Wix XP efficiency

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: bullwinkle
The Wix/Napa Gold has higher efficiency than the XP/Napa Platinum-at a lower price. That's a double win in my book.

As an aside, things are strange up here. If I buy a Wix, it's cheaper than a Wix XP by a significant margin. The XP is insanely expensive at one of my suppliers. At NAPA Canada, however, the Platinum is, oddly, a bit cheaper than the Gold at regular price, which always makes me wonder about our Napa's sanity.

 

[compratio10_5]

Good discussion here on reported filter efficiency and the measurable effects. After reading a bunch of SAE papers and technical reports, I believe that true oil filter lifetime performance is not reflected by the reported ISO 4548-12 Multi-pass efficiency test. The fluid power (hydraulic) industry seems to be where the most relevant information is found and I don't know how well this applies to engine lube oil filters. But I wonder if the emphasis on multi-pass efficiency test number is in some cases misleading. Refer to "Dynamic Filter Efficiency" by by Hy-Pro Corp. and "Cyclic Stabilization Test" by Pall Corp. Which is most misleading, to publish an efficiency number that is not maintained over the life of a filter in actual service or to not publish a number? Here is a quote from Pall's "The Cyclic Stabilization Test" technical report that can be googled:

"How is Filter Performance Measured?
Evaluating filters in an actual operating system is
the only sure way to establish that a filter will perform
to expectations as well as achieve and then
maintain the required fluid cleanliness level
throughout the filter’s service life. However, it is
often impractical to perform such tests,for reasons
of time and consistency.
Filter selection and comparisons are usually made
primarily on the basis of the filtration (Beta) ratio
and dirt holding capacity determined by Multi-pass
testing.However, there are many other parameters
vital to maintaining filter element integrity and
desired performance in actual operation,including
the strength and stability of the filtration medium,
the filter’s ability to withstand flow and pressure
surges,as well as those conditions induced by cold
start-ups.
Using Multi-pass performance as the sole filter
specification is inadequate,as often weaknesses or
deficiencies in performance are overlooked or not
exposed because of limitations in the scope of
testing"

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: SnowmanCO
IMO, Wix's performance numbers are correct (B2=20). It is just being interpreted incorrectly.


Not this again ... it's been discussed many times. WIX does not use the typical beta format standard. B2=20 when WIX says it means 50% @ 20 microns. It's been verified many times. I was told on the phone a year or so ago by WIX Tech Line that the XP efficiency was 50% @ 20 microns.

Now they have changed it to 99% @ 35 microns (which is basically the same as saying 50% @ 20 microns) to sound better, and not today they won't even tell anyone what it is. See a trend here?

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: Toptierpao
I will know with a uoa in 2 ways.

1)Fuel dilution.....We have direct injected vehicles which always run around 3 % fuel dilution verified via GC testing. I have reduced that some and want to bring it down more if I can.Word is that the XP does a very good job in that respect. Time to test that word since MG is no longer being used. Thats the easy part.


How does an oil filter reduce fuel dilution? It certainly can't filter fuel out of the oil.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: compratio10_5
Here is a quote from Pall's "The Cyclic Stabilization Test" technical report that can be googled:

"How is Filter Performance Measured?
Evaluating filters in an actual operating system is
the only sure way to establish that a filter will perform
to expectations as well as achieve and then
maintain the required fluid cleanliness level
throughout the filter’s service life. However, it is
often impractical to perform such tests,for reasons
of time and consistency.
Filter selection and comparisons are usually made
primarily on the basis of the filtration (Beta) ratio
and dirt holding capacity determined by Multi-pass
testing.However, there are many other parameters
vital to maintaining filter element integrity and
desired performance in actual operation,including
the strength and stability of the filtration medium,
the filter’s ability to withstand flow and pressure
surges,as well as those conditions induced by cold
start-ups.
Using Multi-pass performance as the sole filter
specification is inadequate,as often weaknesses or
deficiencies in performance are overlooked or not
exposed because of limitations in the scope of
testing"


He's talking about other parameters of the filter besides efficiency, like media strength (ie, Tearolators), that may not be found in the ISO efficiency testing.

IMO, using the ISO 4548-12 multi-pass test is a good "apples to apples" way of comparing filter efficiency because it's a standardized efficiency test. I have no doubt that a filter that comes in with high efficiency in the ISO test is also filtering better in actual use out on the road.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: ZeeOSix
How does an oil filter reduce fuel dilution? It certainly can't filter fuel out of the oil.

I asked about that before and never got much of an answer, unless I'm willing to accept that correlation and causation are the same thing, or perhaps even accept that effects can precede causes, or an occasional appeal to authority.

If an oil filter can reduce fuel dilution, I want to hear about it, and how it works, not just "buy this because we said it works to do something even the manufacturer doesn't claim."

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: Toptierpao
I just purchased an XP last week and will give it a try.If I am happy with it,I will go to XP on everything.For now,it will be an experiment. For some reason,they do not want the public to know true filtration numbers. It is either really bad or really good.


If they are hiding the efficiency numbers because they are so good, it would be the first time in my life I've ever seen such a bonehead marketing move. Filter companies know that good efficiency numbers help sell filters. The way I see it, WIX has now stopped giving any numbers at all on the XP when someone calls them because they don't want the word to spread around, like here on a chat board like this one.

 

[MParr]

Broken record

 

[ZeeOSix]

Moe like responding to misinformation.

 

[MParr]

Are you now or have you in the past been compensated by FRAM Filter?

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: MParr
Are you now or have you in the past been compensated by FRAM Filter?


No ... and you don't know why people say what they do about this subject matter? I'm not the only one who says these things.

 

[MParr]

No but, it appears you are the choir leader.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: MParr
No but, it appears you are the choir leader.


Appearances can be misleading - may other members here say the same about the filter you seem to despise. You don't have to read it.

If you think there's something better then start talking about it - I'm all ears. There are many very good filters out there, but the XP IMO isn't on my list. But is someone wants it on their list then that's all good too - their car, their money.

 

[MParr]

Despise? That’s a good one. To be clear, I will not use a Tough Guard or Extra Guard on any of my vehicles. That is from past experience. The Ultra is a whole different matter. I would use it but, not on my Ford. From all of your past posting, I fully believe you are associated with FRAM Filters in some capacity.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: MParr
Despise? That’s a good one. To be clear, I will not use a Tough Guard or Extra Guard on any of my vehicles. That is from past experience. The Ultra is a whole different matter. I would use it but, not on my Ford. From all of your past posting, I fully believe you are associated with FRAM Filters in some capacity.


Well, your wrong. If you go back 4 years ago you'd think I was associated with Purolator (go read my posts from 4+ years ago). If the WIX XP was 99% @ 20 microns, you'd probably think I was associated with WIX. Go figure ...

 

[MParr]

You won’t convince me otherwise.

 

[ZeeOSix]

Originally Posted By: MParr
You won’t convince me otherwise.


Nobody convinces anyone ... they convince themselves from becoming educated about stuff. If something comes along better from company XYZ, then people might think I'm associated with company XYZ. Call it being a "fanboy" about something ... I really don't care.

 

[dnewton3]

I, too, like the FU. But it's not a good ROI for me. I'll probably never run an OCI out long enough to make it the wise choice.

I can use a Wix/NG or TG easily out to 15k miles. Why pay more for the Ultra? I don't get any better filtering (in a tangible sense) in terms of efficiency or capacity. What little difference that may exist is so paltry small that we'll NEVER see the difference in wear control. There are other things that control engine wear more so than the oil filter nowadays.

 

[Kruse]

Originally Posted By: dnewton3
I, too, like the FU. But it's not a good ROI for me. I'll probably never run an OCI out long enough to make it the wise choice.

I can use a Wix/NG or TG easily out to 15k miles. Why pay more for the Ultra? I don't get any better filtering (in a tangible sense) in terms of efficiency or capacity. What little difference that may exist is so paltry small that we'll NEVER see the difference in wear control. There are other things that control engine wear more so than the oil filter nowadays.


Now you've done it. You have angered the Fram gods on this site. Your children's children will be cursed.

 

[Garak]

Originally Posted By: MParr
You won’t convince me otherwise.

He is right, though. Look at his posts from a few years back with regards to Purolator. He likes high efficiency filtration At one time, all things being equal, Purolator was leading that market. Now, there's something else, and the tearing issue didn't help, either.

A few years back, too, I was quite happy to be using Bosch Premiums for under $5 with Purolator P1 efficiency. Of course, events conspired against me, too, with the pricing going up significantly, the convenience and availability dropping off, not to mention the tears. So, I went back to the Wix that I've been using for years, along with some dalliances with Hastings and Baldwin.