Subaru Suggestions

[jqgz]

Originally Posted by Ignatius
Originally Posted by jqgz
As others have said the Wix 57055 is a good filter choice. It has a very high bypass pressure. Fram ultra filters well but bypass valve is too low for Subaru specs.


Are you aware of the fact that an oil filter with a higher flow rate can utilize a lower bypass spec? The 23psi bypass spec that applies to Subaru's OEM oil filter (a Fram Extra Guard in a blue can) applies to THAT specific filter because it is flow restrictive as compared to say a Fram Tough Guard or Ultra Synthetic oil filter.

The Wix filters have a higher bypass spec because the have an even lower flow rate than Subaru's OEM oil filter. It even states on Wix's website that they have a 10 gallons per minute max flow rate. Wix makes a great product but Fram has proven to produce oil filters that have a flow rate of at least 14.5 gallons per minute to meet Subaru's specs. Flow rate is near infinitely more important than a bypass spec.

This oft repeated misnomer that every oil filter used on a Subaru MUST have at least a 23psi bypass to function properly needs to go into the ash heap of history.

Do you have a link to the flow spec on the Fram? Here is the link for the Wix specs: http://www.wixfilters.com/Lookup/PartDetails.aspx?Part=2166931

I would like to review the Fram flow specs as I was unaware they were superior to Wix. No flow specs listed here: https://www.fram.com/parts-search/T...WAAS4AdPgAyZMQEswACwAuAgCLp5ATzIAqEAF0gA

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

Max flow rate is more determined by the outlet size hole than anything else inside the filter (short of stuffing it with rock wool), and therefore a moot point since on any given engine the outlet hole is obviously identical. It's been discussed oodles of times, filter media generally has around 100+ square inches of area, while a typical 3/4-16 filter outlet hole has an area of 0.442 square inches, meaning the media, unless completely packed full of contaminants, presents minimal impediment to flow. Here's some official proof your thinking is out of line:

Originally Posted by Machinery Lubrication

Question:

Joel White of Weyerhaeuser was curious about the effect of flow rate, contaminant level, and viscosity on the performance of a filter, comparing the multi-pass Beta test (ISO 4572) performance to the real world. Leonard Bensch, Ph.D. of Pall Corporation and U.S. Delegate to ISO on contamination control, offered the following enlightening response. We at Practicing Oil Analysis felt the information would be helpful to anyone interested in selecting filters and controlling contamination.

Answer:

1. Flow Rate Influence. Relative to flow-rate, the efficiency, or Beta ratio, of a filter may change slightly but this is generally not that significant unless you are talking about wide extremes of flow. We can test an element rated at 30 GPM at flows ranging from 10 to 50 GPM without much change in Beta. We will, however, see a change in the initial (clean element) differential pressure and the dirt capacity of the filter. Pressure drop increases roughly proportional to the flow and the dirt capacity will decrease with increasing flow, but not necessarily linearly.

2. Influence of Particle Ingression Rate. If dirt ingression is within reasonable limits there will be little effect on the Beta ratio or dirt capacity. When we first developed the multi-pass test at Oklahoma State University, tests were run on a wide range of filters from 3 mg/L up to over 100 mg/L. In the range of 3 to 25 mg/L, we did not see significant differences. 10 mg/L was chosen for the original test procedure, just for standardization.

The ISO 4572 Multi-pass test is now undergoing revision to include, among other things, on-line particle counting, a new automatic particle counter calibration procedure, and a new test dust to replace the obsolete AC Fine Test Dust. This revised standard will also include three separate test conditions for dirt ingression -- 3, 10, and 15 mg/L. Test results were presented to the committees which showed very little change in Beta or dirt capacity with these three conditions. Laboratories are allowed to choose any of the three conditions to help in establishing a convenient test time. However, the standard procedure will state that for comparison of filter performance, the comparison should be done at the same test condition.

This new Multi-pass test will be designated ISO 16889 and is in the final stages of acceptance at ISO, which is anticipated this year.

3. Viscosity Influence. With respect to viscosity effects on beta, we have found that the efficiency is generally not highly affected unless the viscosity ranges are extreme (I'm beginning to sound like a broken record). I did a study at Oklahoma State University many years ago on this effect and found that dirt holding capacity was affected, generally decreasing, as viscosity was increased. Such studies were run on the same oil while viscosity was adjusted by changing temperature.


Go beat your dead horse somewhere else.

 

[Zolton]

You guys are really casting the forum in a poor light.

Aren't we actually talking about an engine series that originally called for 5w-30 or 10w-30 pref?

Suddenly, as CAFE struck down Subaru's obsolete engine tech they resorted to a 20 weight as a band-aid, or am I missing something?

Were the older vehicles back-speced to 20 weight too? I wonder why not....???

Again, I ask, WHY use 20 weight?

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

Zolton, no EJ engine has EVER spec'd a 20 weight, only the FA/FB series. All of the NA FA/FBs have ALWAYS spec'd 20 weights from day one of production, and the turbos have always spec'd 30 weights (even the EJs). No Subaru engine has been back-spec'd to a lower weight oil for CAFE purposes. Yes, you're missing alot here, so how is straightening out your incorrect assumptions a poor reflection on the board?

 

[PimTac]

He has been here before Subie.

 

[ARCOgraphite]

Originally Posted by geeman789
Is it even possible to ever push 14.5 gallon of oil PER MINUTE through the oil circuit ... ? That is a HUGE volume, given the typical sizing of oil passages. And, can 14 gallons of oil per minute RETURN via only gravity to the oil pan that quick ?

The Subaru oil pump volume number has always seemed suspect to me. I seriously wonder if Subaru meant " quart ... ".

Must reference Unimpeded pump output capability. Not volume flow in situ.

That would eat up 1/3 of you cruising HP and fuel mileage. to pump that much.

This is why we see a focus on moderating pump losses on newer engines.

The Turbo engines need the high bypass to keep the turbo oiling circuit and banjo feed screens clear.

Honda has had similar issue with VTEC oil feeds plugging.

IIRC my VW 1.4 Turbo has a 36psig delta bypass.

 

[ARCOgraphite]

Originally Posted by SubieRubyRoo
Zolton, no EJ engine has EVER spec'd a 20 weight, only the FA/FB series. All of the NA FA/FBs have ALWAYS spec'd 20 weights from day one of production, and the turbos have always spec'd 30 weights (even the EJs). No Subaru engine has been back-spec'd to a lower weight oil for CAFE purposes. Yes, you're missing alot here, so how is straightening out your incorrect assumptions a poor reflection on the board?


Just a side note SRR, I have been trying to pin down the engine series in that 2013 Legacy. Is it a FB25? It was the transition year so not sure.

 

[ARCOgraphite]

Originally Posted by Zolton
You guys are really casting the forum in a poor light.

Aren't we actually talking about an engine series that originally called for 5w-30 or 10w-30 pref?

Suddenly, as CAFE struck down Subaru's obsolete engine tech they resorted to a 20 weight as a band-aid, or am I missing something?

Were the older vehicles back-speced to 20 weight too? I wonder why not....???

Again, I ask, WHY use 20 weight?



For the FB25 (complete new engine design and architecture, wet timing system, stationary HLA, square B/s ratio)

Subaru requires 20 grade oil only. Actually they DEMAND it.

The big -bore EJ had a wide range and seemed to enjoy a more viscous oil.

 

[Zolton]

Originally Posted by SubieRubyRoo
Zolton, no EJ engine has EVER spec'd a 20 weight, only the FA/FB series. All of the NA FA/FBs have ALWAYS spec'd 20 weights from day one of production, and the turbos have always spec'd 30 weights (even the EJs). No Subaru engine has been back-spec'd to a lower weight oil for CAFE purposes. Yes, you're missing alot here, so how is straightening out your incorrect assumptions a poor reflection on the board?


Well, you were able to explain yourself fully, and add some valuable info to the discussion. I must be asking the right questions!

 

[Zolton]

Originally Posted by PimTac
He has been here before Subie.


lol, coming from a veteran from 2017 that is very observant!

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted by Zolton
Originally Posted by PimTac
He has been here before Subie.
lol, coming from a veteran from 2017 that is very observant!

This "veteran" from 2005 would agree with that observation.

 

[Zolton]

You guys are so cranky at the idea a new member can know more than you do!

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

Still waiting to be enlightened with all this knowledge you supposedly possess.

 

[kschachn]

Originally Posted by Zolton
You guys are so cranky at the idea a new member can know more than you do!

Really? Like the group designation for GTL stocks?

 

[M56959]

Bickering