Exactly. For years here there was the consistent statement that Champ XL were 99% at 20um, because someone, sometime, got an email from someone at Champion labs that said so. Even though the website and box said nothing, and the Supertech MP variant said 99% at 30um. Is it possible it was 99% at 20um - sure, but only because it could be anything technically.
Yeah, and I was one of the posters that shared those details. We're just trying to get a more accurate picture, where possible. BUT it is questionable if media is that efficient in every filter. Maybe 30um and 99% is the average for the line and 20um 99% is their best in some of those filters? Not the worst for the price. PG could be more clear, but it IS wierd to have statements such as the MG Select or the Carquest Premium as opposed to the data PG states on their self-branded offerings. Confusing.
I quite like the champ XL and continue to use it. I believe you did get an email from them. I just wonder what the info sent is actually pertaining to. A specific unit ? The whole line? Etc.
After thinking about this for a couple months my opinion is the “Product Specifications” are the OEM specs. Which PG exceeds efficiency wise.
Exactly. Typical Toyota and Honda OEM filter efficiency.
I agree 100%
Actually, they don't claim a rating of 99% at 25 microns. They claim "99% Multi-Pass efficiency and removal of particles as small as 25 microns". If challenged, they could back up that claim by showing that they ran an oil sample through the filter, say, 1000 times and sure enough, got 99% the particles out of the oil, including a couple that were "as small as 25 microns" once the filter was sufficiently plugged up. The wording reeks of marketing weasel wording. The "Product Specification" section is probably off of their spec sheet from the engineering department, doesn't have any weasel words, but does omit the percentage blocked in the micron range given (42 - 60).
They also include per ISO 4548-12 so that should eliminate modifying the amount of passes. But yes no filter model mentioned and I’ve sent multiple emails without response.
Think it's just a matter of wording. Any filter will remove some particles "as small as" even down to 5u or less, so a filter would have to be a super rock catcher to not catch any particles below 25u. I think they really mean @25 microns and larger. And I've also tried to contact them through their website a couple of times and all I hear back is crickets.
I remember once being advised by a lawyer that in corporate contracts and statements (e.g. insurance contracts) all ambiguity is in there for a reason, and it is usually not in your favor.
That was the point I was trying to make, and is it all BS marketing not backed up by testing? I have never used these filters but just started looking at them since that is all you hear about now on this site.
I understand and do not disagree with your skepticisms - its a matter of lack of better options.
