Napa has the Full filters. For your Forester, the part number is 2-OSB007
The Endurance has a wire mesh backing that should keep the pleats straight, which is important on the Pentastar where they always twist!
What kind of car do you have?
The Cost Of Cartridge Filters Compared To Spin Ons
- Thread starter Bellavita
- Start date
Napa has the Full filters. For your Forester, the part number is 2-OSB007
The Endurance has a wire mesh backing that should keep the pleats straight, which is important on the Pentastar where they always twist!
What kind of car do you have?
More than 65 years ago, some genius decided to make oil filters more idiot-proof by enclosing them in disposable cans that screwed onto engines. By the time they added a crimped seam, necessary seals, threading, valving, paint, etc., inside and on the can, that change made filters much more complicated, and more susceptible to manufacturing defects.Not sure why but some genius decided that a spin on filter was obsolete... probably a greenie
Blame WIX and Purolator, lol.
The cartridge filter on my 2017 F-Type's 3.0L supercharged Jaguar engine is always 100% empty when I remove the cap. I'd say I prefer a design that retains oil for startup.
They should've made it like the last generation of FWD Iron Duke where the cartridge is always primed in oil
.
Everything in my fleet is now cartridge. I don't mind them at all. I pay about $7.50 cdn +s/h for my Impala cartridges (Wix), an equivalent spin on is about a dollar cheaper. There are no performance or heavy duty options in the old car filter space would be my only beef... but what manufacturer wants to carry fancy inventory on a filter that was last used 56 years ago, I get it. My Tacoma has many more options that way.
Just for interest's sake, the factory service interval for the filter on my 1967 (cartridge filter) is every third (3rd - not a typo) oil change. In 1968 when Chevrolet went to spin on, the interval is every second. Granted the spin on specified in the passenger cars is the "short" spin on, I always use the longer one anyway but... there is no question the cartridge has significantly more surface area then the spin on. Many peers I used to cruise with or hang out with "back in the day" converted their cartridge engines to the spin on, it is a trivial modification. I personally never saw a need for that but to each their own. My Impala will remain cartridge unless the filters finally disappear from production.
Just for interest's sake, the factory service interval for the filter on my 1967 (cartridge filter) is every third (3rd - not a typo) oil change. In 1968 when Chevrolet went to spin on, the interval is every second. Granted the spin on specified in the passenger cars is the "short" spin on, I always use the longer one anyway but... there is no question the cartridge has significantly more surface area then the spin on. Many peers I used to cruise with or hang out with "back in the day" converted their cartridge engines to the spin on, it is a trivial modification. I personally never saw a need for that but to each their own. My Impala will remain cartridge unless the filters finally disappear from production.
By that time were the Chevrolet cartridges full-flow or partial-flow like the earlier ones? Were they mounted remotely through hoses, or mounted more or less directly onto the block (as on the 1952 Ferguson tractor I remember)?
The optional partial-flow filter on our '54 Chevrolet was mounted remotely through hoses. After it got old, I worried that the old hoses might fail, so replaced them with new ones----only to have one of the new hoses blow up soon afterward during an ~800-mile trip.
They are mounted right to the block in either case (canister or spin on) from the factory for passenger cars / light trucks. The aftermarket had (and still does) various remote offerings where you put an adapter plate on with an inlet and an outlet, then route the hoses to your remote location. Boat guys use the remote solution lots to facilitate access to the filter(s). In my day car guys did it just to be cool, a pair of filters mounted on the firewall for example. I have never seen anyone use a canister set up in conjunction with an aftermarket remote mount, they were always common spin on filters.
Last edited:
One obscure example would be my old BMW 530i. It was mounted to the engine, but that’s not where the oil would flow.
Interesting, thanks. I clarified my post as I was referring to aftermarket remotes.
Yeah those hoses would leak and the job to replace them was pretty difficult. The return went through the engine mount which was another leak point.
Exactly. Those were my observations as well with the guys I used to cruise with... just another possible point of failure.
But GM mounted the factory-option filter of our '54 Chevy remotely. Specifically, it was clamped or bolted to the intake manifold somehow, I think. My parents also had a '55 pickup and '61 Biscayne, both with essentially the same 235 in³ "Stove Bolt" Six the '54 had, but I don't remember what the filters were like on them. Their '59 AMC Rambler had the first spin-on filter I ever saw.
I am strictly referencing the 67 to 68 time frame with Chevrolet when the transition occurred from cartridge to spin on in my post. I assumed when you asked "By that time were the Chevrolet cartridges full-flow or partial-flow like the earlier ones?" we were referring to that period. Filters may well have been remotely mounted from the factory for some marquees in the 50's no argument there, I don't know, I have not owned or maintained any cars that old.
Last edited:
only thing I have to say about cost of one style versus the other is the production cost of something that has been manufactured for 50 years or more is going to be far less than the production cost of something new... once the tooling and equipment have been in use for some years and other manufacturers start competing on newer hi production parts, that cost difference starts to go away. Kinda like explaining to someone why a diesel truck costs more to drive than a gasoline truck, until you drive them far enough for a cost savings..
not too mention some of the spin on filters haven't changed in 50 years.. there is almost no cost to produce them at a certain point.
My Dad worked at the Chevy Small Block factory in Flint MI right until the plant closed in 2000. It produced engines from 1955 to 2000.
Those V8 engines were the cheapest engine the General could build, simply because the production machinery and engineering had long been paid for.. same applies to this small stuff.
4WD
$50 site donor 2024
The Purolator Boss cartridge filter for Mercedes 3 valve, 112/113 V6-8s, is a German produced filter (not sure of the exact number), and appears identical to the Mann fleece filters. The Purolator Boss PBL35581 (for vw 2.0t fsi, 2.5L 5-cylinder) is made in Germany too.
Perhaps they make one for your car and the same holds true? Mann bought Purolator I think. I have to buy them with oil change specials because they charge a crazy amount of money for them by themselves. I've been most pleased with them in my VW and the fleece filter in the MB has been changed every ~<2 years with the oil for probably 14 years with no problems.
Been wondering the same thing on comparative cost. All my cars/SUV have cartridge filters that fit in a receptacle accessed from the tp of the engine bay, so no longer need to lay on my back to swap out. Also the retaining cup for the cartridge filters seems to be a better design that eliminates overtightening, so they are always easy to open/replace.
On the cost issue, my assumption is that they have been implemented on higher end vehicles, so of course they are entitled to charge more for the parts (NOT!). Anyway, trend seems to be trickling down to all vehicles now. Still have to use a cannister filter on my Triumph motorcycle. Maybe someday that will change on later models. Does seem a waste to throw away all that cannister material, so think overall a shift to cartridges is a good thing and preferable for me.
On the cost issue, my assumption is that they have been implemented on higher end vehicles, so of course they are entitled to charge more for the parts (NOT!). Anyway, trend seems to be trickling down to all vehicles now. Still have to use a cannister filter on my Triumph motorcycle. Maybe someday that will change on later models. Does seem a waste to throw away all that cannister material, so think overall a shift to cartridges is a good thing and preferable for me.
