Thanks @Bellavita! Very nice. A couple of thoughts. I removed a no-name filter off my daughter's 2010 Subaru Outback yesterday and it was interesting to me to see how the filter just dumped most of its oil after I removed it from the car. I am used to Fram Ultras that hold almost all the oil. There is a difference in ADBV performance! Second point is that the rankings would change a lot if you ran the filters for say two OCIs, which is pretty conservative if we can believe the ratings of 15-25,000 miles on some of them. I'm not sure I would run any filter for more than a year, but I bet you could do it as long as the mileage was OK. That might be several normal OCIs, making for a very different cost analyses.
Oil Filter Value Analysis
- Thread starter Bellavita
- Start date
I really like your idea of a two OCI ranking, practical and a more real world application. I'll replace the current one that maximizes the rated life of the filter with a 2 OCI ranking. Great feedback, thank you.
AuthorEditor,
Your idea is implemented, we're at version 3.0! All the filters have been analyzed to get 2 OCIs except for those that are rated less than that. For example the OCI on my Subaru is 6,000 miles. If the filter life is rated at 10,000 miles, the number of oil changes is 1.7.
An interesting filter is the Fram Tough Guard. Its combination of performance, features and price point consistently has it at the top in both categories.
Thanks again for the excellent input.
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2022
- Messages
- 5,566
Is the Champ XL really 99%@20um and the Supertech is 99%@30um, when by every measure from the cut opens there the same filter?
Thanks for the quick update! Unfortunately, my go-to autoparts store (closest to home) is Advance Auto and they sell the Pure One at $12.79. At that price I can get the Fram Endurance at Walmart, which I think is a better filter. Obviously, you have to adjust the spreadsheet for your own local prices and availability.
Definitely the Endurance is a better filter . . . a great choice. In fact in the analysis it is ranked #1 in the Performance & Features area.
The PureOne is available on Amazon for $8.74 with Prime 1 day ship. I live in Wisconsin and the DIY Menards chain carries the Purolator line also.
Hi SC Maintenance,
Great question. Go all the way to the right of the analysis and you'll find a link of a BITOG member that emailed Champion with that question and they were told the XLs are at 20um.
If the Champ XL didn't have the $4.99 shipping cost, it would shoot to the top of the analysis. It has very good performance specs and features.
Interesting that Tough Guards still win out even at 2 OCIs. I wonder how much difference there is between the Tough Guard and the Ultra? Doesn't look like much other than the media.
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2022
- Messages
- 5,566
Well, my guess is the email they got was from whomever the temp agency sent that day.
If it were truly 99%@20um they would advertise it everywhere, or on the box at minimum, and it would be more than $3.50 at RA.
I like the filter, I just don't believe that spec.
Hi AuthorEditor,
There is not much difference per the analysis. The filtration performance is the same and the Tough Guard is rated at 15K miles, Ultra at 20K. Both use synthetics in the media. For the extra 5K rating the Ultra costs $2.53 (39%) more than the Tough Guard. Lot of value for $6.44 with the Tough Guard.
I'm with you, I like their filter also. Not much difference in the media description for the filters. The Champ XL is a "synthetic blend" and the Supertechs state "natural & synthetic fibers".
I had to email Wix to get the efficiency and micron rating for the 57055 filter for my Subaru. 99% @23 microns, good numbers and yet they do not publish it.
There is no way to determine if one design is better than the other on every oil filter made becasue in order to do that you would have to literally do a controlled dP vs flow test on every one of them. Basically an impossible task. In the end, the only thing that can impact the dP caused by the center tube is if there are not enough holes or louvers, or if louvers are very choked down. Again, you couldn't prove just how choked down louvers would need to be to become a significant impact to dP vs flow.
The bottom line is that if a center tube is built right, regardless if it's holes, louvers or the nylon cage (eCore), there won't be enough different in "flow" (meaning the actual dP vs flow) to make any difference since an engine's oiling system is lubricated with a positive displacement oil pump.
Last edited:
I seem to recall that someone once calculated the surface area of all the holes on some filter that was deemed "too restrictive" and it was surprising how much area there was. Maybe I'm wrong, but I imagine reputable companies pull samples off the assembly line on a regular basis for testing to make sure they meet standards, and even though we think the holes and slits look too small that isn't supported by their data.
Whet does Eff score, Micron Score and Filter Life score mean?
Hi Bart_9,
Thank you for the question! The score is a ranking with 1 being the best within a category. I'll use the Fram Tough Guard as an example.
The TG's efficiency is 99% and scores a 2. This means there is another filter that is better. (It is the Ecoguard Synthetic at 99.9% with a score of 1)
The TG's efficiency is at 20 microns and scores a 2. (The FVP oil filter has the smallest micron at 15 and scores a 1)
The TG's filter life is rated at 15,000 miles and scores a 3. (The Fram Endurance at 25,000 miles is best and scores a 1)
I recently added the media type and anti drain back features to the scoring.
The TG's filter media is a synthetic fiber and cellulose blend and scores a 3. (Filters Fram Endurance, Titanium and Purolator Boss that are synthetic with a wire or mesh backing score a 1.)
The TG's anti-drainback material is silicone and scores a 1. (Filters that use nitrile score a 2)
We add the five scores and get a total of 11 for performance and features for the Fram Tough Guard and is ranked 4th. The Fram Endurance scores a 7 and is ranked 1st.
I hope this helps, and as always, I'm open to ideas to make the analysis better!
Thank you for the question! The score is a ranking with 1 being the best within a category. I'll use the Fram Tough Guard as an example.
The TG's efficiency is 99% and scores a 2. This means there is another filter that is better. (It is the Ecoguard Synthetic at 99.9% with a score of 1)
The TG's efficiency is at 20 microns and scores a 2. (The FVP oil filter has the smallest micron at 15 and scores a 1)
The TG's filter life is rated at 15,000 miles and scores a 3. (The Fram Endurance at 25,000 miles is best and scores a 1)
I recently added the media type and anti drain back features to the scoring.
The TG's filter media is a synthetic fiber and cellulose blend and scores a 3. (Filters Fram Endurance, Titanium and Purolator Boss that are synthetic with a wire or mesh backing score a 1.)
The TG's anti-drainback material is silicone and scores a 1. (Filters that use nitrile score a 2)
We add the five scores and get a total of 11 for performance and features for the Fram Tough Guard and is ranked 4th. The Fram Endurance scores a 7 and is ranked 1st.
I hope this helps, and as always, I'm open to ideas to make the analysis better!
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2022
- Messages
- 5,566
Based on the Ascent testing its very likely that 99.9%@25um is actually worse than the filters rated at 99%@20um - a particle that is 20% smaller diameter making it likely to have only half the volume? Maybe others more familiar with these tests can answer more definatively.
Would you all like to see ISO 4548-12 Oil Filter Lab Testing Comparison, Efficiency & Capacity, Pressure vs Flow, Bubble Point, and Burst?
I have this as a “watched” thread, so if you do happen to start a new one, could you put a note or link in this one to direct followers to the new thread? Thanks!! Yes, no problem I can do that.
bobistheoilguy.com
Great point, looking forward to hearing insights on it.
The analysis agrees with your hypothesis!
- The oil filter with the 99.9% efficiency scored a 1 for efficiency but its 25 micron rating scored a 4 for a total of 5.
- Oil filters with a 99% efficiency score a 2 for efficiency and with a 20 micron rating score a 2 for a total of 4.
The lower number is better!
The Titaniums are switching over to non-wire backed media like the Ultras did.
Yes, efficiency of 99% @ 20μ is better than 99% @ 25μ.
Not sure what you mean here (?).
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2022
- Messages
- 5,566
The comparison is one filter at 99.9%@25um vs 99% @20um. Even assuming its 99.0%@20um, thats likely still better than 99.9%@25um given the ascent testing published here years ago.
On the particle size i am assuming a wear particle is not a 1 dimensional line. A 20um sphere is half the volume of a 25um sphere, and a 20um circle is about 2/3 the area. So given filter material is a random weave, it would make sense that the 20% change in particle size singlular dimension makes the overall size (in volume or area) much larger than 20% and hence easier for the filter media to catch. I am Inferring here.
