Originally Posted By: goodtimes
DENSO
#1 oil filter no defect, no tear.
Good choice there goodtimes.
DENSO
#1 oil filter no defect, no tear.
Good choice there goodtimes.
WIX 57356XP and FRAM XG7317 Cut Open and Compared
- Thread starter HX520W
- Start date
- Status
Thanks for taking the time for a real nice c&p.
HX520W, thanks for the C&P and comparison pics.
As you can see in my signature I'm using a WIX oil filter. It was on a clearance sale at RA. Normally I would use a MC FL-400S. If I were to buy a synthetic oil filter it would be the FU. IMHO, I think it's the best oil filter on the market. And, I'm far from being a FU fan boy. I just know a good oil filter when I see it. And, I don't think there is anything wrong with WIX oil filter either.
As you can see in my signature I'm using a WIX oil filter. It was on a clearance sale at RA. Normally I would use a MC FL-400S. If I were to buy a synthetic oil filter it would be the FU. IMHO, I think it's the best oil filter on the market. And, I'm far from being a FU fan boy. I just know a good oil filter when I see it. And, I don't think there is anything wrong with WIX oil filter either.
Originally Posted By: DuckRyder
How and how long did you dry the elements out? FWIW I’ve only noticed the “fibers” tend to only appear loose after some drying, I’ve also noticed the same effect present on HD filters (Made by Champion). I’ve never dried out a used WIX.
I wrapped the filters in paper towel and let them sit for a day and a half. Every FRAM Ultra that I've cut open has looked like that, even deeper down in the pleats where the media is untouched.
How and how long did you dry the elements out? FWIW I’ve only noticed the “fibers” tend to only appear loose after some drying, I’ve also noticed the same effect present on HD filters (Made by Champion). I’ve never dried out a used WIX.
I wrapped the filters in paper towel and let them sit for a day and a half. Every FRAM Ultra that I've cut open has looked like that, even deeper down in the pleats where the media is untouched.
Originally Posted By: HX520W
Originally Posted By: Eddie
The number of pleats doesn't mater if we don't know the SQ IN of the total media. Ed
Very true. I'll update the thread with those numbers soon.
Full synthetic media also has the variable of depth filtering, so even comparing total square inches of media isn't a true comparison. The real way to compare media performance is with efficiency, holding capacity and flow vs PSID data.
Originally Posted By: Eddie
The number of pleats doesn't mater if we don't know the SQ IN of the total media. Ed
Very true. I'll update the thread with those numbers soon.
Full synthetic media also has the variable of depth filtering, so even comparing total square inches of media isn't a true comparison. The real way to compare media performance is with efficiency, holding capacity and flow vs PSID data.
Originally Posted By: HX520W
Very true. I'll update the thread with those numbers soon.
NO! Don't go cutting them up! Leave them be please.
Very true. I'll update the thread with those numbers soon.
NO! Don't go cutting them up! Leave them be please.
Thanks for all the responses.
I just spent around three and a half hours trying to remove the media from each filter without damage. I think that I was mostly successful.
The media from the WIX has a surface area of ~67.0 square inches (~432.5 cm^2), and the media from the FRAM has a surface area of ~83.4 square inches (~538.1 cm^2).
This is what the FRAM looked like after removing the end caps.
The adhesive on the FRAM was fairly easy to remove once the steel was gone.
The adhesive on the WIX was strong enough and elastic enough that I was afraid to attempt to remove it before taking this picture.
Lots of adhesive on the WIX...
Most, if not all, of the grooves in the adhesive were caused while removing the steel end cap. The adhesive itself tore and was still stuck to the end cap.
Front side of the media from the FRAM after removing it from the center tube.
Back side of the FRAM's media.
Front side of the WIX.
Back side of the WIX.
FRAM on the left and WIX on the right.
The backing mesh designs between the FRAM (left) and WIX are completely different.
The media from the FRAM (top) is longer and taller than the media from the WIX. The media from the WIX wouldn't sit as very flat on the floor, but you get the idea.
These are the three different layers from the FRAM. The outer layer is on the far left.
This is a closeup of the outer (left) and inner layers of filter media from the FRAM.
Closeup of the backing material from the FRAM. I'm not sure if it's stainless or if it has some sort of coating.
These are the two layers from the WIX.
Closeup of the WIX's filter media.
The mesh on the WIX is coated, presumably to hold the metal wires in place and to prevent corrosion during storage.
I just spent around three and a half hours trying to remove the media from each filter without damage. I think that I was mostly successful.
The media from the WIX has a surface area of ~67.0 square inches (~432.5 cm^2), and the media from the FRAM has a surface area of ~83.4 square inches (~538.1 cm^2).
This is what the FRAM looked like after removing the end caps.
The adhesive on the FRAM was fairly easy to remove once the steel was gone.
The adhesive on the WIX was strong enough and elastic enough that I was afraid to attempt to remove it before taking this picture.
Lots of adhesive on the WIX...
Most, if not all, of the grooves in the adhesive were caused while removing the steel end cap. The adhesive itself tore and was still stuck to the end cap.
Front side of the media from the FRAM after removing it from the center tube.
Back side of the FRAM's media.
Front side of the WIX.
Back side of the WIX.
FRAM on the left and WIX on the right.
The backing mesh designs between the FRAM (left) and WIX are completely different.
The media from the FRAM (top) is longer and taller than the media from the WIX. The media from the WIX wouldn't sit as very flat on the floor, but you get the idea.
These are the three different layers from the FRAM. The outer layer is on the far left.
This is a closeup of the outer (left) and inner layers of filter media from the FRAM.
Closeup of the backing material from the FRAM. I'm not sure if it's stainless or if it has some sort of coating.
These are the two layers from the WIX.
Closeup of the WIX's filter media.
The mesh on the WIX is coated, presumably to hold the metal wires in place and to prevent corrosion during storage.
Thank you for posting those pictures
They look great
How did you get the end caps off the media?
Too bad Wix uses such a dinky media in their filters for this application (both regular and XP)
If you're using it on the track with a short OCI, why not use the Fram Racing HP17?
How did you get the end caps off the media?
Too bad Wix uses such a dinky media in their filters for this application (both regular and XP)
If you're using it on the track with a short OCI, why not use the Fram Racing HP17?
Yes Sir HX520W you really got into these filters Thank you
HX520W - very nice C&P and comparison. Thanks much.
The Fram mesh is stainless steel per Motorking some time ago. Very nice exhibit with new details.
Not going to be popular to say, but neither is going to be a filter for me. I don't want more steel in the flow path is one reason, the other is I am satisfied to use more standard synthetic blend filters, such as a Napa Gold, Champ Labs, or Toyota DENSO.
Not going to be popular to say, but neither is going to be a filter for me. I don't want more steel in the flow path is one reason, the other is I am satisfied to use more standard synthetic blend filters, such as a Napa Gold, Champ Labs, or Toyota DENSO.
Originally Posted By: slacktide_bitog
How did you get the end caps off the media?
I used snips (between the pleats with the widest spacing) to cut the end cap so that I could fold the metal away from the media and form multiple "flaps" of metal sticking up around the filter. From there, I used pliers grab the metal flaps that I created and twisted the pliers like a screwdriver to roll the metal off of the adhesive.
Originally Posted By: slacktide_bitog
If you're using it on the track with a short OCI, why not use the Fram Racing HP17?
I've considered doing that, but I'm not sure that I like the idea of using a filter with such a high bypass valve setting.
How did you get the end caps off the media?
I used snips (between the pleats with the widest spacing) to cut the end cap so that I could fold the metal away from the media and form multiple "flaps" of metal sticking up around the filter. From there, I used pliers grab the metal flaps that I created and twisted the pliers like a screwdriver to roll the metal off of the adhesive.
Originally Posted By: slacktide_bitog
If you're using it on the track with a short OCI, why not use the Fram Racing HP17?
I've considered doing that, but I'm not sure that I like the idea of using a filter with such a high bypass valve setting.
More nice work. How sturdy is the WIX mesh? It looks pretty good.
On the adhesive on the baseplate, the vigin XP I cut open didn’t exhibit excessive adhesive internally or externally, but the standard filter did exhibit some minor adhesive potting internally on the end cap.
Can you give us the date codes and whether the XP is marked M+H or Affinia. The Fram is an older version, though they are supposed to be the same internally. (new ones are painted with single color graphics.)
On the adhesive on the baseplate, the vigin XP I cut open didn’t exhibit excessive adhesive internally or externally, but the standard filter did exhibit some minor adhesive potting internally on the end cap.
Can you give us the date codes and whether the XP is marked M+H or Affinia. The Fram is an older version, though they are supposed to be the same internally. (new ones are painted with single color graphics.)
Originally Posted By: HX520W
Originally Posted By: slacktide_bitog
If you're using it on the track with a short OCI, why not use the Fram Racing HP17?
I've considered doing that, but I'm not sure that I like the idea of using a filter with such a high bypass valve setting.
"Racing Filters" always tend to have a high bypass valve setting along with very good flow performance (ie, low PSID with high oil flow). Reason being, the designers expect those filters will be used on engines that have a high flow oil pump, using a thicker oil and are living at high RPM on the track. One thing you don't really want is the filter running in bypass most of the time at high RPM.
Here's the Ford Racing Performance "racing filter". Good flow, high efficiency and a high bypass valve setting. BTW, most full synthetic filters will flow about the same as what's shown in the graph for the FRP filter - ie, around 5~6 PSID at 10 GPM with hot oil.
Originally Posted By: slacktide_bitog
If you're using it on the track with a short OCI, why not use the Fram Racing HP17?
I've considered doing that, but I'm not sure that I like the idea of using a filter with such a high bypass valve setting.
"Racing Filters" always tend to have a high bypass valve setting along with very good flow performance (ie, low PSID with high oil flow). Reason being, the designers expect those filters will be used on engines that have a high flow oil pump, using a thicker oil and are living at high RPM on the track. One thing you don't really want is the filter running in bypass most of the time at high RPM.
Here's the Ford Racing Performance "racing filter". Good flow, high efficiency and a high bypass valve setting. BTW, most full synthetic filters will flow about the same as what's shown in the graph for the FRP filter - ie, around 5~6 PSID at 10 GPM with hot oil.
- Status
