ST 3950 clicker by pass???

[Riflemen10x]

Hi Guy`s,

Just got a new ST 3950 last night at Wallmart and noticed its missing the bypass at the threaded end.I had to cut it open and see whats the deal and didn`t like what I saw.the metal spring at the back of the can was blocking six holes in the end of the top plate that holds the filter paper I don`t see how this filter can go into bypass with out crushing the middle tube.looks like im going to have to find a new filter.

Riflemen10x

 

[lubeowner]

You are right. Champion has already abandoned that design on many of it's filter lines. Advise to find a new filter. We have been having great success at my shop with the NAPA Proselect, or you could always go with the good ole' Purolator premium plus. Both good filters at good prices.

 

[Gary Allan]

quote:

---

I don`t see how this filter can go into bypass with out crushing the middle tube.

---

The end cap flexes to open the holes. It's very easy to do with your fingers.

 

[ZR2RANDO]

R10x-
Looking through these pages you’ll see plenty of discussion about these “clicker” bypass valves. Some people don’t see a problem with them, others do.
I do.
I think it is a marginal, insufficient, cheap design…cost cutter all the way.
You’ll have to read all the previous pages and pages of discussion and make your own decision.
Sometimes you can just look at something and decide to use something else.
I did.

 

[labman]

I just cut open the one I took off my truck a few weeks ago. Many people here bad mouth the clickers, but other than it being a clicker, I didn't see any problem. Due to the recent, alleged problems of the Champ filters, I studied it very closely, no distorted media, tears, or other problems. In all fairness, likely it only had about 1000 miles on it. With my short trips, I follow GM's modern, severe duty schedule and change oil and filter every 3 months.

I guess some people fear anything they don't understand.

The ST 3950 worked fine for me for my usage. I am not going to let the fear mongerers push me into more expensive filters.

Surely we don't have WIX sales weasels on the board.

 

[lubeowner]

Labman,

The problem is with changing filters after 1000 miles doesn't represent the actual motoring public, and saying you didn't find problems after 1000mi., come on, what did you expect? The OEM is further extending is recommended OCI every year. Many of the after market filters do not and will not hold up to these drains. In talking with a few people last week in the lubricants industry I believe we may see some tests and requirements that will be forced on the filter manufacturers in the next few years. This way they will have to actually live up to their marketing claims, and the standards required by the OEM.

 

[ZR2RANDO]

I think some people don't understand some things they see...

I don't know of any Wix sales weasels, but I think there are some Champ sales weasels here.

 

[Hootbro]

quote:

---

Originally posted by lubeowner:
...... In talking with a few people last week in the lubricants industry I believe we may see some tests and requirements that will be forced on the filter manufacturers in the next few years. This way they will have to actually live up to their marketing claims, and the standards required by the OEM.

---

My bet is that the oil filter manufactuers will just change the wording to something like "3months/3K miles" rather than actual make the filters to last for the ever increasing drain intervals.

Hootbro

 

[Gary Allan]

quote:

---

The problem is with changing filters after 1000 miles doesn't represent the actual motoring public, and saying you didn't find problems after 1000mi., come on, what did you expect? The OEM is further extending is recommended OCI every year.

---

Well, I think that he only pointed out that he followed the OEM recommendation for severe, short trip, service. He probably could have gone 6 months without difficulty ..and that would have been closer to the average consumer use.

Perhaps after the bypass valve testing is done ..some endurance testing on Super Tech filters would be in order.

Anyone want to suggest an endurance test that would satisfy all and all (even the few)? That is to assure that the results are representitive of what the average consumer can expect if they even marginally follow the OEM recommendation??

(we are looking for productive input here - please keep that in mind

)

Would 3month oil, 6 months filter do it?
Would 6month oil, 6 months filter do it?
Would 6month oil, 12 months filter do it?

What would be appropriate?? In my minds eye, I would tend to assign a 6k/6m OCI as the minimum that any consumer should be doing under just about any circumstances. This should cover just about everyone. Now my test platform isn't any daily driver currently. That is, it's driven daily ..but for limited mileage.

The reason that I'm not all that sold on the clicker being the culpret here ...or rather that maybe it is, is simply because in my research with PureONE filters indicates that they bypass valve is rarely in use. It doesn't open or appear to open except in situations where the pump relief is in use. This makes me think that even in those situations ..it's not opening. This leads me to believe (an opinion based on observations) that only a severely loaded filter will ever need the bypass valve at all. This has me "projecting" (offering a plausible explanation based on my obeservations) that any failures in any filter, other than obvious manufacturing defects, are due entirely to over extention of use/abuse that is totally beyond the filters capability in terms of loading of the media. That is, although we see violated media any other filter would be continually bypassing oil in the same application. Whatever crap can make it through a split media ...can surely fit through a bypass vavle opening.


Now I can see how some would not care to see this data ..that's fine ..but we haven't had this entire brew-ha-ha (spl

) over nothing ...so I'm interested in narrowing down the possibilities to as few as possible.

Your thoughts?

 

[surfstar]

Bosch Premium are now clicker bypass as well. I will still use the ones I got Free After Rebate, although they may go on the GFs Civic first.

 

[labman]

How much evidence do we have that clickers are a problem? I totally discount Lube Owner's, Zerando's, and Filter Guy's posts. It looks to me they either have an unstated agenda or completely lack a life to spend the time they have on this subject. I don't even have time to do more than quickly skim through them. Has anyone actually read all them, all the way through?

 

[ZR2RANDO]

Labman,

I suppose you don’t read novels, or text books, or magazine articles either?
Maybe just Cliff’s Notes? (You’ll learn more if you read the whole book..)
If you don’t have time to read the posts on here, then why do you waste any time here at all? I’d suggest that you either read the posts, or don’t complain about them.
Your posts don’t carry much weight with me either, trust me.
Feel free to put me on your ignore list, won’t bother me at all.

My personal take on the “clicker” design bypass is the following:
1 I have never had a problem with one personally because I have never used one.
I didn’t, and still don’t, like the design so I use other brands of filters for my application that has an internal bypass.
2 I don’t like bypass valves on the closed end of a filter.
3 That “clicker” type valve would behave different when the oil is hot or cold due to metal expansion when hot. I believe it will flex less when cold (particularly winter time cold, not just normal room temp..), which is actually when it is likely to be needed the most.
4 The design only allows bypass oil to bypass through those holes in an open or shut situation, on/off so-to-speak, never good in any hydraulic flow situation, and I’m not sure at all that it allows sufficient bypass flow even when it is open. Progressive spring tensioned bypasses at the inlet end of the filters are to me a MUCH better design.
5 Any type of debris could easily get caught between the 2 pieces of metal and allow that bypass to bypass all the time (I understand it could be a minor amount…)

The reasons that I have for not liking that design are more than sufficient for me to not use that design. If you (or anybody else who feels the need to use that design regardless of any reason other than the fact that it is cheap) want to use it, go ahead. There are too many better-made alternatives in the same cost range for me to worry about using an obviously bad (cheap/marginal) design.

[ July 07, 2005, 03:34 PM: Message edited by: ZR2RANDO ]

 

[ZR2RANDO]

Gary,
Concerning your statement,
“This has me "projecting" (offering a plausible explanation based on my obeservations) that any failures in any filter, other than obvious manufacturing defects, are due entirely to over extention of use/abuse that is totally beyond the filters capability in terms of loading of the media. That is, although we see violated media any other filter would be continually bypassing oil in the same application. Whatever crap can make it through a split media ...can surely fit through a bypass vavle opening.”
-----------------------
Only certain brands of filters seem to routinely show the damage that you blame on “over extention of use/abuse”, other brands seem to handle that same use with no problem..to them it would be considered “normal” use. (excluding obvious over-use cases that were noted as obvious over-use cases) Sounds like you are just making excuses for poorly made filters, sounds familiar.
Just because engine operating conditions are forcing a filter to bypass temporarily does not give that filter an excuse to self-destruct internally. That “violated media” would be bypassing 100% of the time, and also possibly contributing media material to the flow as well.
I’m just saying that some “economy” filters will show failures under the same conditions that other “economy” filters will NOT …some brands are just not made to that level of quality that others would consider minimally acceptable.

As for your “longevity” testing, OCI is not the only mark to compare, driving style (call it passive/aggressive maybe?) should be noted as well.
I live out in the county, it is 8 miles to the closest gas station, and several more to the next crossroad where there are any local businesses to speak of. I rarely go 55 mph before I’ve gone a few miles down the road. About 12 miles away I can hop on the interstate and then go about 15 miles into town.
I am NOT the type of driver that a filter manufacturer should be building filters for.
A much more “normal” driver would be those types that crank and go, no warmup, always have to pass whoever is in front of them, jackrabbit starts at a red light, etc.
That person could still easily qualify for a “normal” OCI as long as the engine got fully warmed up, did not make a high percentage of short trips, didn’t pull a trailer, didn’t drive in dusty-offroad conditions yadayadayada..

As for the comment-
“Now I can see how some would not care to see this data”

I my particular case at least, I have learned to take any relevant data with a certain amount of skepticism. Web forums like this can rarely provide 100% of the details that would be required to base any results completely on that data. I would like to see the data just as much as anybody else, I just don’t always try to blame anything but the product for that product’s failures. If these filters (in this example) should not be trusted for more than 3k/3mo, they should say so on the box.

 

[Gary Allan]

quote:

---

(we are looking for productive input here - please keep that in mind

)

---

Well, I did ask ...