STP S8316 Oil Filter Cut Open

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Hosteen
I don't think this filter has a "double ADBV." What you are looking at is the relief valve. Looks like a ADBV though. There is oil on both sides of what you are calling another ADBV so it wouldn't be holding back anything.Regards

Actually the Champ dome end flat type bypass shown as indicated/explained in my first post here is in pic#10 uses no coil spring. Just the flat inner portion of the 4 spoke leaf spring covering the six holes acts as the dome bypass. In pic #3, though it's depth may be difficult to discern, the coil spring controls the mechanical centertube adbv holding oil in the centertube.
 
Well our very own BlueOvalFitter got the skinny from Champ that the efficiency on this filter is 98% at 30 microns and the red ADBV is silicone.

Thanks Blue!
 
Originally Posted By: KCJeep
Well our very own BlueOvalFitter got the skinny from Champ that the efficiency on this filter is 98% at 30 microns and the red ADBV is silicone.

Thanks Blue!

Here is the info. from Champ Labs;



Efficiency 98% @ 30 Micron

Capacity 6 grams

Element Collapse 75 PSID (Differential pressure across the media)

Hydrostatic Burst 300 PSI

Anti-drain back Valve = yes

Relief Valve = yes

Anti-Siphon Valve = yes

The Anti-drain back valve seals on the outer lip thus would be a little stiffer.

Have a Great Day.


I deleted names, addresses, and phone numbers.
 
UPDATE for the sake of posterity and future searchers.

The STP filter is advertised at 96% efficiency and says so right on the box. I quote:

"96% High efficiency Micropore Technology captures particles 4x smaller than the human eye can see. 20% More dirt holding capacity than other national brands.

They don't clarify exactly what brand but their little graph below has the other national brand represented in ORANGE ha ha. It goes on to say below "Multi-pass Efficiency ISO 4548-12".

I'm not sure where Blue's tech line person got 98% at.
 
^^^Hmm, not that it really matters but I thought I remembered 96% on the STP box but no micron level, which is pretty much meaningless. The MultiPass 4548-12 is just the now standard ISO filter efficiency test procedure.

Again though, I'd have no problem running the S8316
 
Originally Posted By: sayjac
^^^Hmm, not that it really matters but I thought I remembered 96% on the STP box but no micron level, which is pretty much meaningless. The MultiPass 4548-12 is just the now standard ISO filter efficiency test procedure.

Again though, I'd have no problem running the S8316


Exactly, ISO 4548-12 does not specify a particular micron size the test is done for. Here's a summary of the ISO 4548-12 test for those not familiar:


ISO 4548-12
--------------
Methods of test for full-flow lubricating oil filters for internal combustion engines -- Part 12: Filtration efficiency using particle counting, and contaminant retention capacity.

This part of ISO 4548 specifies a multi-pass filtration test with continuous contaminant injection and using the online particle counting method for evaluating the performance of full-flow lubricating oil filters for internal combustion engines.

The test procedure determines the contaminant capacity of a filter, its particulate removal characteristics and differential pressure.

This test is intended for application to filter elements having a rated flow between 4 l/min and 600 l/min and with an efficiency of less than 99 % at a particle size greater than 10 microns.
 
Originally Posted By: KCJeep
UPDATE for the sake of posterity and future searchers.

The STP filter is advertised at 96% efficiency and says so right on the box. I quote:

"96% High efficiency Micropore Technology captures particles 4x smaller than the human eye can see. 20% More dirt holding capacity than other national brands.


Pretty nebulous what they say in red. Searching the 'net says that 0.1mm = 100 microns (dia of a human hair) is the smallest the naked human eye can see, so 4 times smaller would be 25 microns.

I guess I could buy into the STP filter being 96% @ 25 microns. Why don't they just say that instead of "4x smaller than a human eye can see".
lol.gif
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top