Oh oh, more Ultra drama

[cheesepuffs2]

Why do people have an issue with Fram filter media now? Even if it changed, isn't it still 99% at 20 microns? If so then who cares.

 

[OVERKILL]

LoL ... dude, it was a joke. Got my "dude" in to be square, lol. Yeah, it's the same thing.

You just seem to be being overly pedantic for the sake of being contrary, sorry I didn't take it as a friendly dig.

How do you know that same exact model filter Fram tested didn't show the increase in efficiency compared to the OG Ultra in the same model/size? You would have to do the same exact test with the old vs new on the same model of filter. I keep saying that the size and test operation setup between labs can give different results, but nobody seems to absorb that fact. There are all kinds of factors that could result in what Fram said about the efficiency increasing below 20u.

I'm not denying the lab results theory, I'm calling into question the accuracy of the figures provided in that e-mail, given all the other inconsistencies, that's it. Your "how do you know" premise hinges on those figures, in that e-mail, being accurate. I'm simply saying that given the other inconsistencies, I'm inclined to discount that document as a whole and simply go by the less precise >99% claim.

I'm not saying he was lieing ... that's a "reach" meant in the nicest way (got one of those in there too). Don't know why you'd think he was lieing.

I don't think he's lying, I am saying that by questioning this, you are implying that he is. He explicitly stated:

It is the only oil filter in the market with two layers of full synthetic media

Synthetic glass microfiber media filters will never degrade when immersed in oil. Typical cellulose/synthetic blends can and will degrade over time.

He stated, quite clearly, that the media was full synthetic glass microfiber.

All I said is that Fram NEVER uses the words "100% synthetic" or "Full synthetic" ... regardless if they meant it was or not.

But Jay did, multiple times, per the above.

It's really not hard to understand the logic.

I'm not seeing the logic, I'm seeing you contradict what Jay said, seemingly just to be contrary at this juncture?

And how do you know Cuimmings not using "100%" or "full" really means it is?

Because they say so in their freakin' media breakdowns which I posted in the "what is in your filter" thread? Sweet Christ man!

If you want to continue to go off the reservation with this "personal journey" regarding whether synthetic filter media is REALLY synthetic if they don't say "full" synthetic, you are going to have to continue without me, I lack the patience and tinfoil for that journey.

 

[bbhero]

Here we go again ... "get a grip". You're really being insulting ... maybe you don't thinks so, but you are.

You have absolutley zero proof they lied, because you have zero test data on the same filter model/size in the same exact lab with the same operator and test setup as done on the new Ultra model/size. Just seems this won't sink in.


If you could actually comprehend what I write you wouldn't even make that comment.

Not gonna argue man…

But seriously…

It’s obvious what they did…. To anyone paying attention or remotely objective.

Cheapened a exceptionally great product.

Then made things up or… they were ignorant about the former product.

It’s still a very good filter.

 

[Hall]

And if we’re willing to pay a certain amount for specific materials and construction, why isn’t someone filling that market?

It's not worth their time. You're vastly overestimating how many of these would be sold, not to mention all of the different part numbers that would be needed.

HPL has targeted a small niche market for essentially bespoke oils, yet because of their business mindset and production capabilities, they can easily make small batches to satisfy the need, without negatively impacting their overall operations.

Odds are they are using existing raw materials so it's primarily a simple change in changing the blend. Even then, their oils run $12-14/quart and I'll bet you it's not because of "better" ingredients, it's volume-based.

and simply make small batches of premium filters by substituting the better media

Now that media is a low-volume component, which means higher cost to purchase, which will be passed on to the consumer. A large filter company probably produces millions of oil filters annually, using the same filter material. They're not going to produce a few thousand filters using an unnecessary media for an unknown market.

 

[bbhero]

Zero proof…

Hilarious…


Join reality. .

You are way, way better than this.

Overkill is exactly right.

 

[Hall]

I said this in another thread, there are too many people who have wild, unrealistic expectations for oil filters. If components aren't of certain materials, etc, etc, it's "junk".

Why do people have an issue with Fram filter media now? Even if it changed, isn't it still 99% at 20 microns? If so then who cares.

 

[OVERKILL]

Why do people have an issue with Fram filter media now? Even if it changed, isn't it still 99% at 20 microns? If so then who cares.

Synthetic medias are superior in many respects, please see my "what's in your filter" thread pinned to the top of this sub-forum.

The issue is that FRAM cheapened the filter after First Brands took them over. We know cost cutting was a goal, they said as much. The Toughguard is 99% at 20 microns, the Ultra is >99% at 20 microns, so more efficient. The beauty of the full synthetic media filter with wire backing was that this was truly premium construction and filtration with no risk of media tears or swelling due to moisture. With the "update" we lost the wire backing, they clearly absorb moisture, and the media distorts. Thankfully, we have not seen any tears, but that risk exists.

It's still a fantastically efficient filter, it's just less than it was and for some people, well, they aren't happy with that. I'm one of those, I didn't like to see it cheapened.

 

[Furious]

Why do people have an issue with Fram filter media now? Even if it changed, isn't it still 99% at 20 microns? If so then who cares.

Simple answer to that, people these days love to jump on bs bandwagons and often times make up things.

Simple fact is the filter is 99%+ efficiency at 20 microns, one of the best on the market in terms of filtration, don't like it? don't run it, it is that simple.

 

[ZeeOSix]

You just seem to be being overly pedantic for the sake of being contrary, sorry I didn't take it as a friendly dig.

Hey ... you got really bent out of shape over someone using "dude", and I took it as a dig here ... so sue me, lol.

I'm not denying the lab results theory, I'm calling into question the accuracy of the figures provided in that e-mail, given all the other inconsistencies, that's it. Your "how do you know" premise hinges on those figures, in that e-mail, being accurate. I'm simply saying that given the other inconsistencies, I'm inclined to discount that document as a whole and simply go by the less precise >99% claim.

Niether you or me, or anyone else knows for sure unless the testing I mentioned was done. I simply say the conclusion that the info Fram gave is wrong or that they "lied" about it isn't 100% known for the reasons I gave about filter efficiency testing variables. Simple as that.

I don't think he's lying, I am saying that by questioning this, you are implying that he is. He explicitly stated:

He stated, quite clearly, that the media was full synthetic glass microfiber.

But Jay did, multiple times, per the above.

I'm not seeing the logic, I'm seeing you contradict what Jay said, seemingly just to be contrary at this juncture?

If you think I said or even implied he was lying, then you are reading between the lines. All I've said is that Fram has never used the words "100% synthetic" or "full synthetic". How you believe I think Jay lied about it is really a reach ... big time. Not appreciated either.

Because they say so in their freakin' media breakdowns which I posted in the "what is in your filter" thread? Sweet Christ man!

Go back to the post you first showed the Cummings info ... all you showed was this ... that's what my comment was about ... context matters.

If you want to continue to go off the reservation with this "personal journey" regarding whether synthetic filter media is REALLY synthetic if they don't say "full" synthetic, you are going to have to continue without me, I lack the patience and tinfoil for that journey.

Technically, I have a valid point ... you can't convince me that when someone says "synthetic media" that it's 100% synthetic without proof. Just because it says "synthetic media" doesn't automatically mean it's 100% or full synthetic. Who ultimately defines "synthetic" media. If you can prove otherwise, go for it.

Since Fram still calls the new Ultra the "Ultra Synthetic" it seems inaccurate now since they specifically say it's synthetic blend media ... maybe they should just call it the "Ultra" now.

 

[blufeb95]

No grippy paint has always been a thing on larger filters for HD applications.

 

[Furious]

No grippy paint has always been a thing on larger filters for HD applications.

Just did a quick look into this, looks like you are correct. And before someone says FRAM is lying about the "Sure-Grip" the filters without it do not have it listed on the packaging.

 

[bbhero]

We just disagree.

That’s the way it goes at times.

You are a good guy Zee.

That I believe is true.

 

[OVERKILL]

Hey ... you got really bent out of shape over someone using "dude", and I took it as a dig here ... so sue me, lol.

It wasn't a dig, clearly, and I didn't see your edit about that until right now when I went back to look at our quotes. I figure you and I have a reasonable rapport on here, using "dude" in that context was more like a "wut" to which you responded (before your edit) what I thought was reasonable:

LoL ... not the way they express it. I go for accuracy.

To which I responded in kind with "sue me". Since I thought we were doing a British Humour bit

If you think I said or even implied he was lying, then you are reading between the lines. All I've said is that Fram has never used the words "100% synthetic" or "full synthetic". How you believe I think Jay lied about it is really a reach ... big time. Not appreciated either.

So, just to be clear, JAY EXPLICITLY SAID it was full synthetic. You read the quotes right? So then what are the grounds on which to question the validity of the use of the term "synthetic" when discussing the OG? At that juncture what verbiage FRAM uses is wholly immaterial if Jay has already explained it IS in fact a fully synthetic microglass media. This is where you are losing people. It also makes that ridiculously error-ridden e-mail even more ridiculous, lol.

Go back to the post you first showed the Cummings info ... all you showed was this ... that's what my comment was about ... context matters.

Cummins refers to synthetic media, all types, broadly, as just synthetic media. The pic you quoted states it's made from glass or various polymers. There really isn't much to be left up to interpretation. Blends are their own type of media, labelled as such, and have a widely accepted definition.

Since Fram still calls the it the "Ultra Synthetic" is seems inaccurate now ... maybe they should just call it the "Ultra" now.

I agree with that, it should not longer be labelled as a synthetic media filter. I feel they think they are justified in keeping the label because of the synthetic "topper" over the cellulose blend media. I think that's pretty greasy personally.

 

[blufeb95]

They don't have anything about the Ultra or Tough Gaurd in 12750 size listed on their website, but the 10575 size is still recommended along with it on the GM cars it recommends it for, the 12750 is about a half inch taller and doesn't have the grippy paint, I'm not sure why they've essentially created a second version of the 10575 without the grippy paint.

 

[ZeeOSix]

You just seem to be being overly pedantic for the sake of being contrary

LoL ... and you're are not? Had to point that out.

 

[OVERKILL]

LoL ... and you're are not? Had to point that out.

View attachment 143800

I've never denied that, lol.

 

[SC Maintenance]

Industrial material costs are way, way up in the last 2 years. Not to mention labor, and since all these filter companies have been consolidated I presume there all carrying a ton of debt which is also going up. So every filter manufacture has or will do something.

Choices are to raise the price - seems like what M+H did, or Cheapen the product - seems like what Fram is doing. Same as Shrinkflation. Some do both I suppose.

My guess is walmart is Fram's largest customer, and they don't like price increases. I am willing to bet this is just the start. Were now seeing louvers on the ultra. Louvers I think would be cheaper to stamp based on my knowledge of stamping. We have already seen crappy threads - too cheap to change out the tap.

Whats next - who knows.

 

[ZeeOSix]

It wasn't a dig, clearly, and I didn't see your edit about that until right now when I went back to look at our quotes. I figure you and I have a reasonable rapport on here, using "dude" in that context was more like a "wut" to which you responded (before your edit) what I thought was reasonable:

I just took it as a dig ... so guess people need to make it more clear what their intentions are when they post. People can take things differently then intended.

So, just to be clear, JAY EXPLICITLY SAID it was full synthetic. You read the quotes right? So then what are the grounds on which to question the validity of the use of the term "synthetic" when discussing the OG? At that juncture what FRAM uses is wholly immaterial if Jay has already explained it IS in fact a fully synthetic microglass media. This is where you are losing people.

Again ... I simply pointed out that Fram never used the term "full synthetic". IMO, if it was you'd think they should have used the term, I certainly would have as a clear selling point ... easy as that. Doesn't mean Jay was right or wrong or "lying" about it ... nobody said he was or has proved he was. People thinking I'm "implying" that are making assumptions. I just find it odd that Fram never used the term "full synthetic" ... period.

I agree with that, it should not longer be labelled as a synthetic media filter. I feel they think they are justified in keeping the label because of the synthetic "topper" over the cellulose blend media. I think that's pretty greasy personally.

It's no longer a "full synthetic" media, even though they are using the term "synthetic" pretty loose ... just like anyone can if they wanted to. Must be because it still has some synthetic media in it ... the "topper" layer. There are no rules, regulations or laws that say a filter maker can't use the term "synthetic media" unless it was 100% full synthetic media.

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

Well, per the Ascent testing data, the OG Ultra had the 2nd highest holding capacity tested, so, I think it was something to be proud of and he was right to be. But yeah, if you are liberating significant amounts of stuff like we saw with my first HPL run, changing the filter early, no matter how good that filter is, is probably a good idea.

I wasn’t knocking the Ultra capacity; I was using it to show if the Ultra could only hold half an ounce of particulates… other, lower-tier filters really need to be changed more often.

 

[OVERKILL]

I just took it as a dig ... so guess people need to make it more clear what their intentions are when they post. People can take things differently then intended.

I figured given our history that wasn't necessary, so my apologies that you took it wrong.

Again ... I simply pointed out that Fram never used the term "full synthetic". IMO, if it was they should have used the term, I certainly would have ... easy as that.

But Cummins doesn't, Donaldson doesn't consistently...etc. The media types are pretty well defined, so perhaps it just isn't seen as necessary.

Doesn't mean Jay was right or wrong or "lying" about it

Jay's quotes were provided for context on the media being full synthetic because you said it might not be:

Who knows if Fram meant 100% "full synthetic" when they use the term "synthetic". It could be, or it could be it was close to 100% synthetic and simply therefore called "synthetic".

... nobody said he was or has proved he was. People thinking I'm "implying" that are making assumptions.

It was based on your replies to the above quote where you didn't acknowledge that Jay's quotes pretty much put an end to any debate on that regarding the OG:

Like already said ... when's the last time you saw a "full synthetic" oil that was actually 100% full synthetic? Same thing could be going on with oil filter media claims.

No, it's not weak. Fram has NEVER said that their media in the Ultra was "full synthetic" or 100% synthetic". If it was, don't you think they would use one of those terms?

Since these were in response to my quotes from Jay, it definitely came across as you doubting the validity of what he said.

I just find it odd that Fram never used the term "full synthetic" ... period.

I don't, simply because I've read enough material on medias that these categories appear to be well defined, so it's likely that it's not really thought of as being necessary.

It's now not "full synthetic", even though they are using the term "synthetic" pretty loose ... just like anyone can if they wanted to. There are now rules or laws that say you can't use the word "synthetic" unless it was 100% synthetic media.

Well, the "topper" is synthetic, so it DOES have a synthetic layer, but still, even if that's accurate, it's still underhanded to keep that verbiage on the box IMHO. That said, the website DOES describe it correctly as a blend: