Whats wrong over at Purolator?

If OCIs are pretty short then lower efficiency filtration has less impact than if OCIs are longer.

This doesn’t make much sense to me. If particles are there, they’re there. The sump will make many turnovers if the fluid therein, and larger particles that survive will do their damage.

You could argue that neither size range will be damaging, at which case the arguments are all just academic anyway.

If the engine is shedding wear materials, oci duration doesn’t make a whole lot of difference unless you’re relying on the dispersants, which is a different beast than media filtration.

Either you want a good filter to catch more smaller particles, regardless of oci, or you don’t.
 
This doesn’t make much sense to me. If particles are there, they’re there. The sump will make many turnovers if the fluid therein, and larger particles that survive will do their damage.

You could argue that neither size range will be damaging, at which case the arguments are all just academic anyway.

If the engine is shedding wear materials, oci duration doesn’t make a whole lot of difference unless you’re relying on the dispersants, which is a different beast than media filtration.
Particles are there, but at what size and how many is the key, and it's not really the largest particles that cause the most wear. Engine wear due to particulate in the oil is proportional to how clean the oil is and how long that oil is pumped through the engine (the OCI). So length of OCI definitely makes a difference because the longer the OCI the more the contamination level increases. If you ran a low efficiency filter for 10K miles there will be more particulate in the oil vs using a high efficiency filter - ISO 4406 particle count data shows that.

A higher efficiency filter keeps the oil cleaner, and as the OCI gets longer and longer than that becomes more important. For example, that's why big diesel engines use a bypass filtering system, so they can run that oil a very long time and keep it clean throughout the OCI. If you changed oil every 1500 miles on a broken in engine you wouldn't need much filtration beyond a fine screen because you're getting rid of the debris by changing the oil.

If you read some engine wear studies, like the ones done by Cummins you will see that the conclusion is the debris 20u and less contributes to the most wear. An oil filter rated at 99% @ 20u is typically around 70-80% @ 5u, so it's going to filter out way more debris below 20u than a filter that's rated at 99% @ 45u. Low efficiency oil filters also shed way more already captured debris than high efficiency filters, as seen in every ISO 45458-12 test. Oil filters lose efficiency as they load up, which is opposite of air filters which will increase in efficiency as they load up. It's been discussed a lot in this forum.

Either you want a good filter to catch more smaller particles, regardless of oci, or you don’t.
I choose higher filtration every time ... why not when oil filters that are 99% @ 20u microns don't cost any more (and sometimes less) than much lower efficiency filters. I'd even run a high efficiency for 3000 miles in that case.
 
crazy times my guy.. went like 7 years not keeping up and using fram xg got a new truck and noticed fram was no more.. went with wix cause they were always top dogs just to learn M&H bought them out "purolator" a brand i wrote off years ago from tearing issues.. now only manufacture is PGI AND M&H... PGI look great i grabbed a couple cases off ebay.
Reminds me of that old Geico commercial where the caveman came out from a pile of rocks wondering what happened. 😄
 
I was under the impression the Puro Boss was basically a M&H fleece filter in a can, like the ones they supplied to Mercedes and BMW.

I won’t use Puro or Wix unless I check the center tube. A friend needed her oil changed, she got a Wix filter. I begrudgingly used it after checking if the louvers are open.
 
A brand can be useful for marketing purposes, but how many brands maintain consistent quality? Not many! Look what happened to famous American car brands in the 1970s-80s. They just fell behind the Asian and to some extent European cars. Anyone remember the absolutely horrible attempts to compete with the influx of fuel efficient Hondas and Toyotas? Pintos, Gremlins, and Vegas were just bad jokes. In any case, with our global economy products and the companies that make them can change fast for both the good and bad. Luckily, we do have the Internet to help us try to keep informed, but it isn't easy. The days of buying a brand and knowing what it means are mostly gone.
 
Particles are there, but at what size and how many is the key, and it's not really the largest particles that cause the most wear. Engine wear due to particulate in the oil is proportional to how clean the oil is and how long that oil is pumped through the engine (the OCI). So length of OCI definitely makes a difference because the longer the OCI the more the contamination level increases. If you ran a low efficiency filter for 10K miles there will be more particulate in the oil vs using a high efficiency filter - ISO 4406 particle count data shows that.

A higher efficiency filter keeps the oil cleaner, and as the OCI gets longer and longer than that becomes more important. For example, that's why big diesel engines use a bypass filtering system, so they can run that oil a very long time and keep it clean throughout the OCI. If you changed oil every 1500 miles on a broken in engine you wouldn't need much filtration beyond a fine screen because you're getting rid of the debris by changing the oil.

If you read some engine wear studies, like the ones done by Cummins you will see that the conclusion is the debris 20u and less contributes to the most wear. An oil filter rated at 99% @ 20u is typically around 70-80% @ 5u, so it's going to filter out way more debris below 20u than a filter that's rated at 99% @ 45u. Low efficiency oil filters also shed way more already captured debris than high efficiency filters, as seen in every ISO 45458-12 test. Oil filters lose efficiency as they load up, which is opposite of air filters which will increase in efficiency as they load up. It's been discussed a lot in this forum.


I choose higher filtration every time ... why not when oil filters that are 99% @ 20u microns don't cost any more (and sometimes less) than much lower efficiency filters. I'd even run a high efficiency for 3000 miles in that case.
I agree with most of what you say.

And I agree, higher filtration is beneficial.

But that’s again my point, the particles are there or they aren’t.

You said if it’s a shorter oci it doesn’t matter as much. Sure the particle counts may be lower, but the reality is that if the particles are there, they’re doing damage.

The point is to get them out. Yes, an oil change is a way to do it. But they return simply with use and fuel burn. So then you’re relying upon dispersants, or you’re relying upon filtration.

I’d prefer to filter them out. I think you would too. I’d prefer to not allow them to be loaded in the oil just because Im doing a shorter oci. They’re still there doing damage in the right tolerance and soft material locations.
 
I agree with most of what you say.

And I agree, higher filtration is beneficial.

But that’s again my point, the particles are there or they aren’t.

You said if it’s a shorter oci it doesn’t matter as much. Sure the particle counts may be lower, but the reality is that if the particles are there, they’re doing damage.
I didn't say if it's a shorter OCI it doesn't matter, I said a lower efficiency filtration has less impact, meaning impact on wear compared to if that lower efficiency was ran for a long OCI. I explained it more in post 23. The very extreme example is if you dumped the oil every 100 miles on a broken in engine you wouldn't even need an oil filter.

If you ran a low efficiency filter for 10K miles the sump particle count would be much higher than if a very high efficiency filter was used. If you ran a low efficiency filter for 3000 miles, the PC would still be higher than if using a high efficiency filter, but the PC difference between them would be less drastic than if the OCI was 10K. That's what I mean by: "If OCIs are pretty short then lower efficiency filtration has less impact than if OCIs are longer". Less impact on wear.

The point is to get them out. Yes, an oil change is a way to do it. But they return simply with use and fuel burn. So then you’re relying upon dispersants, or you’re relying upon filtration.
If the OCI is shorter then there is less debris generated during that OCI. And yes, you want to get them out and prevent them from being circulated through the engine. The only good way to achieve that with long OCIs is to use a more efficient oil filter. Debris that's dispersed in the oil doesn't magically disappear, it still has to be filtered out of the oil by the oil filter.

I’d prefer to filter them out. I think you would too. I’d prefer to not allow them to be loaded in the oil just because Im doing a shorter oci. They’re still there doing damage in the right tolerance and soft material locations.
I use a high efficiency filters regarless of the OCI ... why not. But the fact is the shorter the OCI the less important the filter efficiency is compared to running that same low efficiency filter for a much longer OCI. There is less wear if a 50% @ 20u filter is ran for 2000 miles vs if that same fitler was ran for 10,000 miles. That was my main point in my original comment in post 4.

Yes, high efficiency filters will keep the oil cleaner regardless of the OCI, but for much longer OCIs they make a bigger difference in oil cleanliness over the OCI. The dirtier the oil and the longer that oil is ran, the more wear.
 
Back
Top Bottom