More filter media means less pressure drop across it, that's a good thing. The extra can volume is a bonus imo
ok to use over-szied filter?
- Thread starter Mark72
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: IndyIan
Originally Posted By: bigjl
If there are benefits why was the oversize filter specced from new?
Or at least the oversize filter given as an alternative fitment
Fitment of an aux oil cooler makes sense
As does fitting a full bypass system
But i must admit i can't really see the benefit it fitting a bigger oil filter
I am sure there is one
I just don't see it
Initially the Neon oil filter was an oversized one, and it said in the manual that you only needed to change the filter every two oil changes. But the oversized filter was the lowest point on the car(duh, what could happen?), so they now spec a smaller filter to be changed with each oil change.
So a capacity to hold dirt without clogging is the main reason?
It isn't unusual for filters to be left in for two changes with some makes in the UK, am certain Honda was one that did this.
I must admit that as most of my cars over the last 5/6 yrs have had inserts i get to have a look at the media
And even a filter i left in place for two reasonably long intervals. Two of 6/7k i think it was looked new apart from discolouration from the oil.
Originally Posted By: bigjl
If there are benefits why was the oversize filter specced from new?
Or at least the oversize filter given as an alternative fitment
Fitment of an aux oil cooler makes sense
As does fitting a full bypass system
But i must admit i can't really see the benefit it fitting a bigger oil filter
I am sure there is one
I just don't see it
Initially the Neon oil filter was an oversized one, and it said in the manual that you only needed to change the filter every two oil changes. But the oversized filter was the lowest point on the car(duh, what could happen?), so they now spec a smaller filter to be changed with each oil change.
So a capacity to hold dirt without clogging is the main reason?
It isn't unusual for filters to be left in for two changes with some makes in the UK, am certain Honda was one that did this.
I must admit that as most of my cars over the last 5/6 yrs have had inserts i get to have a look at the media
And even a filter i left in place for two reasonably long intervals. Two of 6/7k i think it was looked new apart from discolouration from the oil.
There are benefits, albeit marginal ones. Holding more oil is down the list of reasons though.
More media should mean more capacity which is a bonus for longer OCI's or dirty engines, and a bit more resistance to bypass events as well due to better flow characteristics, better specified above as "less differential pressure".
I can't think of a single downside to an oversize if it meets the proper specs and you have room for it. Well, there's one. If you actually have a mechanical mishap and the filter is to blame you'll get zero sympathy from the filter manufacturer unless it is the EXACT filter they say to use on your car.
More media should mean more capacity which is a bonus for longer OCI's or dirty engines, and a bit more resistance to bypass events as well due to better flow characteristics, better specified above as "less differential pressure".
I can't think of a single downside to an oversize if it meets the proper specs and you have room for it. Well, there's one. If you actually have a mechanical mishap and the filter is to blame you'll get zero sympathy from the filter manufacturer unless it is the EXACT filter they say to use on your car.
Anything you can do to increase the oil capacity of the little 3.6 quart sump of the Nissan 2.0 is a good idea. Having more media is a good idea for extending oil change intervals also, as it should theoretically be able to handle more contamination before it loads up fully.
Last edited:
The use of a slightly larger oil filter has never been proven to be of any benefit to an engine. People use a slightly larger oil filter to make themselves "feel" better.
Just use what is supposed to go on the vehicle.
Just use what is supposed to go on the vehicle.
Now, on my Honda S2000 I run a filter that is over twice as large as the stock filter. I run it for 15k miles(two 7500 mile oil runs).
Here is what it(Baldwin) looks like after 15k miles and what the stock Honda S2000 and a Wix filter for the S2000 looks like after 3k miles.
http://s949.photobucket.com/user/rrounds/library/Oil Filters?sort=2&page=1
ROD
Here is what it(Baldwin) looks like after 15k miles and what the stock Honda S2000 and a Wix filter for the S2000 looks like after 3k miles.
http://s949.photobucket.com/user/rrounds/library/Oil Filters?sort=2&page=1
ROD
Originally Posted By: Ramblejam
Originally Posted By: stchman
The use of a slightly larger oil filter has never been proven to be of any benefit to an engine.
You might want to reference VW technical service bulletin 17-04-01...
You are using a manufacturer's TSB to support your case.
I read the TSB and in no way would putting on a slightly larger oil filter would be a cure all. Apparently the 1.8T Passat engine had a sludge problem, don't see how a slightly larger filter would cure that.
Originally Posted By: stchman
The use of a slightly larger oil filter has never been proven to be of any benefit to an engine.
You might want to reference VW technical service bulletin 17-04-01...
You are using a manufacturer's TSB to support your case.
I read the TSB and in no way would putting on a slightly larger oil filter would be a cure all. Apparently the 1.8T Passat engine had a sludge problem, don't see how a slightly larger filter would cure that.
dnewton3
Staff member
What? This topic again?
Is my computer screen the only one that shows the "search" button feature?
Is my computer screen the only one that shows the "search" button feature?
Last edited:
dnewton3
Staff member
Originally Posted By: Ramblejam
Originally Posted By: stchman
You are using a manufacturer's TSB to support your case.
Yes, I'm utilizing a TSB from Volkswagen, where installing a larger filter was mandated for the benefit it provides, as proven by their R&D.
link please.
Originally Posted By: stchman
You are using a manufacturer's TSB to support your case.
Yes, I'm utilizing a TSB from Volkswagen, where installing a larger filter was mandated for the benefit it provides, as proven by their R&D.
link please.
Lots of theory based assumptions for this topic. Doesn't seem to hurt or help. Go for it.
Personally I think it would be fine for the most part until winter came along. Seems like it would take the oil longer to circulate through the extra filter area at cold temps.. Maybe starve the engine a bit until the temperature increased. Start up noise would be what to listen for in that situation.
If you are wanting longer oil change intervals, get a filter designed for that. Extra media won't help. The composition of the media as well as the construction of the filter is what matters.
If your engine is dirty, change the oil AND filter a little more often. If cost is a factor, just buy some ST and a Puro Classic.
And of course the real test is to get a UOA. Run the same brand of oil and viscosity at 2 OCI's at the same mileage. Then get the filter designed for your vehicle as well as the oversized one. Same brand on that too.
THEN REPORT BACK HERE.
My .02
Personally I think it would be fine for the most part until winter came along. Seems like it would take the oil longer to circulate through the extra filter area at cold temps.. Maybe starve the engine a bit until the temperature increased. Start up noise would be what to listen for in that situation.
If you are wanting longer oil change intervals, get a filter designed for that. Extra media won't help. The composition of the media as well as the construction of the filter is what matters.
If your engine is dirty, change the oil AND filter a little more often. If cost is a factor, just buy some ST and a Puro Classic.
And of course the real test is to get a UOA. Run the same brand of oil and viscosity at 2 OCI's at the same mileage. Then get the filter designed for your vehicle as well as the oversized one. Same brand on that too.
THEN REPORT BACK HERE.
My .02
Last edited:
One caveat I will mention to using an oversize, non spec'd filter. In the very unlikely event that the filter should be determined to be the cause of an engine issue, you would not be covered by the filter maker's warranty. As long as one is aware of that unlikely possibility then you are making an informed decision.
I've used the longer PL14610 where a PL14612 was spec'd, but that's hardly a major difference. And back in 2001 when Honda downsized to the 14610/7317 size the local Honda dealer was still using the previous 14459/3593A size for a year or two.
I've used the longer PL14610 where a PL14612 was spec'd, but that's hardly a major difference. And back in 2001 when Honda downsized to the 14610/7317 size the local Honda dealer was still using the previous 14459/3593A size for a year or two.
Originally Posted By: dlundblad
Lots of theory based assumptions for this topic. Doesn't seem to hurt or help. Go for it.
Personally I think it would be fine for the most part until winter came along. Seems like it would take the oil longer to circulate through the extra filter area at cold temps.. Maybe starve the engine a bit until the temperature increased. Start up noise would be what to listen for in that situation.
With a positive displacement oil pump, a little larger oil filter shouldn't make any difference. Especially once the oil filter is full of oil and the ABDV works correctly, there should be no difference in the oil volume delivery to the engine.
Lots of theory based assumptions for this topic. Doesn't seem to hurt or help. Go for it.
Personally I think it would be fine for the most part until winter came along. Seems like it would take the oil longer to circulate through the extra filter area at cold temps.. Maybe starve the engine a bit until the temperature increased. Start up noise would be what to listen for in that situation.
With a positive displacement oil pump, a little larger oil filter shouldn't make any difference. Especially once the oil filter is full of oil and the ABDV works correctly, there should be no difference in the oil volume delivery to the engine.
dnewton3
Staff member
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
Originally Posted By: dlundblad
Lots of theory based assumptions for this topic. Doesn't seem to hurt or help. Go for it.
Personally I think it would be fine for the most part until winter came along. Seems like it would take the oil longer to circulate through the extra filter area at cold temps.. Maybe starve the engine a bit until the temperature increased. Start up noise would be what to listen for in that situation.
With a positive displacement oil pump, a little larger oil filter shouldn't make any difference. Especially once the oil filter is full of oil and the ABDV works correctly, there should be no difference in the oil volume delivery to the engine.
Zee is correct.
Volume in = volume out. The size of the filter does not matter.
Think of it in this analogy:
imagine a faucet running water into a cup; once the cup is full, the water running out of the cup will equal the water going in, both in velocity and volume. You can get a larger cup, but the effect is the same; fluid in = fluid out. That is how it works with positive displacement pumps.
Now, larger filters will have (presumably) more surface area of the media, and therefore the velocity of the fluid across the media will slow down per square inch of media, in contrast to a "smaller" filter. That is where some theorize the benefit exists; slower fluid flow allows for a more efficient media rating. However, I personally don't see enough data to substantiate this in terms of practical application. The delta velocity shift is so small that it's just noise in data streams, unless the disparity of surface area is huge. Therefore, using a filter that is 1/2 inch "taller" just does not shift the velocity across the media enough to make any huge difference in beta data. And beta data is only an input. The real measurement is in actual wear data. So, the benefit is imagined, not realized, at least from a pragmatic point of view. But it is true to say the fluid flow will be effected, but ONLY across the media, and not the entry/exit thresholds. The entry and exit velocity and volume will be equal across the whole filer, and therefore the engine will never know the difference.
The greatest risk of using a "larger" filter (albeit a small risk perhaps) is that using a filter that you select, that is not on the approved filter-maker list, is a warranty claim battle, should the unthinkable happen. This is not to infer that warranty coverage is voided, but it is to state that the burden of proof shifts from the maker to you, and that is a LONG, UPHILL battle. Read the warranty statement closely of filter makers, and they all exclude coverage for non-approved applications. You might be able to force them into coverage, but it would only come after a protracted and painful legal battle. Good luck with that ...
Originally Posted By: dlundblad
Lots of theory based assumptions for this topic. Doesn't seem to hurt or help. Go for it.
Personally I think it would be fine for the most part until winter came along. Seems like it would take the oil longer to circulate through the extra filter area at cold temps.. Maybe starve the engine a bit until the temperature increased. Start up noise would be what to listen for in that situation.
With a positive displacement oil pump, a little larger oil filter shouldn't make any difference. Especially once the oil filter is full of oil and the ABDV works correctly, there should be no difference in the oil volume delivery to the engine.
Zee is correct.
Volume in = volume out. The size of the filter does not matter.
Think of it in this analogy:
imagine a faucet running water into a cup; once the cup is full, the water running out of the cup will equal the water going in, both in velocity and volume. You can get a larger cup, but the effect is the same; fluid in = fluid out. That is how it works with positive displacement pumps.
Now, larger filters will have (presumably) more surface area of the media, and therefore the velocity of the fluid across the media will slow down per square inch of media, in contrast to a "smaller" filter. That is where some theorize the benefit exists; slower fluid flow allows for a more efficient media rating. However, I personally don't see enough data to substantiate this in terms of practical application. The delta velocity shift is so small that it's just noise in data streams, unless the disparity of surface area is huge. Therefore, using a filter that is 1/2 inch "taller" just does not shift the velocity across the media enough to make any huge difference in beta data. And beta data is only an input. The real measurement is in actual wear data. So, the benefit is imagined, not realized, at least from a pragmatic point of view. But it is true to say the fluid flow will be effected, but ONLY across the media, and not the entry/exit thresholds. The entry and exit velocity and volume will be equal across the whole filer, and therefore the engine will never know the difference.
The greatest risk of using a "larger" filter (albeit a small risk perhaps) is that using a filter that you select, that is not on the approved filter-maker list, is a warranty claim battle, should the unthinkable happen. This is not to infer that warranty coverage is voided, but it is to state that the burden of proof shifts from the maker to you, and that is a LONG, UPHILL battle. Read the warranty statement closely of filter makers, and they all exclude coverage for non-approved applications. You might be able to force them into coverage, but it would only come after a protracted and painful legal battle. Good luck with that ...
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: dnewton3
Zee is correct.
Volume in = volume out. The size of the filter does not matter.
Think of it in this analogy:
imagine a faucet running water into a cup; once the cup is full, the water running out of the cup will equal the water going in, both in velocity and volume. You can get a larger cup, but the effect is the same; fluid in = fluid out. That is how it works with positive displacement pumps.
Now, larger filters will have (presumably) more surface area of the media, and therefore the velocity of the fluid across the media will slow down per square inch of media, in contrast to a "smaller" filter. That is where some theorize the benefit exists; slower fluid flow allows for a more efficient media rating. However, I personally don't see enough data to substantiate this in terms of practical application. The delta velocity shift is so small that it's just noise in data streams, unless the disparity of surface area is huge. Therefore, using a filter that is 1/2 inch "taller" just does not shift the velocity across the media enough to make any huge difference in beta data. And beta data is only an input. The real measurement is in actual wear data. So, the benefit is imagined, not realized, at least from a pragmatic point of view. But it is true to say the fluid flow will be effected, but ONLY across the media, and not the entry/exit thresholds. The entry and exit velocity and volume will be equal across the whole filer, and therefore the engine will never know the difference.
The greatest risk of using a "larger" filter (albeit a small risk perhaps) is that using a filter that you select, that is not on the approved filter-maker list, is a warranty claim battle, should the unthinkable happen. This is not to infer that warranty coverage is voided, but it is to state that the burden of proof shifts from the maker to you, and that is a LONG, UPHILL battle. Read the warranty statement closely of filter makers, and they all exclude coverage for non-approved applications. You might be able to force them into coverage, but it would only come after a protracted and painful legal battle. Good luck with that ...
I'm asking this only in theory.
Well proven truck engines have overengineered lube systems. For instance 12L displacement
from 6 cylinders filled with 36L of oil. That is approx correct, right? So 3L oil/1L disp.
and 6L/each cylinder. An avarage 4.0 V6 engine is holding for instance 6L of oil.
That is approx correct, right? So 1.5L oil/1L disp. and 1L/each cylinder and this does not
mean that they are underengineered. The HD engine has multiple times the capacity.
Now I'm trying to reach my point. If I'm planning to run the longest OCIs possible, because:
a)why change the oil if there are plenty more additives
b)the product is expensive
c)I would not like to throw money out of the window
Isn't it the best(cheapest/easiest)way to upgrade the oil system capacity to install bigger filter('cause I can't change the sump)? And I'm not talking about 1/2 inch taller at the same diameter filters. In my mind more oil means better cooling, also more securing space on the dipstick.
In my case:
1. Engine ran out of warranty.
2. Well maintained, upcoming failure previsionally excludable.
3. Previous UOAs are(will be) present. - Data to compare before and after.
4. Perfect oil pressures(according to man. specs) both hot and cold. - Data to compare before and after.
I would like to upgrade from the stock OC236 (95x95mm) to OC33(143x95mm), maybe OC105(177x95mm) or even OC15 (141x108mm) if possible.
I'm only asking this for the knowledge and not trying to be the smartarse.
Zee is correct.
Volume in = volume out. The size of the filter does not matter.
Think of it in this analogy:
imagine a faucet running water into a cup; once the cup is full, the water running out of the cup will equal the water going in, both in velocity and volume. You can get a larger cup, but the effect is the same; fluid in = fluid out. That is how it works with positive displacement pumps.
Now, larger filters will have (presumably) more surface area of the media, and therefore the velocity of the fluid across the media will slow down per square inch of media, in contrast to a "smaller" filter. That is where some theorize the benefit exists; slower fluid flow allows for a more efficient media rating. However, I personally don't see enough data to substantiate this in terms of practical application. The delta velocity shift is so small that it's just noise in data streams, unless the disparity of surface area is huge. Therefore, using a filter that is 1/2 inch "taller" just does not shift the velocity across the media enough to make any huge difference in beta data. And beta data is only an input. The real measurement is in actual wear data. So, the benefit is imagined, not realized, at least from a pragmatic point of view. But it is true to say the fluid flow will be effected, but ONLY across the media, and not the entry/exit thresholds. The entry and exit velocity and volume will be equal across the whole filer, and therefore the engine will never know the difference.
The greatest risk of using a "larger" filter (albeit a small risk perhaps) is that using a filter that you select, that is not on the approved filter-maker list, is a warranty claim battle, should the unthinkable happen. This is not to infer that warranty coverage is voided, but it is to state that the burden of proof shifts from the maker to you, and that is a LONG, UPHILL battle. Read the warranty statement closely of filter makers, and they all exclude coverage for non-approved applications. You might be able to force them into coverage, but it would only come after a protracted and painful legal battle. Good luck with that ...
I'm asking this only in theory.
Well proven truck engines have overengineered lube systems. For instance 12L displacement
from 6 cylinders filled with 36L of oil. That is approx correct, right? So 3L oil/1L disp.
and 6L/each cylinder. An avarage 4.0 V6 engine is holding for instance 6L of oil.
That is approx correct, right? So 1.5L oil/1L disp. and 1L/each cylinder and this does not
mean that they are underengineered. The HD engine has multiple times the capacity.
Now I'm trying to reach my point. If I'm planning to run the longest OCIs possible, because:
a)why change the oil if there are plenty more additives
b)the product is expensive
c)I would not like to throw money out of the window
Isn't it the best(cheapest/easiest)way to upgrade the oil system capacity to install bigger filter('cause I can't change the sump)? And I'm not talking about 1/2 inch taller at the same diameter filters. In my mind more oil means better cooling, also more securing space on the dipstick.
In my case:
1. Engine ran out of warranty.
2. Well maintained, upcoming failure previsionally excludable.
3. Previous UOAs are(will be) present. - Data to compare before and after.
4. Perfect oil pressures(according to man. specs) both hot and cold. - Data to compare before and after.
I would like to upgrade from the stock OC236 (95x95mm) to OC33(143x95mm), maybe OC105(177x95mm) or even OC15 (141x108mm) if possible.
I'm only asking this for the knowledge and not trying to be the smartarse.
Ive been using larger filters for years now no ill effects i do extended drains and most times reuse my filters so in theory.... a larger filter should hold more dirt before getting loaded and going into bypass.
Originally Posted By: MAHLE_Collector
In my case:
1. Engine ran out of warranty.
2. Well maintained, upcoming failure previsionally excludable.
3. Previous UOAs are(will be) present. - Data to compare before and after.
4. Perfect oil pressures(according to man. specs) both hot and cold. - Data to compare before and after.
I would like to upgrade from the stock OC236 (95x95mm) to OC33(143x95mm), maybe OC105(177x95mm) or even OC15 (141x108mm) if possible.
I'm only asking this for the knowledge and not trying to be the smartarse.
In theory you could use any sized larger filter and be fine as long as it fits the engine block correctly and has a bypass valve setting that is appropriate for the application. Couple of things to consider with using much larger oil filters is that you should be able to pre-fill them when the filter is installed, and ensure the ADBV works correctly to prevent extended dry starts.
In my case:
1. Engine ran out of warranty.
2. Well maintained, upcoming failure previsionally excludable.
3. Previous UOAs are(will be) present. - Data to compare before and after.
4. Perfect oil pressures(according to man. specs) both hot and cold. - Data to compare before and after.
I would like to upgrade from the stock OC236 (95x95mm) to OC33(143x95mm), maybe OC105(177x95mm) or even OC15 (141x108mm) if possible.
I'm only asking this for the knowledge and not trying to be the smartarse.
In theory you could use any sized larger filter and be fine as long as it fits the engine block correctly and has a bypass valve setting that is appropriate for the application. Couple of things to consider with using much larger oil filters is that you should be able to pre-fill them when the filter is installed, and ensure the ADBV works correctly to prevent extended dry starts.
Another possibility is the oem sized on the small side?
If anyone has been around manufacturing design & engineering allot of times they will look at Cost, reliability, performance, endurance, customer appeal, etc.. Sometimes spec the smallest possible wire, line, pipe etc... Even though the savings may be min. The bean counters multiple it per machine & its enough savings, they will push the envelope. Not saying every manufacture does this in every application, but its done from my experience. Even taking something thats working & trying to reduce cost.
When I was working in fluid power there is almost always pressure drop across a oem sized filter & Never remember hearing a smaller filter was better.
Granted there are race applications where saving weight & reducing oil psi was desired.
If anyone has been around manufacturing design & engineering allot of times they will look at Cost, reliability, performance, endurance, customer appeal, etc.. Sometimes spec the smallest possible wire, line, pipe etc... Even though the savings may be min. The bean counters multiple it per machine & its enough savings, they will push the envelope. Not saying every manufacture does this in every application, but its done from my experience. Even taking something thats working & trying to reduce cost.
When I was working in fluid power there is almost always pressure drop across a oem sized filter & Never remember hearing a smaller filter was better.
Granted there are race applications where saving weight & reducing oil psi was desired.
Originally Posted By: rrguy
Another possibility is the oem sized on the small side?
If anyone has been around manufacturing design & engineering allot of times they will look at Cost, reliability, performance, endurance, customer appeal, etc.. Sometimes spec the smallest possible wire, line, pipe etc... Even though the savings may be min. The bean counters multiple it per machine & its enough savings, they will push the envelope. Not saying every manufacture does this in every application, but its done from my experience. Even taking something thats working & trying to reduce cost.
When I was working in fluid power there is almost always pressure drop across a oem sized filter & Never remember hearing a smaller filter was better.
Granted there are race applications where saving weight & reducing oil psi was desired.
I doubt that material cost savings are that much of a concern given that pricing of filters at the retail level tends to be fairly uniform. I doubt that Purolator is charging the OEM more for a filter that's a half-inch longer but otherwise identically spec'ed.
Subaru has the tiny filter because of the distance from the header to the. They were also installing an expensive OEM filter at their factories in Japan and the US. I think now it depends on where it was made.
Even when installed in the US, Toyota tends to use this fancy depth filter at the factory. I think the dynamic with the Japanese makers is interesting because it's sometimes more expensive at the factory than what they sell at the parts counter.
Another possibility is the oem sized on the small side?
If anyone has been around manufacturing design & engineering allot of times they will look at Cost, reliability, performance, endurance, customer appeal, etc.. Sometimes spec the smallest possible wire, line, pipe etc... Even though the savings may be min. The bean counters multiple it per machine & its enough savings, they will push the envelope. Not saying every manufacture does this in every application, but its done from my experience. Even taking something thats working & trying to reduce cost.
When I was working in fluid power there is almost always pressure drop across a oem sized filter & Never remember hearing a smaller filter was better.
Granted there are race applications where saving weight & reducing oil psi was desired.
I doubt that material cost savings are that much of a concern given that pricing of filters at the retail level tends to be fairly uniform. I doubt that Purolator is charging the OEM more for a filter that's a half-inch longer but otherwise identically spec'ed.
Subaru has the tiny filter because of the distance from the header to the. They were also installing an expensive OEM filter at their factories in Japan and the US. I think now it depends on where it was made.
Even when installed in the US, Toyota tends to use this fancy depth filter at the factory. I think the dynamic with the Japanese makers is interesting because it's sometimes more expensive at the factory than what they sell at the parts counter.
- Status
