Premium Guard Ext Life - 99% at 25 microns, but micron rating is 42-60?

[Alien]

Please stay on topic. This thread is about the efficiency of the PG filters, not the quality of PG, Fram, and M+H filters, or which country any of them are made in. There are plenty of other threads on those subjects.

 

[Fair enough]

I didn’t read everything, but micron rating to me is go- no go. Like 100% contained larger than 42-60 microns, zero particles.
There is no guarantee of anything. We saw Purolator have two different values, and go to Amazon to buy , you will see 99+%@25 for the Boss.
People also trust the media manufacturer is making the media so perfect it matches efficiency values to the micron. Buy the 20 versus the 23 when in reality it may not be true.

 

[ZeeOSix]

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.

See post 32 ... they reference ISO 4548-12.

 

[ZeeOSix]

I didn’t read everything, but micron rating to me is go- no go. Like 100% contained larger than 42-60 microns, zero particles.

If it's 100% at larger than 42-60 microns, then it's pretty bad at 20 microns.

 

[Glenda W.]

@Alien has shown us that even ISO 4548-12 advertising isn’t well regulated. Purolator had incorrect specs on their website for years. Unless we fork up cash for testing we’re at the will of these companies.

 

[Zee09]

The EG box, bottom left...
Basic info...

 

[Glenda W.]

The EG box, bottom left...
Basic info...

View attachment 262790

These Ecogards are great filters especially on sale on Amazon!!

 

[Zee09]

These Ecogards are great filters especially on sale on Amazon!!

If you Google the model i use the S241 you will get a link to Amazon for the $6+ price as opposed to the Amazon $9+ listing....

Great filters.......

 

[tmorris1]

See post 32 ... they reference ISO 4548-12.

View attachment 262781

I am not skeptical or have a horse in the race. Just asking questions about why everyone thinks they are good filters.
I guess the question that I have is: Does the 40-60 micron rating make sense with the 99% multi-pass efficiency for particles as small as 25 microns? I assumed that it would mean that the filter will pass particles smaller than 40-60, but maybe that isn't how it works?

 

[Alien]

I am not skeptical or have a horse in the race. Just asking questions about why everyone thinks they are good filters.
I guess the question that I have is: Does the 40-60 micron rating make sense with the 99% multi-pass efficiency for particles as small as 25 microns? I assumed that it would mean that the filter will pass particles smaller than 40-60, but maybe that isn't how it works?

Read post #30

 

[Fair enough]

I am not skeptical or have a horse in the race. Just asking questions about why everyone thinks they are good filters.
I guess the question that I have is: Does the 40-60 micron rating make sense with the 99% multi-pass efficiency for particles as small as 25 microns? I assumed that it would mean that the filter will pass particles smaller than 40-60, but maybe that isn't how it works?

I think that’s how it works, zero particles at 42-60. There isn’t anything else they say except micron rating. The 42-60 could be media variation in samples they tested. My guess.

 

[Alien]

I think that’s how it works, zero particles at 42-60. There isn’t anything else they say except micron rating. The 42-60 could be media variation in samples they tested. My guess.

Or it's the range of 99% or 100% efficiencies for the various sizes. We know from the Puralator spec sheets that the efficiencies vary between filter sizes of the same models.

 

[SC Maintenance]

I have a Pronto EX that says 98% at 30 microns "test performed under ISO4548-12"

I have a ecogard - the regular one - saying 98.8% efficiency based on ISO 4548-12 at 30 microns

The above are different sized filters - one for my Nissan, one for my Toyota.

The ISO test is exacting. Debating what the meaning of "multi pass" or what the meaning of the word is, is, or what some junior programmer put on a website with absolutely no spec or indication around it - I think is not particularly meaningful.

 

[Fair enough]

If something is 98.8%@30, things are still going through. If at zero particles the bar goes much higher. That’s my guess at an explanation. Like the Boss 99+%@46 microns, it isn’t zero particles yet.

 

[tmorris1]

I think that’s how it works, zero particles at 42-60. There isn’t anything else they say except micron rating. The 42-60 could be media variation in samples they tested. My guess.

So how does it ever filter anything smaller like the 25 micron that they claim in their efficiency rating?

 

[Fair enough]

So how does it ever filter anything smaller like the 25 micron that they claim in their efficiency rating?

99%@25 microns according to their testing. Essentially all gets caught, but not all. Smaller than 25 gets caught.
I am just writing what I think could be an answer. One thing about these forums is there are people who look at it as a place to criticize others. Which destroys learning. It’s ok to be wrong, it’s ok to express what you want.

 

[tmorris1]

99%@25 microns according to their testing. Essentially all gets caught, but not all. Smaller than 25 gets caught.

My question is how if the filter has a 42-60 micron rating? Wouldn't that mean it passes everything below 42 micron?

 

[Alien]

I am not skeptical or have a horse in the race. Just asking questions about why everyone thinks they are good filters.
I guess the question that I have is: Does the 40-60 micron rating make sense with the 99% multi-pass efficiency for particles as small as 25 microns? I assumed that it would mean that the filter will pass particles smaller than 40-60, but maybe that isn't how it works?

Here is my personal thought journey:

I was looking for which would be the best filter to put on my Ecoboost 3.5. I had purchased a Motorcraft OEM filter and had it on my shelf, but evidence of poor-quality construction of recent Motorcraft filters made me question that purchase. Further digging into the evidence the C&P teams both here and on YouTube have recently amassed made me question the quality of almost all of the products being currently produced by First Brands and Purolator, the two biggest filter manufacturers in the US. The only filters consistently getting high marks for quality construction appear to be PG EXTs and its clones and the Purolator Boss. Both made contradicting claims as to their efficiencies. So I asked the president of Purator's owner M+T what the correct number is, and he confirmed that it was the lower number shown on their spec sheets of 99%@46u. He also changed their web page to reflect that, replacing the previous (decades-old?) claim of 99%@25u.

Because of what I uncovered about the correct efficiency of the Boss, people here have rallied around the PG EXTs and its clones. But if they are both in fact in the same efficiency category (as the 40 - 60u spec indicates), then there is no relative efficiency advantage to either filter model. The PG EXT and its clones are considerably cheaper but use unbacked blended media. The Boss is more expensive but has backed "untearable" pure synthetic polyester media, which may even be technologically more advanced with less "downstream issues" than the microglass media used by its direct competitors. The Boss also showed among the best flow and capacity results on the Ascent and BR tests.

So I returned my Motorcraft filter and spun a Purolator Boss filter onto my Ecoboost 3.5 when I change the oil a few days ago. It replaced an Endurance and is my first Purolator branded filter in years, maybe even more than a decade ...

 

[kschachn]

99%@25 microns according to their testing. Essentially all gets caught, but not all. Smaller than 25 gets caught.
I am just writing what I think could be an answer. One thing about these forums is there are people who look at it as a place to criticize others. Which destroys learning. It’s ok to be wrong, it’s ok to express what you want.

You should be a politician.

 

[tmorris1]

My question is how if the filter has a 42-60 micron rating? Wouldn't that mean it passes everything below 42 micron?

Since nobody directly answered my question, I will assume that either 42-60 micron rating is wrong or the efficiency should read 99%@42-60?