Oil Filters for BMW N55 Engine

JHZR2

Staff member
Thread starter
Joined
Dec 14, 2002
Messages
48,389
Location
New Jersey
Originally Posted By: Sayjac
Nice display of Bimmer cartridge options. I find your conclusion(s) about the BMW oem vs the made in Mexico Mann to be interesting and enlightening. Both look to be good quality though. Your ultimate choice and reasoning for it interesting too. As you seem aware it may be or is maligned by some due to "funny beta ratio". And since subject already broached, I would agree with follow up comments posted about the FU cartridge especially in (but not limited to) BWM applications. Based on anecdotes posted I don't put the FU cartridge in same category as the spin on. Linked is the last FU BMW anecdote I remember seeing posted. https://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubbthreads.php/topics/3930157/Fram_Ultra_=_Piece_of_%5Bcensore
Its just not clear to me that my/any engine sheds sufficient particulate. If they did, the ratings on Toyota and Honda filters would notionally be better, or the engines wouldn't last and consume oil. I think I like the o ring to ensure a seal compared to friction or felt. People concern about oil viscosity values to get more flow faster at cold start. Enviable for sure, but then lets put a more restrictive filter in there, which also plays into that startup flow scenario. Its well established in the physics of filtering that the smaller the pores the slower a filter will flow. Pores necessarily are smaller to get the ratios without excessive hard pack cake build up too early. So my basis, fbow, is a better sealing filter with a less restrictive media. Since the car is low use and not a DD, I'll trade efficiency for flow. Regarding the FU, its a huge assumption that any damage occurs instantly under install, or under use. Use I can marginally see due to pressure pulses at startup, but I'm not convinced we have enough objective basis of why and when it occurred. I don't see running one for 2-4K, perhaps less, to be a big risk. If it fails, I don't know it happened before I unspun the device, and if it fails, I don't see a huge risk to my engine given mileage. And I'll get another one free, and give an engineering sample for them to work on. But the earliest I'd put it in service is this time next year anyway...
 
Joined
Dec 29, 2010
Messages
5,620
Location
Paramount, California
Perhaps if you oil the end caps on the Fram Ultra cartridge before you install it, it doesn't break. Breakage is probably due to twisting under pressure during installation. During torquing, if the bottom end cap becomes stationary under pressure and you twist the top end cap, something is going to break. Oiling it will help it rotate without twisting. I probably wouldn't run an oil filter with only 50% efficiency (Napa Platinum, Napa Gold, Wix XP, and Wix) in a BMW. OEM Mann is probably a decent choice. I would personally go with the Fram Ultra but I would oil the end caps before installation as I said. I don't think there is too much concern with oil-flow restriction with any oil filter. As Jim Allen said in his sticky post, the differential oil pressure (Delta P) across the oil filter is negligible in comparison to the gauge oil pressure -- so, any claim of oil-flow restriction by the oil filter is bogus. Lower efficiency will only help with the oil-filter life, not oil flow.
 
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
15,401
Location
The Old North State
Originally Posted By: JHZR2
...Its just not clear to me that my/any engine sheds sufficient particulate. If they did, the ratings on Toyota and Honda filters would notionally be better, or the engines wouldn't last and consume oil. I think I like the o ring to ensure a seal compared to friction or felt. People concern about oil viscosity values to get more flow faster at cold start. Enviable for sure, but then lets put a more restrictive filter in there, which also plays into that startup flow scenario. Its well established in the physics of filtering that the smaller the pores the slower a filter will flow. Pores necessarily are smaller to get the ratios without excessive hard pack cake build up too early. So my basis, fbow, is a better sealing filter with a less restrictive media. Since the car is low use and not a DD, I'll trade efficiency for flow. Regarding the FU, its a huge assumption that any damage occurs instantly under install, or under use. Use I can marginally see due to pressure pulses at startup, but I'm not convinced we have enough objective basis of why and when it occurred. I don't see running one for 2-4K, perhaps less, to be a big risk. If it fails, I don't know it happened before I unspun the device, and if it fails, I don't see a huge risk to my engine given mileage. And I'll get another one free, and give an engineering sample for them to work on. But the earliest I'd put it in service is this time next year anyway...
First, I believe you should use what you want and feel comfortable with. I do. It's your vehicle and you're call. My mention of the NP choice and beta was more tongue in cheek, devil's advocate. Obviously you are aware of the beta and you've noted your reasons for the choice. No problem here. I personally don't go in much for the 'flow over filtration' notion unless perhaps in high performance racing applications. PC use, not so much. But that doesn't mean I wouldn't use an NP under some circumstances. And I've seen posted many anecdotes where the filter looks great post use, but there is absolutely no authoritative information on efficiency. Many of the made in China jobber tier filters new and post use are that way and judging by the comments many are impressed with them. To use a term oft posted here, they could well be 'rock catchers' some seem to disdain. Also most of the OEM filters are similar, efficiency information is propriety. If not for the one Amsoil spin on data point often posted, there would be virtually no OEM efficiency information. I've not seen an efficiency for the BMW/Mann OEM cartridges here, given that they 'could' be in the range of the NP beta. It's an unknown but many are still confident because of their fitment and construction and being oem. As for the FU cartridges, I'll leave it other to speculate on the whys and when's of the post use fail anecdotes. In one I remember the OP mentioned it was an engine noise that lead him to check the cartridge he posted. When replaced noise gone. But, that was one anecdote. I agree that running one for 2-4k 'likely' ok as you note. That said, for a 'premium' cartridge with an attached price rated to 15k, that's not saying much. With many other choices available for the same or less money wouldn't go out of my way for an FU cartridge.
 

JHZR2

Staff member
Thread starter
Joined
Dec 14, 2002
Messages
48,389
Location
New Jersey
Today, out went a K&N I had in there for two years or so, in went a Napa Platinum that I had. I’ll say, the FU gaskets (red) are the nicest and thickest... I used them for two changes, three or four years in total.

19B76A0F-6BEA-4BA2-B4B0-E33B8FBF38AA.jpeg
F64E35FA-62C1-470C-ADBD-AB4B2239E2BF.jpeg
5C42FB1B-94E4-405F-8729-64FA8902A73D.jpeg
 
Last edited:

JHZR2

Staff member
Thread starter
Joined
Dec 14, 2002
Messages
48,389
Location
New Jersey
And the Korean K&N that came out. I was a bit surprised that the media was folded, I torque the cap to spec, and I know it’s no further than the factory because there’s a tiny paint dot on the cap and housing.

4479E0EE-DEC8-43CB-9E8F-6F208D098204.jpeg
8D433FF5-96DC-453A-A636-F0370256719A.jpeg
3D4BCC58-A1A0-4735-8A5F-6FB81EC47AD2.jpeg
A0B35D95-D381-4BC9-AA8D-49B6310A2416.jpeg
 
Top