What do you think about these oil filter tests ?
Are they serious ?
Are they serious ?
Oil filter tests
- Thread starter mougly
- Start date
Wrong sub-forum, but these have been discussed here ad-nauseum. Search function is your friend.
dnewton3
Staff member
Moved to proper forum.
I think they have some improvements needed. That being said I think their filters can be somewhat compared within their own testing parameters. Certainly not any official requirements. It is fun to watch however. It does seem they are showing a willingness to improve as time goes on which is good.
There were folks whining about "His arms flailing around" too much in previous videos.
But it is a fair and balanced test.
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2024
- Messages
- 1,159
Did they measure the restriction on the filter adapter? Didn’t watch or listen to all of it. Too much showmanship.
Their efficiency ranking of the filters they tested don't rank the same as the official ISO 4548-12 efficiency. If their ranking order matched the official ISO rankings, then I'd have more confidence in their test results. The elephant in the room is concluding that the Boss was the most efficient filter, which many here know has about the worse ISO efficiency of all the filters tested. That needs to be explained, and not just accepted, which unfortunately most will do when watching YT videos like this one.
The dP vs flow testing is more believable, and it shows that there isn't really a significant dP vs flow between filters (especially with hot oil) to really matter. Related thread below, which is data from BR's dP vs flow test results.
The dP vs flow testing is more believable, and it shows that there isn't really a significant dP vs flow between filters (especially with hot oil) to really matter. Related thread below, which is data from BR's dP vs flow test results.
Each filter was subjected to the same exact tests.
All testing has bias. Period. And we are not sure if repeatable. It seems cheesy when he roots for and against certain filters.
But they didn't have skin in the game. No need to be biased. Each filter was tested exactly the same.
Bias is bias, they knew what filters they were testing and no, nothing is ever exactly the same. "Need" to have a result is only one form of conscious bias. And the very result differing from standard testing results means either the testing is flawed, some invisible bias, or probably both.
I'm not taking anything away from these guys, so don't take it the wrong way. Their methods are pretty cool to look at and makes a nice video but the whole thing lacks scientific rigor. It's not double blind. It's not fully temperature, ambient pressure controlled. Don't know if all measuring equipment is calibrated and traceable to NIST.
I mean in middle school chem/physics we had to account for all possible errors in our experiments. I don't see much of this in you tube videos.
Bias:
Bias is an unfair preference or inclination for or against a person, group, or idea that affects judgment and decision-making. It can be conscious or unconscious and often leads to prejudiced outcomes.
Scientific rigor:
Scientific rigor is the strict application of the scientific method, ensuring robust and unbiased experimental design, methodology, analysis, interpretation, and reporting of results. It embodies the highest standards and best practices in scientific research, focusing on truth discovery.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1048984323000036
https://vitrek.com/mti-instruments/knowledge-center/measurement-errors/
I guess if results don't meet certain peoples satisfaction it's considered no good. I get it.
I'm not sure what you were expecting. Not one response here has said this is dead nuts great data. It's flawed. I mean I've not seen any solid proof otherwise. Is it better than someone just flappin a lower jaw bone? Probably. Is it dangerously misleading? Probably not short term. Is it useful for picking a good oil filter? No, because it does not match standardized testing.
You don't find it a bit fishy that the filter that ranked the near the best at filtering in their test has the worse official ISO 4548-12 efficiency? There have been many discussions on why that could be. Ascent's official ISO efficiency test also showed with wasn't very good efficiency.
But people who don't really understand oil filters or understand how the ISO test is conducted will not smell the fish in the room, and see the YT video and just believe that the Boss is about the most efficient filter on the market even though the maker (Mann+Hummel) says the Boss ISO efficiency is 99% @ 46u, which would translate to around 50% @ 20u.
Pretty fascinating.
Similar threads
- Locked
