UPF-44s vs PF-59s

[Silvertwinkie]

I've been using UPF-52s for years in my Impala SS. Recently I picked up a 2004 Suburban with the 6.0L. The filter they had on it was a PF-44, so after the break in, I switched to a UPF-44. About 3 weeks ago, I finally got the Helm book for the Burb. It calls for a PF-59. So my question is if given the choice between a PF-59 (which is a bigger version of the PF-44 from what I'm told), which would you go with. The PF-59, being larger may be better for flow, but the UPF-44 has a better micron filter rating.

I'm totally confused. Anyon shed any light?

Thanks.

 

[VQ35DE]

Find some UPF-58's or UPF-59's, somewhere in the country. That would be what I would do. They will both work in-place of the UPF-44.

 

[T-Keith]

The other UPFs have been discontinued.

Both are good filter and filter well, the UPF is a sturdier filter with wire reinforcement. I'd probably use that one unless I was concerned about flow.

-T

 

[VQ35DE]

What's left of the UPF filters can be found at www.partsvoice.com. There are still many filters in most sizes left.

 

[Silvertwinkie]

Flow I don't **think** is an issue with the UPF-44s after reading this thread:

http://theoildrop.server101.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=6;t=001257#000000

I'd be interested in anyones comments on using a UPF-44 on a 6.0L that tows upward of 7000 or more lbs.

BTW, if it makes any difference, I change the oil and filter every 3k miles.

 

[T-Keith]

Grease's oil filter study found the UPF to flow a little poorer then the regular AC, plus it had less media. Probably not too big of concern. GM's figures showed the filter as a whole flowing better then the others.