Bellavita
Thread starter
10/4. I'll change the media rating accordingly for the Titanium and update the rankings. Thank you!The Titaniums are switching over to non-wire backed media like the Ultras did.
10/4. I'll change the media rating accordingly for the Titanium and update the rankings. Thank you!The Titaniums are switching over to non-wire backed media like the Ultras did.
Yeah, I highly doubt that extra 0.9% efficiency at 25u is going to make the efficiency at 20u better than 99%.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.
The ISO 4548-12 efficiency test compares different filters under the same test conditions with the same test dust, so making all those assumptions doesn't mean much. The results of the ISO test shows the overall efficiency is all anyone can conclude - and having a nice efficiency vs particle size curve like in Ascents test results is nice to have. If a filter catches more particles of any size, then it's more efficient regardless of how it got there.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.
Update complete. With that change the Ultra and Titanium now have the same performance and features. The difference that remains is the cost. The Titanium is currently $3.52 (39%) more than the Ultra.10/4. I'll change the media rating accordingly for the Titanium and update the rankings. Thank you!
Manufacturer and Retailer Oil Filter Media Descriptions | Rank 1-Best | Media Groupings | |
Screen Backed Synthetic | 1 | Wire/Mesh Backed Hybrids | |
SmartFUSION™ Full Synthetic with reinforced polymer mesh backing | 1 | ||
Metal Screen Back Full Synthetic Blend | 1 | ||
Synthetic | 2 | All Synthetic or MicroFiber | |
Micro-Glass Synthetic and Cellulose | 3 | Microglass or Synthetic Blend Hybrids | |
Micro-Glass Synthetic and Cellulose | 3 | ||
Dual Layered Synthetic Blend | 3 | ||
Dual Layered Synthetic Blend | 3 | ||
High-Density Synthetic Blend | 3 | ||
Natural & Synthetic Fibers | 3 | ||
Natural & Synthetic Fibers | 3 | ||
Natural & Synthetic Material | 3 | ||
OE Synthetic Blend | 3 | ||
Synthetic Blend | 3 | ||
Synthetic Blend | 3 | ||
Synthetic Blend | 3 | ||
Synthetic Blend | 3 | ||
Synthetic Blend | 3 | ||
Synthetic Fiber Cellulose Blend | 3 | ||
Synthetic Media Blend | 3 | ||
Enhanced Cellulose | 4 | Cellulose & Cellulose Blends | |
Enhanced Cellulose | 4 | ||
Enhanced Cellulose | 4 | ||
Enhanced Cellulose | 4 | ||
Cellulose & Polyester Blend | 4 | ||
Cellulose | 4 | ||
Cellulose | 4 | ||
Cellulose | 4 | ||
Cellulose | 4 | ||
Multi-Fiber High Density | 4 | ||
Multi-Fiber High Density | 4 | ||
Fiber and Resin Blend | 4 |
Your recommendation makes good sense. In fact I originally had the media in the feature area unrated.I'd rate the media based on the efficiency, holding capacity and/or "up to" use rating. Doesn't matter exactly what the media design is in order to get those performance factors. Having the info on what the media type/design may be be good info, but I don't think it should have a rating in the final ranking score because efficiency and holding capacity/up to use rating is what's important.
Good Morning Overkill,Are any filters with a mesh backed blend media?
Right, but none of those are blend media, per my query.Good Morning Overkill,
3 of the 32 oil filters in the database are backed. From their descriptions below it looks like the Endurance is a blend and the other two are full synthetic. Here they are:
View attachment 160997
On which filter? The material for the XG and Titanium is a total gong show, as the filters both transitioned in most cans from a full synthetic media to a cellulose blend with a synthetic "topper", but this isn't wire-backed (hence my question about wire backed).Hi Overkill,
Fram uses the language "Full Synthetic Blend". How does that differ from a blend media? Thank you!
The Fram Endurance in the chart on Post #130. Fram's language is a "metal screen back full synthetic blend".On which filter? The material for the XG and Titanium is a total gong show, as the filters both transitioned in most cans from a full synthetic media to a cellulose blend with a synthetic "topper", but this isn't wire-backed (hence my question about wire backed).
OK, that's word salad from their site, as they also state:The Fram Endurance in the chart on Post #130. Fram's language is a "metal screen back full synthetic blend".
Our most durable oil filter has arrived. Designed with a heavy-duty shell and metal screen back construction in the fully synthetic filter media, FRAM Synthetic Endurance™ oil filters are optimized for use with synthetic oil to deliver 99% filtration efficiency and maximum engine protection for 25,000 miles.
First Brands doesn't have ducks, and they aren't in a row, they have geese, Canadian geese, and they are biting children and crapping everywhere.
Yes, but can we expect them to actually fix anything? LOL They are currently manufacturing a filter (or so it appears) with two different types of media, depending on the size of the can. To expect customer service to have any idea as to how to even engage on this stuff, let alone in an educated and informed manner, I think is asking WAY too much, lol. We'll end up with more "baked media" and equally, if not more, bizarre nonsense.Someone should contact Fram and ask why the conflicting info on the Endurance media description on their website.
Based on the size of the can? Examples?They are currently manufacturing a filter (or so it appears) with two different types of media, depending on the size of the can.