people concerned about exceeding 3,000 miles with it. What are they running in their oil, flour?
You can use a PureOne or EaO filter that will show excellent lab results in an ISO test, but the reality in the engine bay does not always manifest into those glaring differences.
It is kind of amusing how the P1 is given grief, as of late, for not being a long drain filter. Not that long ago, aside from the EaO and the K&N, the P1 didn't have a lot of competition in the "long drain" market and would often be the filter of choice. Now, we have some people concerned about exceeding 3,000 miles with it. What are they running in their oil, flour?
Originally Posted By: mobilaltima
Ive heard the horror stories of how the Nissan OEM oil filters are made by Fram.
Why is this a "horror story"? Just because a filter is manufactured by FRAM doesn't mean it's identical to an OCOD. FRAM would have manufactured it to NISSAN's specifications, just like Purolator manufactures Motorcraft filters to Ford's specifications. I would have no worries using the factory-recommended filter on any car.
Ive heard the horror stories of how the Nissan OEM oil filters are made by Fram.
Why is this a "horror story"? Just because a filter is manufactured by FRAM doesn't mean it's identical to an OCOD. FRAM would have manufactured it to NISSAN's specifications, just like Purolator manufactures Motorcraft filters to Ford's specifications. I would have no worries using the factory-recommended filter on any car.
- Status
