wix 57151 vs. 57151XP oil filter

[dnewton3]

That's the filter for the Ford 6.7L, right?
Use the regular Wix and not the XP.
The beta data is outstanding for the "normal" filter!

No one knows why, because Wix's customer service sux, and their tech data folks won't talk, but the XP ratings are not nearly as good as their normal filters, according to their website.

 

[claluja]

Originally Posted by dnewton3
That's the filter for the Ford 6.7L, right?
Use the regular Wix and not the XP.
The beta data is outstanding for the "normal" filter!.


Yes, for the 6.7. And thanks for mentioning it on other thread. Like the Donaldson, but may try the Wix with the slightly lower beta ratios . . . (Although I tend to believe the Donaldson numbers more than the Wix numbers - not sure why).

 

[DGXR]

Originally Posted by dnewton3
That's the filter for the Ford 6.7L, right?
Use the regular Wix and not the XP.
The beta data is outstanding for the "normal" filter!

No one knows why, because Wix's customer service sux, and their tech data folks won't talk, but the XP ratings are not nearly as good as their normal filters, according to their website.


The theory is, the XP filters are "extended performance" and approved for longer service intervals. So the filtration efficiency is lower so that media will not load up over the longer service interval. But that efficiency is still within the manufacturer's specs and will maintain warranty.

The regular WIX can have better efficiency because they are not intended to run as long, and will be replaced before they load up.

This has been discussed on here many times as the most likely reason for the difference in efficiency. Without a response from WIX, I'm not sure if a 100% firm conclusion can be reached but it sure makes sense to me. I'll use the regular WIX, thank you very much.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted by DGXR
The theory is, the XP filters are "extended performance" and approved for longer service intervals. So the filtration efficiency is lower so that media will not load up over the longer service interval.


Yep, pretty hard to "load up" at 50% @ 20μ. Other full synthetic media filters are much higher in efficiency and have longer service intervals. Goes to show that all synthetic media is not created equal.

 

[dogememe]

Originally Posted by DGXR
Originally Posted by dnewton3
That's the filter for the Ford 6.7L, right?
Use the regular Wix and not the XP.
The beta data is outstanding for the "normal" filter!

No one knows why, because Wix's customer service sux, and their tech data folks won't talk, but the XP ratings are not nearly as good as their normal filters, according to their website.


The theory is, the XP filters are "extended performance" and approved for longer service intervals. So the filtration efficiency is lower so that media will not load up over the longer service interval. But that efficiency is still within the manufacturer's specs and will maintain warranty.

The regular WIX can have better efficiency because they are not intended to run as long, and will be replaced before they load up.

This has been discussed on here many times as the most likely reason for the difference in efficiency. Without a response from WIX, I'm not sure if a 100% firm conclusion can be reached but it sure makes sense to me. I'll use the regular WIX, thank you very much.


Where does a regular Wix begin to have problems? The ones off my 15K mostly-highway OCIs on my Escape did fine - and that's a small 51348 filter.