This will help give us a subjective baseline for Trasko vs. Amsoil vs. TP style filters.
This will resolve the controversy of cleanest oil quite fast-
This will resolve the controversy of cleanest oil quite fast-
We need UOA w/Micron Counts on the board:
- Thread starter outrun
- Start date
- Status
I doubt it. It's like splitting hairs and you would have to do a study like 3mp's like every 1000 to see when the filter becomes full, or if it gets better or worse with time. The capacity of the filter, how much flow, and how often the element is changed are factors.
Any by-pass filter is 100's of times better than conventional full flow filters. We will be able to argue to the end of time which one is "better"
It's All Good...
Yeah, So far from my experience with my motor guard I can say it is a good feeling to see the dipstick oil still amber colored after 4,000 miles
I'm sure any bypass filter will work, but the tp is probably slightly better than the amsoil since amsoil recommends bypass filter changes every year which means it doesnt plug up as fast which means it doesnt trap as much dirt.. just my 2 cents.
>>>I'm sure any bypass filter will work, but the tp is probably slightly better than the amsoil since amsoil recommends bypass filter changes every year which means it doesnt plug up as fast which means it doesnt trap as much dirt.. just my 2 cents.
Or, maybe, it can hold much more dirt. Tests done by independent source showed absolute particle removal at 3 microns, repeat runs to less than one micron in the AMSOIL bypass filter.
Or, maybe, it can hold much more dirt. Tests done by independent source showed absolute particle removal at 3 microns, repeat runs to less than one micron in the AMSOIL bypass filter.
Yeah i've heard that alot, but its much smaller so i cant see it trapping THAT much more dirt than a roll of toliet paper.
I have Trasko. It still amber gold colored at 7600 miles.
[ April 16, 2004, 09:32 PM: Message edited by: fasty ]
[ April 16, 2004, 09:32 PM: Message edited by: fasty ]
Amsoil, Trasko, Gulfcoast, Frantz, Have one thing in commen... Guess what it is?
No, Trasko (small TP), Gulfcoast, Motorguard, and Frantz uses a Toliet Paper roll and Amsoi isnt using TP. I dont know what kind of the Amsoil uses material filter.
OilGuard uses
[ April 17, 2004, 01:01 AM: Message edited by: fasty ]
OilGuard uses
[ April 17, 2004, 01:01 AM: Message edited by: fasty ]
They all use concentrated cellulose.. Paper..
They have a fancy way of making cellulose more complicated than a roll of TP is.. Such as Oil Gaurd with their wound up balls of string..(From what I heard their filters channel oil..) Cellolose is the only material that will filter oil efficiently such as a roll of TP.. If they all claim to filter oil to less than a micron why by the fancy most expensive one and be locked into buying their filter element? TP is cheap and does the job and is readily available.. It makes no sense to buy a companies filter setup who has just put a spin on an an old and simple technology and turn it into something more complicated and say it filters better than TP.. When it dosen't.
They have a fancy way of making cellulose more complicated than a roll of TP is.. Such as Oil Gaurd with their wound up balls of string..(From what I heard their filters channel oil..) Cellolose is the only material that will filter oil efficiently such as a roll of TP.. If they all claim to filter oil to less than a micron why by the fancy most expensive one and be locked into buying their filter element? TP is cheap and does the job and is readily available.. It makes no sense to buy a companies filter setup who has just put a spin on an an old and simple technology and turn it into something more complicated and say it filters better than TP.. When it dosen't.
The AMSOIL filter element is made of compressed cotton and wood fiber.
You can recommend anything anything; you can recommend 10,000 miles oil drain intervals, but the engine wont last as long as it would if you change the oil every 3,000 miles. That is of course with normal filtration. With filters that clean oil the rules change. You still need to get the right amount of new oil and never allow the oil to get dirty. That is if you want to get maximum engine life. TP filters are not magic. They keep absorbing contaminants until they cant hold any more. To have a filter that can go longer between changes it must be less effective or larger or the engine owner must accept a higher wear rate. Filters are easy. You can look at a filter element and tell if it will clean oil or not. I have never bought the old, "why pay one dollar for a filter element when a twentyfive dollar filter element will work just as well."
I had an easier installation with my first TP filter than Therion. My Rambler came from the factory with an almost useless bypass filter installed. All I had to do was toss it and use the existing ports to install the Frantz. (The Motor Guard didnt come out until 1966.)
Ralph
I had an easier installation with my first TP filter than Therion. My Rambler came from the factory with an almost useless bypass filter installed. All I had to do was toss it and use the existing ports to install the Frantz. (The Motor Guard didnt come out until 1966.)
Ralph
Alot of my installation woes were caused by a the 90* fitting that LEAKS NO MATTER WHAT U DO TO IT.
From now on i will never use the 90* fitting ever again as it leaked in all instances. Even when i replaced it with a new one and put teflon on it.
From now on i will never use the 90* fitting ever again as it leaked in all instances. Even when i replaced it with a new one and put teflon on it.
Mykro,
What you say is very true. But do you not agree that it's kind of convenient to go longer between the filter Changes? I mean if you are dinking around with the filter every 2,000-3,000 miles you might as well just change the darned oil?
Do you agree or disagree that it's pretty convenient to have a less messy spin on filter that takes about 2-3 minutes to change?
Do you agree or disagree all by-pass filters are better than conventional full flow filtration and that it's good to have a choice?
[ April 19, 2004, 09:06 AM: Message edited by: msparks ]
Originally posted by msparks:
Per Mykro: "Cellolose is the only material that will filter oil efficiently..." This is a total and flat-out lie. He has twisted Ralph's words which state that nothing is proven to filter more efficiently than cellulose.
Per Mykro: "From what I heard their filters channel oil" Who did you hear that from? Do you have UOAs that substatiate that, or do you think that we should believe you because you said it? Until Mykro can substantiate his claim, I have to assume that it's another lie.
Another Mykro pearl of wisdom: "It makes no sense to buy a companies filter setup who has just put a spin on an an old and simple technology and turn it into something more complicated and say it filters better than TP.. "
It may not make any sense to Mykro because he has a very myopic and opinionated perspective on oil filtration. To me, it makes perfect sense for some people to not want to change out a roll of toilet paper every 2-3000 miles. It also makes sense that many people like the convenience of a spin-on filter. And I've never heard anyone claim that spin-on filters do a better job of filtering than toilet paper.
Personally I believe that each bypass filter system has its unique attributes and that any of these systems will likely allow the engine to last far longer than the rest of the car. So each potential user should weigh the cost, convenience, ease of installation, packaging constraints and lubrication objectives to decide which is best. They should not just accept the opinions of guys like Mykro.
No, it isn't true. Mykro is making false claims, and is twisting the words of others to make it sound like facts.
Per Mykro: "Cellolose is the only material that will filter oil efficiently..." This is a total and flat-out lie. He has twisted Ralph's words which state that nothing is proven to filter more efficiently than cellulose.
Per Mykro: "From what I heard their filters channel oil" Who did you hear that from? Do you have UOAs that substatiate that, or do you think that we should believe you because you said it? Until Mykro can substantiate his claim, I have to assume that it's another lie.
Another Mykro pearl of wisdom: "It makes no sense to buy a companies filter setup who has just put a spin on an an old and simple technology and turn it into something more complicated and say it filters better than TP.. "
It may not make any sense to Mykro because he has a very myopic and opinionated perspective on oil filtration. To me, it makes perfect sense for some people to not want to change out a roll of toilet paper every 2-3000 miles. It also makes sense that many people like the convenience of a spin-on filter. And I've never heard anyone claim that spin-on filters do a better job of filtering than toilet paper.
Personally I believe that each bypass filter system has its unique attributes and that any of these systems will likely allow the engine to last far longer than the rest of the car. So each potential user should weigh the cost, convenience, ease of installation, packaging constraints and lubrication objectives to decide which is best. They should not just accept the opinions of guys like Mykro.
I just didn't want to get into a pissing contest. But your also right
I'm sure any bypass filter will work, but the tp is probably slightly better than the amsoil since amsoil recommends bypass filter changes every year which means it doesnt plug up as fast which means it doesnt trap as much dirt.. just my 2 cents.
Yeah i've heard that alot, but its much smaller so i cant see it trapping THAT much more dirt than a roll of toliet paper.
Small, doesn't always tell everything. The AMS Oil can likely hold more dirt per cm3 because flow can't channel as a roll of TP can when its loaded, it has to go through the media.
Cellolose is the only material that will filter oil efficiently
Absolutly not true. Cellulose is a very good material, but glass has better dirt holding properties and better flow per cm2. However, glass won't remove water.
How come no one considers using hydraulic spin on filters as by pass or remote full flow oil filters? These unlike everyone else's filters on the market are bought by specifications like 99% @1µm, with 20 gpm.
Yeah i've heard that alot, but its much smaller so i cant see it trapping THAT much more dirt than a roll of toliet paper.
Small, doesn't always tell everything. The AMS Oil can likely hold more dirt per cm3 because flow can't channel as a roll of TP can when its loaded, it has to go through the media.
Cellolose is the only material that will filter oil efficiently
Absolutly not true. Cellulose is a very good material, but glass has better dirt holding properties and better flow per cm2. However, glass won't remove water.
How come no one considers using hydraulic spin on filters as by pass or remote full flow oil filters? These unlike everyone else's filters on the market are bought by specifications like 99% @1µm, with 20 gpm.
- Status
Similar threads
