Who makes Mobil 1 filters now ?

OVERKILL said:
The Wix XP is the only example of that, so I'd say the Wix XP is what goes against the real-world practice.

FRAM Ultra - High efficiency, high holding capacity
Donaldson Blue (Synteq) - High efficiency, high holding capacity
Fleetguard Stratapore/Nanonet - High efficiency, high holding capacity
AMSOIL EaO - High efficiency, high holding capacity
Royal Purple - High efficiency, high holding capacity

The only other partial exception might be the Purolator BOSS, just because it's not "great", but the Purolator One is also an extended interval filter and it (and its predecessor the PureONE) have historically had high efficiency and holding capacity.
Click to expand...
But on the Ascent tests, the WIX XP (lowest efficiency) showed the highest capacity, lowest differential pressure and the longest time to fill up, while the Royal Purple (second highest efficiency) had the second lowest capacity, highest differential pressure and shortest time to fill up. On the BR test results, the Amsoil, Royal Purple, and Fram Endurance showed among the best efficacies but among the lowest capacities and hot flows, while the Wix XP had among the lowest efficiencies but among the highest hot flows and capacities. The Boss was the only filter that was among the top in all three measures in the BR tests. So other than with the Boss in the BR tests (and to a lesser degree the OG Fram Ultra on the Ascent tests), there does appear to be a tradeoff between efficiency on one hand and capacity, flow, and time to fill up on the other hand.
 
Last edited:
cheesepuffs2 said:
But that goes against real-world practice. Filters geared toward extended intervals, say the Wix XP for instance, have worse starting efficiency than their "regular" filter of the same brand, to essentially leave room for more contaminants and not load the filter to where it may bypass. Running an ultra-high efficiency oil filter with long intervals isn't the way the industry has gone, it's the opposite.
Click to expand...
What people do in "real world practice" doesn't mean that using a less efficiency filter isn't causing more long term wear because the oil isn't kept as clean. Many engine wear studies show that cleaner oil always results in less engine wear. Running an inefficient filter for long OCIs, regardless of what it's holding capacity, is going to result in dirtier oil over the OCI. I wouldn't want to run a filter rated at 50% @ 20u for a 10K+ OCI ... regardless if people do it in real-world practice or not and it seems to be "OK". Most likely don't read engine wear studies and understand how oil cleaniness equates to wear. If someown wants to maintain the mechanical health of the engine as well as possible, then using a high efficiency oil filter is one of many steps in that direction. Short OCIs don't need as efficient filtration as mentioned before, ie: If the OCI was 3000 miles or less with a 5 quart or more sump, the filter wouldn't have to be very efficient.

And since when is Wix of Purolator/M+H concerned about some added wear to engines when saying to run their least efficient oil filters for extended OCIs. And as already mentioned, there are lots of high efficiency filters these days that have pretty high holding capacity and therefore are also recommended for long OCIs.
 
Last edited:
Alien said:
But on the Ascent tests, the WIX XP (lowest efficiency) showed the highest capacity, lowest differential pressure and the longest time to fill up, while the Royal Purple (second highest efficiency) had the second lowest capacity, highest differential pressure and shortest time to fill up. On the BR test results, the Amsoil, Royal Purple, and Fram Endurance showed among the best efficacies but among the lowest capacities and hot flows, while the Wix XP had among the lowest efficiencies but among the highest hot flows and capacities. The Boss was the only filter that was among the top in all three measures in the BR tests. So other than with the Boss in the BR tests (and to a lesser degree the OG Fram Ultra on the Ascent tests), there does appear to be a tradeoff between efficiency on one hand and capacity, flow, and time to fill up on the other hand.
Click to expand...
The FRAM Ultra (OG) was the best of both worlds, having tons of capacity and insanely high efficiency. But, if you've taken an OG Ultra apart, it's really 4 layers of synthetic media, which I strongly suspect, was quite expensive to produce.

The AMSOIL, Royal Purple and FRAM Endurance are all basically the same filter IMHO. They all appear to use the same media, which is quite different from the OG Ultra media. It's likely also considerably cheaper to manufacture, which is why the OG Ultra media was quietly phased-out. These are still marketed as extended drain filters however, keeping in theme with what @cheesepuffs2 was postulating.

The WIX XP shows that you can make a relatively inexpensive synthetic media that's horribly inefficient but has a ton of holding capacity. The AMSOIL/RP/Endurance shows you can use a more efficient version of that media, but you lose capacity. The OG Ultra shows you can have incredible efficiency and high capacity, but it comes at a price.

This is all covered in my "What's in your filter" sticky thread.

The genesis of this philosophy (high efficiency, high capacity) is the HD filter market where the Donaldson Blue and Fleetguard Stratapore filters really pioneered this approach: offering greatly improved efficiency over cellulose, while being capable of much longer drains due to considerable increases in holding capacity. But these are big expensive filters for extremely expensive pieces of equipment, they aren't fighting for shelf space or a price point at Walmart. FRAM was the first company, long before the First Brands acquisition, to try and take this philosophy downstream, and were quite successful. The Ascent data really underscores what an incredible value the OG Ultra was.
 
OVERKILL said:
The Wix XP is the only example of that, so I'd say the Wix XP is what goes against the real-world practice.
Click to expand...
The Wix XP in the Ascent ISO testing also showed to have low efficiency right off the bat at ~85% for all particles above 30u. It took a lot more test dust to clog it enough to get to the target 8 PSI dP above new dP which defined end of test. But just think of how much debris was going through the media and down stream while getting it to the target 8 PSI dP. :cautious:
 
Alien said:
But on the Ascent tests, the WIX XP (lowest efficiency) showed the highest capacity, lowest differential pressure and the longest time to fill up,
Click to expand...
And the one that let the most debris go down stream, which if on an engine would be going right into the engine's oiling system.
 
Alien said:
On the BR test results, the Amsoil, Royal Purple, and Fram Endurance showed among the best efficacies but among the lowest capacities and hot flows, while the Wix XP had among the lowest efficiencies but among the highest hot flows and capacities. The Boss was the only filter that was among the top in all three measures in the BR tests. So other than with the Boss in the BR tests (and to a lesser degree the OG Fram Ultra on the Ascent tests), there does appear to be a tradeoff between efficiency on one hand and capacity, flow, and time to fill up on the other hand.
Click to expand...
No real correlation of BR's efficiency "ranking" to the way the same filters rank with their ISO 4548-12 testing. What confuses people is when they take garage testing on YT as the "official" standard of test results, when it's really not. The OG Ultra in the Ascent test smoked the Boss in efficiency and the Ultra also has more holding capacity. As shown in the Ascent test, it's entirely possible to have high efficiency and high holding capacity, as well as good flow (ie, dP vs flow curve is relatively low and doesn't matter to the PD pump).
 
Patman said:
Just because we aren’t seeing engine failures doesn’t mean that those poorly filtering filters aren’t a problem. For instance, Toyota OEM filters are known for being inefficient and there are certainly a lot of long lasting Toyotas, but at the same time there are a lot of old oil burning Toyotas as well. Perhaps a better filter would have had a different result.

And there is no negative impact whatsoever from using a more efficient oil filter (other than the higher cost) So why not use it?
Click to expand...
Would some say that there is a negative impact with more efficient oil filter because of the restrictive nature of the filter?
 
Zack1978 said:
Would some say that there is a negative impact with more efficient oil filter because of the restrictive nature of the filter?
Click to expand...
Some would think and say that without really knowing the dP vs flow curve. As seen in both Ascent's ISO testing and BRs dP vs flow tests, there really isn't a lot of difference in dP between all the filters tested. A dP of +/- a couple of PSI of dP with hot oil isn't going to matter to vehicles unless maybe they are on a race track at redline all the time. In a case like that, research should be done to actually know the dP vs flow with hot oil, but again almost all filters are going to have pretty low dP vs flow with fully hot oil.
 
Alien said:
But on the Ascent tests, the WIX XP (lowest efficiency) showed the highest capacity, lowest differential pressure and the longest time to fill up, while the Royal Purple (second highest efficiency) had the second lowest capacity, highest differential pressure and shortest time to fill up. On the BR test results, the Amsoil, Royal Purple, and Fram Endurance showed among the best efficacies but among the lowest capacities and hot flows, while the Wix XP had among the lowest efficiencies but among the highest hot flows and capacities. The Boss was the only filter that was among the top in all three measures in the BR tests. So other than with the Boss in the BR tests (and to a lesser degree the OG Fram Ultra on the Ascent tests), there does appear to be a tradeoff between efficiency on one hand and capacity, flow, and time to fill up on the other hand.
Click to expand...
The Boss media looks good in the microscope test if I’m not mistaken.
 
Mobil 1 filters haven't looked good on here for years... The pictures tell you all you need to know.
 
Zack1978 said:
Would some say that there is a negative impact with more efficient oil filter because of the restrictive nature of the filter?
Click to expand...
The filter companies have been trying to solve this issue for many decades. Car makers have taken a more cautious approach than aftermarket it seems.
Here is a Lee video from 1983 where they made a filter with two different medias.
 
Last edited:
MetalSlug said:
Purolator Boss. Nothing negative about it at all. If do please name it lol.
Click to expand...
Low efficiency. If you don't care about efficiency and/or run a pretty low OCI then the Boss would be OK if it makes you feel like a Boss.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

ZeeOSix
Efficiency Info on the New Mobil 1 Filter
2 3
Replies
42
Views
2K
4WD
Corneileous
Oil filter recommendations for 2018 Ram 1500 Hemi.
2 3 4
Replies
71
Views
3K
barkingspider
W
Use bigger and better filters in your OPE
2 3
Replies
58
Views
3K
kimmillard1
Sidebite
Ford FL-820S C&P and Walmart FL1A Filter Observations
Replies
9
Views
788
Fair enough
Hootbro
Mobil 1 M1-212A made in South Korea.
2 3
Replies
54
Views
3K
ZeeOSix
Back
Top Bottom