Does anyone have more insight on this? I know these filters are used on lots of engines but this is the size that fits just about every Honda. I haven't been able to find the RP 10-2867 for a while now, which is my go-to filter. The Amsoil filter has also been unavailable. What gives? Clearly, with both filters made by Champ, there must be a supply chain issue on filter components that go into these same-sized filters.
Royal Purple 10-2867, Amsoil EA15K13-EA out of stock for months
- Thread starter Inverted
- Start date
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2014
- Messages
- 4,118
With filter companies being bought/sold and tossed around, don't expect all 'non manufacturers' to have full inventory until renewal of contracts, if renewable.
For other full synth media filters:
Wix has the 57356XP
Napa Platinum PFL 47356
Titanium FS7317
Boss PBL14610
Am expecting more 'part consolidation' in the future. So, take what you can get as PN's disappear.
And, if there is room, you might be able use a slightly larger diameter equivalent in the 9688 or 3593a size.
For other full synth media filters:
Wix has the 57356XP
Napa Platinum PFL 47356
Titanium FS7317
Boss PBL14610
Am expecting more 'part consolidation' in the future. So, take what you can get as PN's disappear.
And, if there is room, you might be able use a slightly larger diameter equivalent in the 9688 or 3593a size.
So? Who has worn out a properly maintained engine ?
On the Purolator Boss box and on Purolator's website, it states efficiency of 99% at 25 microns for the Boss oil filter. That is not poor efficiency.
Then use whatever you want if you don't believe it matters.
The OP was asking for a similar replacement to Amsoil EA or RP, both of which have very good filtration efficiency.
True, but that claim has recently changed and is based on 1 filter size. Testing of the Boss by Ascent Filtration about a year ago showed it was worse than that and worse than its ratings at the time. So, if its filtration efficiency you're after the Boss is still questionable in my opinion.
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2014
- Messages
- 4,118
Its a full synthetic media. Don't care about the 'efficiency babble' stated on youtube/forums/.... without any test data on specific vehicle. I know what was 'marketed' over the years concerning efficiency and will say its plenty good enough for any vehicle.
M/H learned a thing concerning synthetic media with the acquisition of Wix/Purolator. MH makes the full synthetic wire backed OE filter for one of my cars and looks just like the Wix media or maybe the older Purolator media... or something 'similar'.
Why I avoid blend and cellulose media pic's below.
MH data:
Cold flow thru synth media vs cellulose. Less time in and less amount thru 'bypass'.
Media flow loss when loaded and why I am not a filter hero using a filter for 2x or 3x intervals or other "marketing" intervals, even though doable with full synthetic media.
How a little condensate or blowby moisture affects cellulose fiber filtration as it absorb moisture like the quicker picker upper. And you wonder why some Euro manufacturers like those 20-35 psi bypasses with their pathetic cellulose media...
M/H learned a thing concerning synthetic media with the acquisition of Wix/Purolator. MH makes the full synthetic wire backed OE filter for one of my cars and looks just like the Wix media or maybe the older Purolator media... or something 'similar'.
Why I avoid blend and cellulose media pic's below.
MH data:
Cold flow thru synth media vs cellulose. Less time in and less amount thru 'bypass'.
Media flow loss when loaded and why I am not a filter hero using a filter for 2x or 3x intervals or other "marketing" intervals, even though doable with full synthetic media.
How a little condensate or blowby moisture affects cellulose fiber filtration as it absorb moisture like the quicker picker upper. And you wonder why some Euro manufacturers like those 20-35 psi bypasses with their pathetic cellulose media...
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
The Wix XP, has, historically, offered very poor efficiency via standardized testing. That's not marketing or blather, it's standardized testing, versus other synthetic media filters which, comparatively, in the same testing protocol, performed markedly better.
Now, perhaps MH has updated the media since the acquisition, and if that's the case, then the filter may deserve another look, but that doesn't change the historical facts on the matter.
Having used the Royal Purple 10-2867 myself I would strongly recommend using the Champ XL PH2867XL. It is the exact same build that uses blended filter media instead of full synthetic filter media. Both are rated for up to 15,000 miles of usage and the Champ XL has filtration efficiency of 99% @ 20 microns.
The Champ XL can be commonly sourced from Rock Auto and Amazon.
Here's the ISO testing (link below). The Purolator Boss efficiency came in at ~62% @ 20u and 99.3% @35u. Royal Purple looks really good ... that may be my next go-to oil filter.
Yep, both the WIX XP and Purolator Boss came in ~62% @ 20u. The ACDelco Ultraguard didn't do too bad (~96.5% @ 20u) Link below.
I don't see any reason why filters that test better in the ISO efficiency test (which has been used for 22 years in the global filter industry to measure performance) wouldn't perform better in the real world. Every engine wear study shows that cleaner oil means less engine wear ... all other factors constant.
Of course, one way to keep the overall oil cleanliness level lower over an OCI is to do more frequent OCIs. Higher efficiency oil filters keep the oil cleaner than less efficient filters (as the ISO tests show), and in the real world that becomes more apparent over longer OCIs. Engine wear is proportional to the overall oil cleanliness over the time it circulates through the engine. Larger oil sump capacity also helps keep the concentration of particulate that the filter can't catch lower. Very dirty oil circulated for 5,000 miles could cause more wear than cleaner oil circulated for 10,000 miles in the same engine. Lots of factors involved, but the bottom line is that cleaner oil means less wear - there is no data that says otherwise.
Would you all like to see ISO 4548-12 Oil Filter Lab Testing Comparison, Efficiency & Capacity, Pressure vs Flow, Bubble Point, and Burst?
I have this as a “watched” thread, so if you do happen to start a new one, could you put a note or link in this one to direct followers to the new thread? Thanks!! Yes, no problem I can do that.
bobistheoilguy.com
Last edited:
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Thanks for the additional data! Then yeah, I don't know why one would consider either of those filters when more efficient options are available.
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2014
- Messages
- 4,118
Filtration vs flow.... How good is a filter causing oil pump's bypass to open? or create more pump slip?
Old data but these companies with poor filtration have a history of long lasting engines... and there is not a person here that knows the gram soot production level of their engine, or the micron size of that soot.
Amsoil has learned the hard way that some engines overload their filters. Either you don't get to use the Amsoil filter, like in certain Toyota and Hemi application, or you can't use it as long as they advertise it for....
I'll take the WixXP NapaPlatinum and not worry about anything.
Old data but these companies with poor filtration have a history of long lasting engines... and there is not a person here that knows the gram soot production level of their engine, or the micron size of that soot.
Amsoil has learned the hard way that some engines overload their filters. Either you don't get to use the Amsoil filter, like in certain Toyota and Hemi application, or you can't use it as long as they advertise it for....
I'll take the WixXP NapaPlatinum and not worry about anything.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Briggs and Stratton and Honda lawnmower engines have a history of long lasting engines with no oil filters, that's a strawman.
Again, going back to the material I posted in a previous thread, it isn't soot that's getting caught by oil filters, even when it agglomerates, the particles aren't large enough to end up in the filter. It's other contaminants.
No, AMSOIL spec'd the shorter duration (EaO15K) which was NOT designed for the HEMI and has the wrong bypass pressure, for the HEMI, and they noticed issues with extended drains. That TSB never applied to EaO11, which is the larger HEMI/Ford filter (FL-820S equivalent), which I've already told you, but you apparently have forgotten.
If "not worrying" is the bar here, you can pick anything off the shelf at Walmart, including the FRAM Ultra, which, conveniently, despite having the same filtration efficiency as the AMSOIL filter, never had a TSB associated with it, but happened to have the right bypass pressure. But we already discussed that too...
We could delve into the construction of synthetic media filters, but I feel like that would be a wasted effort in this exchange.
It would basically take a totally clogged oil filter (along with a too small filter bypass valve opening) to make the oil pump hit pressure relief. Typically a new oil filter is only about 1/15th (7%) the total pressure drop in an oiling system. The journal bearings are basically the other 14/15s (93%) of the oiling system pressure drop. Those are typical numbers, +/- a little due to filter and oiling system designs.
In order for a clogged oil filter to cause extreme loss of oil volume flow from pump slip before the pump hit pressure relief, the pump would have to be extremely worn out, or just an inefficient junk PD oil pump to start with. A well designed and healthy PD oil pump will not exhibit much pump slip all the way to pressure relief. If oil flow volume is cut way back from a restrictive oil filter causing pump slip that much, then the pump is junk.
Just because an oil filter is very efficient doesn't mean it's going to automatically clog up ... that is mainly dependent on its holding capacity, how long the filter is ran and how dirty the engine is. That's why "flow over filtration", which is a statement thrown around on here, isn't really a thing in most instances. Every oil filter not close to being totally clogged flows basically the same oil volume to the oiling system as long as the PD pump is not in pressure relief and/or worn out junk slipping very badly.Old data but these companies with poor filtration have a history of long lasting engines... and there is not a person here that knows the gram soot production level of their engine, or the micron size of that soot.
Amsoil has learned the hard way that some engines overload their filters. Either you don't get to use the Amsoil filter, like in certain Toyota and Hemi application, or you can't use it as long as they advertise it for....
I'll take the WixXP NapaPlatinum and not worry about anything.
Those Amsoil filters were either ran too long (Amsoil's fault for their mileage/use claims) and/or they had a pretty small holding capacity. If you look at the ISO test date provided in the link in post #11 you would see the Ultra (OG wire backed version) had pretty high holding capacity, and also lost very little efficiency as it loaded up and the delta-p across the media got pretty high. Other filters didn't fair as well in that department. And the Ultra was the most efficient filter in the bunch.
Last edited:
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
Remember the "filter test" where the pump was on the relief the whole time, everything was cold, and they didn't get any of the efficiency data right? LOL
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2014
- Messages
- 4,118
The OP wanted his Amsoil/Royalpurple filter, which is out of stock. If they fit his application, he should have no issue with the equivalent 9688/3593 equivalent. If he wants to use available full synthetic media, he'll have to switch to Titanium, Boss, XP, or Platinum. Not sure of too many other 7317 full synthetic media filters as Ryco is sold locally, and remember the name of the Canadian filter manufacturer purchasing full synth media. THAT IS ALL THIS THREAD IS ABOUT. We don't controlled the supply change.
I am not here to debate. I did some time with a two major filter companies and see how the internet throws off everything into extremes. With some members, its the same ******** argument over nothing, OVER and OVER again. Look at me cause I know better. Some think they do and they don't.
BTW, one of the best UOAs that I've seen is without a full flow filter which is pretty scary when so many have trust in UOAs and there megamicron super filters, especially when many full flow filters spend a considerate time in bypass and load up quickly. I remember some 'non bench tests' but real manufacturer 'engine tests' where typical filters were loaded up within 3000 miles. There is a relationship with engine soot and test powders but its not as close as we want to believe. I wish all my engines produced standardized ISO quality debris for my filter.
At that time, there were quicklubes being slandered heavily for their 3k/3mo interval, which for all practical purposes, was better than any OE recommendation since the media flow rate dropped to a point where bypass time was excessive. We've come a long way with media and oil, but technology gave us other variables not considered until all hell broke loose... like GDI soot, fuel dilution, both bringing down intervals that no one wants to adapt to. Never maintaining anything is what a consumer wants and enjoy the price for their laziness. R&D at the automaker is seriously excessively fallible.
And, the only way to know if a filter is in relief or not, or partially in relief, is to put a sensor on the bypass valve. Yes, the pre/post gauges provides less data than most want to believe. The data we use here, other than for internet debates, is borderline useless concerning bypasses, and why I don't bother running pre/post PSI gauges on my filters on daily drivers.
And yes, I'll take the Wix XP and Napa Platinum and use it without worry for my OCI. Amsoil learned the lesson concerning filtration flow already and haven't heard of the issue with 'RoyalPurple' but those two brands combined are a drop in the bucket. I would think that the manufacturers would advise better but doesn't look like they did. This isn't the 1st time Amsoil R&D, engineering, or purchasing screwed up when it comes to filtration.
If anyone wants to debate filtration, spend a few years at Wix, Fram, Champ, Donaldson, Luberfiner, or Purolator, and definitely not in the 'marketing department'. Come back when more aware especially if spending time in R&D, testing, or failure analysis. This forum doesn't see 1/100 of the proprietary data from filter manufacturers. We get the best of the marketing aspect, and testing data no more better than 'projectfarm' which seems to be slandered often here.
The OP asked a simple question and got his answer. Because someone has to disagree with the answer and it becomes the same old stupid debate over and over. OP isn't participating or requesting substitutes. Lets see how many pages and years we can keep this thread going for nothing.
I am not here to debate. I did some time with a two major filter companies and see how the internet throws off everything into extremes. With some members, its the same ******** argument over nothing, OVER and OVER again. Look at me cause I know better. Some think they do and they don't.
BTW, one of the best UOAs that I've seen is without a full flow filter which is pretty scary when so many have trust in UOAs and there megamicron super filters, especially when many full flow filters spend a considerate time in bypass and load up quickly. I remember some 'non bench tests' but real manufacturer 'engine tests' where typical filters were loaded up within 3000 miles. There is a relationship with engine soot and test powders but its not as close as we want to believe. I wish all my engines produced standardized ISO quality debris for my filter.
At that time, there were quicklubes being slandered heavily for their 3k/3mo interval, which for all practical purposes, was better than any OE recommendation since the media flow rate dropped to a point where bypass time was excessive. We've come a long way with media and oil, but technology gave us other variables not considered until all hell broke loose... like GDI soot, fuel dilution, both bringing down intervals that no one wants to adapt to. Never maintaining anything is what a consumer wants and enjoy the price for their laziness. R&D at the automaker is seriously excessively fallible.
And, the only way to know if a filter is in relief or not, or partially in relief, is to put a sensor on the bypass valve. Yes, the pre/post gauges provides less data than most want to believe. The data we use here, other than for internet debates, is borderline useless concerning bypasses, and why I don't bother running pre/post PSI gauges on my filters on daily drivers.
And yes, I'll take the Wix XP and Napa Platinum and use it without worry for my OCI. Amsoil learned the lesson concerning filtration flow already and haven't heard of the issue with 'RoyalPurple' but those two brands combined are a drop in the bucket. I would think that the manufacturers would advise better but doesn't look like they did. This isn't the 1st time Amsoil R&D, engineering, or purchasing screwed up when it comes to filtration.
If anyone wants to debate filtration, spend a few years at Wix, Fram, Champ, Donaldson, Luberfiner, or Purolator, and definitely not in the 'marketing department'. Come back when more aware especially if spending time in R&D, testing, or failure analysis. This forum doesn't see 1/100 of the proprietary data from filter manufacturers. We get the best of the marketing aspect, and testing data no more better than 'projectfarm' which seems to be slandered often here.
The OP asked a simple question and got his answer. Because someone has to disagree with the answer and it becomes the same old stupid debate over and over. OP isn't participating or requesting substitutes. Lets see how many pages and years we can keep this thread going for nothing.
RP was listed as in stock with Summit and O’Reilly yesterday, but now both are out of stock. Says available for backorder with Summit, with estimated ship date of July 15.
Hopefully OP was able to purchase one yesterday.
If not, I would have no issue with any of the quality filters with syn or syn blend media: Champ XL, Purolator PL14610 or PBL14610, Fram XG7317, or Wix/XP.
Hopefully OP was able to purchase one yesterday.
If not, I would have no issue with any of the quality filters with syn or syn blend media: Champ XL, Purolator PL14610 or PBL14610, Fram XG7317, or Wix/XP.
You either have relevant factual information to share or you don't.
If there is data lets see it. You've shared some which isn't totally relevant. Cellulose vs. synthetic...sure ok, Nobody would disagree synthetic is preferred.
But would you choose synthetic media with poor efficiency over a blend or straight cellulose with much better efficiency? That's the question.
The OP asked about Royal Purple or Amsoil EA replacement.
I interpret that to mean he wants good filtration efficiency. You interpret that to mean he wants synthetic media only.
OVERKILL
$100 Site Donor 2021
He may also be able to locate, if he's lucky, some of the OG FRAM Ultra (XG) filters that are still synthetic. That's another option, depending on how old the stock is locally at the parts stores and Walmart.
Yet that's exactly what you are doing here...
Amusingly, that's one of the reasons we shouldn't use UOA's for "wear" data. The particle size range they sample is below what is captured in your typical oil filter, sub 10-microns, with most of it being below 7 microns. So "wear rate" as seen in a UOA is a very limited picture. If an engine is shedding larger particles, you aren't seeing them in the analysis.
On the soot test, I posted a link to an article on that recently, but I'll share that again here:
Characterisation of soot in oil from a gasoline direct injection engine using Transmission Electron Microscopy
In this work, an investigation of soot-in-oil samples drawn from the oil sump of a gasoline direct injection (GDI) engine was carried out. Soot partic…
www.sciencedirect.com
GDI soot agglomerates are typically 100-300nm; 0.1-0.3 microns. Clearly, nowhere near large enough to end up in an oil filter.
GDI soot particles, non-agglomerates, are typically 8-43nm; 0.008-0.043 microns. Even smaller.
Quoting later in the article:
GDI soot agglomerate size was found to be comparable to diesel engine soot-in-oil as reported in literature. Soot-in-oil agglomerates drawn from diesel engines show a modest branched morphology, and exist in clusters and chain-like structures with average hydraulic diameter of 100 nm [16]. Similar agglomerates were found by Clague et al. [7] in a study in which soot was compared to black carbon. Diesel soot investigated by La Rocca et al. [20] had an average skeleton length of 131.8 nm measured from TEM projections and were composed of spherical primary particles of 12–40 nm.
This particulate clearly consists of material that's significantly smaller than the ISO test dust.
As noted above, GDI soot, like diesel soot, is typically too small to get caught by the oil filter. Fuel dilution definitely has a negative effect on lubricant health, but not pertaining to filter longevity, but rather lubricant longevity.
Again, you are ignoring, I can only assume intentionally, the equally or more efficient FRAM Ultra (XG) filters when trotting out the AMSOIL high efficiency example, or that the non-15K filters weren't affected. Why?
Side-stepping that repeatedly isn't helping your argument here.
I'm curious why you still participate if you think so lowly of the membership here and clearly so highly of yourself? You have absolutely no interest in discussing this material, you dismiss standardized testing, present yourself as an authority, but demonstrate no willingness to actually debate the merits of the positions you've presented. Rather, you just want your statements accepted out of hand because you are the one presenting them, topped with a rather specious appeal to authority with regards to allusions of somehow having been involved with one of the filter manufacturers in some capacity but never getting into the details of what that really was.
The OP has never confirmed whether he was looking for those specific filters due to their efficiency, or due to the media being synthetic. If efficiency isn't the concern and he just wants synthetic media, then I agree with your recommendation. If on the other hand, he wants efficiency, then I don't. Until the OP replies back with clarification, this question is still unanswered.Greasymechtech said:
