Ask any honest woman...bigger is always better.
Reasons to use a larger filter?
- Thread starter BullittGT
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: Kira
1) Any maker ever market a "Y" or "splitter"?....simply an adapter where you use 2 OE filters instead of 1.
2) In BIG PICTURE terms, is an additional oil cooler the better thing to do?....one with a thermostat
There are “dual filter” mounts that can be mounted remotely,
the path of the oil is indeed parallel – similar to your “Y” concept,
the oil flow is divided between the two filters.
This is on my F150, which gets used for a lot of heavy towing.
The K&N filter is spec for a Cummins diesel.
1) Any maker ever market a "Y" or "splitter"?....simply an adapter where you use 2 OE filters instead of 1.
2) In BIG PICTURE terms, is an additional oil cooler the better thing to do?....one with a thermostat
There are “dual filter” mounts that can be mounted remotely,
the path of the oil is indeed parallel – similar to your “Y” concept,
the oil flow is divided between the two filters.
This is on my F150, which gets used for a lot of heavy towing.
The K&N filter is spec for a Cummins diesel.
Originally Posted By: hallstevenson
People saying a larger filter allows more oil in the sump, doesn't that depend on the location of the oil filter ? If it's above the oil level at full normal capacity, a larger filter has zero impact.
"Sump" capacity doesn't mean just the oil pan itself (yeah, it's not logical, but...)
All oil in all places that see regular circulation is your "TOTAL Sump".
People saying a larger filter allows more oil in the sump, doesn't that depend on the location of the oil filter ? If it's above the oil level at full normal capacity, a larger filter has zero impact.
"Sump" capacity doesn't mean just the oil pan itself (yeah, it's not logical, but...)
All oil in all places that see regular circulation is your "TOTAL Sump".
Originally Posted By: Patman
Here is a reason NOT to use a longer filter. This is the oil filter on my Corvette: (this isn't my car but it's exactly how mine looks)
As a counterpoint, the crazy G37 has enough room for two filters welded end to end, yet they choose the smallest one that fits.
Here is a reason NOT to use a longer filter. This is the oil filter on my Corvette: (this isn't my car but it's exactly how mine looks)
As a counterpoint, the crazy G37 has enough room for two filters welded end to end, yet they choose the smallest one that fits.
Originally Posted By: Linctex
Originally Posted By: Kira
1) Any maker ever market a "Y" or "splitter"?....simply an adapter where you use 2 OE filters instead of 1.
2) In BIG PICTURE terms, is an additional oil cooler the better thing to do?....one with a thermostat
There are “dual filter” mounts that can be mounted remotely,
the path of the oil is indeed parallel – similar to your “Y” concept,
the oil flow is divided between the two filters.
This is on my F150, which gets used for a lot of heavy towing.
The K&N filter is spec for a Cummins diesel.
That's a very cool setup. Do you get almost 100% oil drainage being everything is at that low point?
Originally Posted By: Kira
1) Any maker ever market a "Y" or "splitter"?....simply an adapter where you use 2 OE filters instead of 1.
2) In BIG PICTURE terms, is an additional oil cooler the better thing to do?....one with a thermostat
There are “dual filter” mounts that can be mounted remotely,
the path of the oil is indeed parallel – similar to your “Y” concept,
the oil flow is divided between the two filters.
This is on my F150, which gets used for a lot of heavy towing.
The K&N filter is spec for a Cummins diesel.
That's a very cool setup. Do you get almost 100% oil drainage being everything is at that low point?
Originally Posted By: bbhero
Really good post BrucLuno.
I am keeping my filters on for multiple runs as well. A win win based upon what you and Shannow talked about.
Oh, bbhereo. shame on you. Mr. Purolator is doing loop de loops in his grave.
Really good post BrucLuno.
I am keeping my filters on for multiple runs as well. A win win based upon what you and Shannow talked about.
Oh, bbhereo. shame on you. Mr. Purolator is doing loop de loops in his grave.
Originally Posted By: bbhero
Me too Garak... I like your latest choice of Napa Gold 57356 larger size filter.
It's working out well. With it being cheaper than the specified 51358, and having a silicone ADBV instead of nitrile, it's not a difficult choice.
The pricing difference where the oversize was cheaper also applied to the originally specified 51365 versus the oversize 51356, and also to the Baldwin and Hastings variants.
I got lucky with the NAPA Gold versus my customary "genuine" Wix. Our NAPAs don't advertise filter specials ever, but I happened to be going into one to get some Formula Shell for someone else, and I noticed them setting a bunch of cut filters onto a table, and asked what was going on. They told me it was a filter sale, so I picked some up. Oddly enough, NAPA here sells, at least for the specified filters for my car, the Platinum cheaper than the Gold, which decidedly doesn't apply at my Wix dealer with an XP versus an ordinary Wix.
Me too Garak... I like your latest choice of Napa Gold 57356 larger size filter.
It's working out well. With it being cheaper than the specified 51358, and having a silicone ADBV instead of nitrile, it's not a difficult choice.
I got lucky with the NAPA Gold versus my customary "genuine" Wix. Our NAPAs don't advertise filter specials ever, but I happened to be going into one to get some Formula Shell for someone else, and I noticed them setting a bunch of cut filters onto a table, and asked what was going on. They told me it was a filter sale, so I picked some up. Oddly enough, NAPA here sells, at least for the specified filters for my car, the Platinum cheaper than the Gold, which decidedly doesn't apply at my Wix dealer with an XP versus an ordinary Wix.
Originally Posted By: Garak
It's working out well. With it being cheaper than the specified 51358, and having a silicone ADBV instead of nitrile, it's not a difficult choice.
The pricing difference where the oversize was cheaper also applied to the originally specified 51365 versus the oversize 51356, and also to the Baldwin and Hastings variants.
I noticed the price difference at O'Reillys as well, that being that the oversize (for the G35/37) filter is a few dollars less expensive. My next oil change I'm going with one.
Do you put additional oil with the oversize filter ? I'm not sure that it's necessary.
It's working out well. With it being cheaper than the specified 51358, and having a silicone ADBV instead of nitrile, it's not a difficult choice.
I noticed the price difference at O'Reillys as well, that being that the oversize (for the G35/37) filter is a few dollars less expensive. My next oil change I'm going with one.
Do you put additional oil with the oversize filter ? I'm not sure that it's necessary.
Originally Posted By: Snagglefoot
And that’s fine. You already have the long filter in your Gen 5 V-8. Look at how the short OEM sized filter looks on a Gen 4:
Snagglefoot, Patman uses a PF64, which I thought WAS the short one..... The PF63E is the long one, about 1" longer than a PF64, all other dimensions & threads the same.
Interesting how GM specs the same PF64 for the Corvette 6.2L V8 ... AND... their 1.5L turbo engine. The engineers haven't "optimized" anything. I've put a PF63E oversized filter on my 1.5L turbo, so the oil speed thru the media must be at snail's pace compared to a 6.2L running the smaller PF64.
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
I oversize for less delat-p. Many comments given above have already given the benefits of less delta-p across the media.
Originally Posted By: 1JZ_E46
More filter media means less bypassing under cold starts and high RPMs. In other words, less unfiltered oil makes its way into the bearings, etc.
... and what Linctex and Olas said about more efficiency with over-sized oil filters is likely true. No absolute proof, but makes sense.
I do like the idea of fewer bypass events since nobody wants oil washing over the dirty side directly into the engine, ever.
And that’s fine. You already have the long filter in your Gen 5 V-8. Look at how the short OEM sized filter looks on a Gen 4:
Snagglefoot, Patman uses a PF64, which I thought WAS the short one..... The PF63E is the long one, about 1" longer than a PF64, all other dimensions & threads the same.
Interesting how GM specs the same PF64 for the Corvette 6.2L V8 ... AND... their 1.5L turbo engine. The engineers haven't "optimized" anything. I've put a PF63E oversized filter on my 1.5L turbo, so the oil speed thru the media must be at snail's pace compared to a 6.2L running the smaller PF64.
Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
I oversize for less delat-p. Many comments given above have already given the benefits of less delta-p across the media.
Originally Posted By: 1JZ_E46
More filter media means less bypassing under cold starts and high RPMs. In other words, less unfiltered oil makes its way into the bearings, etc.
... and what Linctex and Olas said about more efficiency with over-sized oil filters is likely true. No absolute proof, but makes sense.
I do like the idea of fewer bypass events since nobody wants oil washing over the dirty side directly into the engine, ever.
Originally Posted By: hallstevenson
Do you put additional oil with the oversize filter ? I'm not sure that it's necessary.
No, the difference is negligible, and I can't tell the difference on the dipstick. Over the 4.9 L capacity, I can't tell squat.
Do you put additional oil with the oversize filter ? I'm not sure that it's necessary.
No, the difference is negligible, and I can't tell the difference on the dipstick. Over the 4.9 L capacity, I can't tell squat.
I'm with the oversize crowd when it's practical and cost effective. For the reasons of lower differential pressure, capacity (for long OCI or FCI) and the slight increase in efficiency. I am wracking my brain to remember the paper I read on that years ago. Maybe BrocLuno knows, since he brought that aspect up first. It wasn't a very large increase in efficiency IIRC, but it existed. I run doubles on the 6.9L diesel, on which I have the oversized FL1995 but also a 3um bypass. I only replace the bypass when it needs it, which is seldom.
One thought I would like to introduce and highlight for those that get loose bowels over the though of a double FCI and the idea of leaving dirty oil in the engine. That remaining oil is no "dirtier" than the new oil will be once it's run through the filter a few times. New oil is often more contaminated (generally with larger particles) than used oil that has been filtered in the engine. The used oil will have some of the smaller particle below the absolute rating of the filter, but these are generally not very harmful and small in number compared to the bulk amount of oil being replaced. And, yeah, that used oil is depleted to some degree of additives, but the new oil makes up for that. From everything I see, a well and properly considered double FCI offers no significant downsides and many upsides, mainly in the area of cost effectiveness.
One thought I would like to introduce and highlight for those that get loose bowels over the though of a double FCI and the idea of leaving dirty oil in the engine. That remaining oil is no "dirtier" than the new oil will be once it's run through the filter a few times. New oil is often more contaminated (generally with larger particles) than used oil that has been filtered in the engine. The used oil will have some of the smaller particle below the absolute rating of the filter, but these are generally not very harmful and small in number compared to the bulk amount of oil being replaced. And, yeah, that used oil is depleted to some degree of additives, but the new oil makes up for that. From everything I see, a well and properly considered double FCI offers no significant downsides and many upsides, mainly in the area of cost effectiveness.
I thought to a degree, a larger filter decreased efficiency?
There's an old thread of someone using a huge filter in their Jeep Grand Cherokee with the 4.0 that hardly fit. Lower efficiency was brought up and I know then I had a hard time wrapping my mind around it.
I want to say doublewasp, but I am not sure.
There's an old thread of someone using a huge filter in their Jeep Grand Cherokee with the 4.0 that hardly fit. Lower efficiency was brought up and I know then I had a hard time wrapping my mind around it.
I want to say doublewasp, but I am not sure.
Filter efficiency is directly and primarily controlled by the media, but not the amount of media. The velocity of flow has a small effect on it and my recollection of the primary material I read about it years back was that lower velocity tended to nudge the efficieny up. As I recall, it was by a negligible amount but I am not standing on my memory about that.
- Status
