What's the diff between a AC PF 58 and PF 59 ??

[Alex D]

I have a 2002 Suburban with the 5.3 and my wife has a 2001 Trans Am with the LS1 motor. The Burb has a AC PF 59 filter listed as stock, the T/A has the PF44 listed, for which the PF58 is the longer version.
My question: The PF 58 and PF 59 seem to be so similar, what's the difference between the two?? they have both the same thread and backplate and are the same length.
can someone enlighten me. Thanks from a newbe

[ November 29, 2002, 12:49 AM: Message edited by: Alex D ]

 

[Patman]

Here are some quotes from a GM tech I know:

quote:

---

The one that is used on 4.8, 5.3, and 6.0 Liter GENIII engines is the PF59 and that is the one that I use. The PF59 has an anti-drainback valve identical to the PF44. The one in the PF58 is different and of a cheaper design. If GM didn't think it needed the better valve, they would have reccomended the PF58 because they make more money on the service parts. If you can't find the PF58, use the PF59. The PF58 will work and is not a problem but only the engineer who specified that filter knows all of the reasons that he or she did it.

---

quote:

---

The PF44 and the PF59 have identical construction and anti-drainback valves with the exception of the length of the filter material and case. I.E. the PF59 is just a larger capacity version of the PF44. The anti-drainback valve design that is used in the PF58 is actually cheaper and has a lower level of sealing than the version used in the PF59.

---

quote:

---

Interestingly, the filter that is on 5.7, the PF44 has the same anti-drainback valve as the PF59. They are identical with the exception of the length of the filter and the case. The PF58 is different and has a different anti-drainback valve that is a cheaper design than the PF59/PF44.

Of course, I have been saying this for three years now and no one appears to be listening. Logically, if one were to seek a larger filter than the stock one for the car applications (LS1) the first place you would look is at a truck engine. The GENIII truck engine is, for all intents and purposes, the same engine as the GENIII car engine with some variance in displacement. Keeping that in mind, GM has specified two filters that are essentially in the same "family" of construction. Mounting location, anti-drainback valves, etc. While using the PF58 may have no detrimental effect on the engine, when the PF59 is available for the same price, why not use it?

---

 

[Alex D]

Patman......thanks for the info, but....what is your opinion? Wat are you using on your LS1 ? and why would GM stock two almost identical filters in their inventory instead of going with one type for all applications. There is no price difference between the 58 and 59. Further the aftermarket always has only one model listed as replacement for the 59 and the 58. it's hard to believe GM would actually have two qualities of drainback valves, a good one and a not-so-good one.........hhmmmm

BTW I remember you from along time ago. I was a very early member of LS1.com joining in early March 1998 just a month after I bought my 98 Camaro and you were a very active member over there too. Then in early '99 I traded the Camaro for an LT4 Corvette Convertible and went on to become an early member of the Corvetteforum. Now I have a '96 LT1 Vette and I also bought my wife a 2001 T/A vert. Plus we have a 2002 Suburban.

So all the filters I am using are the PF58 on the T/A, the PF59 on the Burb and the PF52 on the Vette.......wonder what happened to all the early active members like Hutch and so on........
Nice to see you're still around......

[ November 29, 2002, 06:49 AM: Message edited by: Alex D ]

 

[Patman]

I remember you now Alex! Unfortunately I no longer have my LS1 Formula, I traded it for a 97 GTP in the end of 2000, but then I quickly regretted that so in Oct 2001 I traded that for a 95 Formula.

I was using the Ultraguard UPF58 on my Formula just before I sold it, they didn't make a UPF59 at the time AFAIK. Before that I used the M1-206 filter.

I currently use the K&N HP3002 on my LT1, and the HP1004 on my wife's Honda.

I'm still very active on the LS1 boards though, I'm a moderator on the Great Lakes regional forum of LS1.com and also on the Racer's Lounge in LS1Tech.com. Someday I hope to get another LS1, but this time I'd like to get a C5. It'll be quite a few years away though (at least 7 or 8)

Some of the early members are still active, such as Nineball, Pro Stock John, Mitchntx, etc. A lot of them are over on LS1Tech.com now though, that's the place where all the real technical posts are being made. Good to see you still around!

 

[Mike_dup1]

Some time back (1999) when this was a hot topic in the truck forums I sought out an AC Delco catalog and discovered the PF58 was for Cadillac engines and none other. The owners manuals for the 1999 truck incorrectly listed the PF58 as the filter to use. That lead to many using it and having engine noise during start up. There was a TSB on this topic. I just was looking for that book and can't locate it now.PF 59 can repalce PF58 but not vice versa. It has to do with the anit-drain back valve design (or lack of in the 58).

I considered using the PF59 on my 2002 TA but it was lower the the oil pan and could be hit easily. Since the car is low allready, I decided it was not worth the risk of hitting something on the road that could damge the filter.

fyi

 

[Patman]

Mike, even though the PF58 and PF59 are longer than stock, they still sit pretty much flush with the oil pan, and are not the lowest point on the f-body. In the C5, it's a different story, they can't run the longer filters.

My 98 Formula was lowered with Eibach springs, and I ran nothing but the longer filters the entire time I owned the car. Anything that would be large enough to hit the oil filter would first hit the oil pan anyways, and the pan protects the filter since it's in front of it. The chances of anything hitting the longer filter on an LS1 f-body are so extremely slim. Plus if you ever hit anything you'd stop and check for damage anyways. It's a one in a million chance, but the longer filter provides better filtration and better flow all the time.

 

[Mike_dup1]

As I was cruising a 80mph+ (and being passed up by 18 wheelers) thur the I294 TriState Tollway (Wisconsin-Illinois-Indiana) on my wasy to Bowling Green, I damm near hit (inches) a recap tire tread from a 18 wheeler that was laying near on the white line by C/L parapet barrier. If you hit something on the interstate your car is toast before you can stop safely. I once hit a deer with my 4X4 truck at 65mph taking out my radiator, pushing to hood up in my face. Before I could safely stop, all the coolant was gone and the temp guage was pegged on hot. I drove about 5 miles like that to get off the road. Never ahd any engine problems from that.

I parked my car in October till next May. Since I change oil only once a year, maybe next fall I will take another look at it.

btw
Walmart here sold out all their AC Delco filters and now has nothing but Fram and thier brand. Bought about dozen of PF44 filters for $0.99 each.

Don't they let you post a signature at the bottom of your post. Profile page mentions it but the option does not appear for me??

[ November 29, 2002, 11:14 AM: Message edited by: Mike ]

 

[Patman]

Mike, while I'm sure that people hit stuff on the road all the time, what are the chances that it will actually hit directly on the oil filter? Sure it'll hit the front air dam or the crossmember, but the chances of it going right at the oil filter alone are very slim. That's basically what I'm saying.

As far as your signature question goes, we've disabled the sig lines on here (to prevent non sponsors from advertising stuff for sale in their posts basically)

 

[Mike_dup1]

Patman,

Yes, I know what you are saying.