Wix = Nominal (50%) at 21 microns? (Corvette LT1 Filter Options)
- Thread starter Robvette
- Start date
Good question since Wix doesn't seem to even reference ISO 4548-12 anywhere on their website that I can see searching around it.
Hi RobVette,
Here is the filtered (
) data of the the choices you listed. The Wix filters rank low on the list for two reasons; their filtering performance combined with a relatively high price compared to other filters with better performance.I've been able to find the ISO 4548-12 values for the Wix filter on the RockAuto website. See below. The Wix XP values used to be on the OReilly website but are now gone.
I found another site called "Parts Hawk" that continues to maintain the ISO 4548-12 value for the Wix XP. I wonder if Wix is trying to get these values removed from the retailer sites because they're numbers are not as good relative to some of the competition.
In my database, the Wix and Wix XP models rank 5th and 11th respectively in performance ratings (Efficiency/Micron/Life).
The point is, where did that detailed info on RockAuto come from? If it came from WIx, why doesn't Wix show a similar statement on the Wix website? I'd think some reference to ISO 4548-12 would be mentioned someplace on the official Wix website. Why isn't it? Seems strange that more detailed and supposed "better info" is located on 3rd party websites.I've been able to find the ISO 4548-12 values for the Wix filter on the RockAuto website. See below. The Wix XP values used to be on the OReilly website but are now gone.
Maybe some of those 3rd party statements are bogus, and Wix wants them removed so they don't get hit with false advertising.
Last edited:
I agree, my exact questions. One theory I have is the retailers understand the value of having that information and they (Wix) provides it to them by request only.The point is, where did that detailed info on RockAuto come from? If it came from WIx, why doesnt Wix show a similar statement on the Wix website? I'd think some reference to ISO 4548-12 would be mentioned someplace on the official Wix website. Why isn't it? Seems strange that more detailed and supposed "better info" is located on 3rd party websites.
Maybe some of those 3rd party statements are bogus, and Wix wants them removed so they don't get hit with false advertising.
Here's another example. The NAPA Gold Fil-7055 is made by Wix and list the mfg.'s part number 57055. They have the same
ISO information and includes an average of three NAPA Gold filters that are by Wix. Similar format as what Fram does.
- Laboratory Test Performance per ISO 454812: 18 Grams Dirt (NAPA Gold # 1515), 99% Efficient At 23 Microns (Based On NAPA Gold # 1515, 1356, 7060)
Yet, if someone calls Wix it's hard if not impossible to get such detailed information. I still laugh when I called Wix a while ago asking what the efficiency of the XP was, and I was told it was "proprietary". Who's ever heard of an oil filter sold all over the world having a "propitiatory" efficiency?
It's not an oil filter for some top secret military UFO or something. Personally, I have zero trust in any company that has something to hide or isn't transparent about their products.Now how about Purolator one or Purolator boss filters now the Purolator boss is supposed to be a decent filter.. but how about Purolator one
On a GM? (trying not to gag) Is this a stock Lingenfelter package? If so, isn't originality a priority, especially if you take it to shows so that AC Delco would be the way to go? That it's cheap and easy to find is a bonus.
LMAO No I was just putting in my two cents, about what happened when I emailed wix. I own a Ford that's why I said Motorcraft filter.. LMAO.
All you would need is to test every different filter media you use, doesn't matter if it's a large or small filter, lots of pleats or less....
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2020
- Messages
- 302
When Lingenfelter built the engine in February 1997 they used a Quaker State oil filter and 10w40 Quaker State oil. Here’s one of the pages from the original invoice.
Judging by the part number QS3980 it was likely a the same as a Fram filter since they’re the only other filter maker that uses 3980 for their LT1 filters (PH3980, TG3980, XG3980, etc.).
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2020
- Messages
- 302
Great data! Did you compile all of this?Hi RobVette,
Here is the filtered (
View attachment 162857
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2020
- Messages
- 302
Fram is certainly going to keep the oil clean. It’s a little more restrictive than other filters but that’s probably fine
The Purolator One has excellent performance specs at an excellent price. The PureOne, like the Fram Tough Guard is rated at 99% eff.@20 microns with at 15K life. Tough Guards are easy to get at WalMarts for $6.44. PureOnes are a little more difficult for me. Menards has them for $7.49.
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2020
- Messages
- 302
Attachments
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2020
- Messages
- 302
Re the AC Delco filters - RockAuto says 98% at 20-30 microns.
Summit says “Smallest Particle Filtered:
30 microns”
https://www.summitracing.com/parts/ado-upf52r
It’s such a pain when the manufacturers don’t have clear info on their website.
Summit says “Smallest Particle Filtered:
30 microns”
https://www.summitracing.com/parts/ado-upf52r
It’s such a pain when the manufacturers don’t have clear info on their website.
It does matter based on the filter size, even if they all use the same exact media. Why do you think Purolator and others state different efficiencies for the same filter model line (like a PureOne) for their giant sized efficiency reference filter vs their smaller filters ... all using the same exact PureOne media. Or why do you think Fram references 3 different sized filters in their efficiency statement and says it's the average efficiency of those 3 filters. The overall resulting efficiency has a lot to do with how a filter sloughs off already captured debris caught in the media as the filter loads up and the delta-P across the media starts increasing. It's been mentioned in many threads, and is actually shown in the Ascent testing data too.
Last edited:
