FS 2500

[Gary Allan]

No, not in a "single roll". 3 units in parallel is popular. I don't know if I buy the triple stacker ..but..


..and you're right. The LPF9750 is the new(er) offering from Luberfiner. Looks suspiciously like this, don't you think?

the mount

the filter

 

[deeter16317]

Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
No, not in a "single roll". 3 units in parallel is popular. I don't know if I buy the triple stacker ..but..


..and you're right. The LPF9750 is the new(er) offering from Luberfiner. Looks suspiciously like this, don't you think?

the mount

the filter

So your saying a single roll of paper towels won't last 10k?? Funny, that's the recommended FCI for the GCF 0-1 on a 250HP class 8 OTR truck...and I can verify, the element isn't even beginning to show signs of plugging at 10k on my emissions laden Cummins. I also get better numbers for insoluables and soot with the roll of paper towels at 10k than I did with the EaBP110 at 10k, which indicates its still working well at 10k.

While similar, the Luberfiner has been out longer (and incorporates different technology) than the latest offering from Amsoil...if you read, they (the Luberfiner) have a pleated inner surface of sacrificial zinc to combat acids.

 

[Gary Allan]

Quote:
So your saying a single roll of paper towels won't last 10k??


No, I don't think I said that. I said that I don't buy the stacker working @ 3X the single tp roll in mileage.

Look at it this way. Isn't a 3 stacker the exact same thing as putting 3 Frantz or MG's IN LINE? But nobody would put 3 Frantz or MG's in line if the first tp roll is shot in 3k. You would put 3 MG's or 3 Frantz filters in parallel to assure a 10k interval. It may be more or less despending on your soot production ..so YMMV.

 

[Gary Allan]

..but more on the EaBp vs. Z-Guard 9750 ..the two appear identical. While I don't know it, I would venture that one is the rebadge of the other. Amsoil could surely just have come out with a competitive product with their media ..but I don't KNOW that.

Given the cost of the filter ($38.75 PC/50.40), it would still be cheaper than(if the $80 figure is correct) the 9750 in price. Now I personally want to strangle the front office clowns that price the mounts ..but I can't reach that far. The mounts should be sold @ ZERO markup. Recurring sales is where the long term money is. Still, even with that (imo) lame aspect to it, the unit is a bargain in comparative costs to even something like an MG or Frantz ..and surely something like the FS2500.

It comes down to where you like to spend your money.

 

[deeter16317]

But what's the difference between a stack of 3-rolls of TP (toilet paper) versus my single roll of PT (paper towels)? Similar diameter, similar length...just putting that into perspective.

I agree, three parallel will have an apparent longer lifespan as each is seemingly filtering at the same rate and the flow is divided amongst the three filters...but that's also assuming the first roll in a stack "plugs off"...has anyone actually seen a roll of TP completely plug off?

 

[Gary Allan]

Well, while I ponder the three in a row configuration ..one could reason it a couple of ways. One will assume that the first roll or a single roll is not perfect in terms of filtration ..and that the next roll or the one beyond that will probably trap stuff that didn't get caught in the first. Now this will translate to a cleaner oil ..that will then have less particles for the front roll to filter. It sorta ends up being a "round robin" argument. The 3 in a row setup will produce cleaner fluid ..the 3 in parallel will process more fluid to a single roll level longer. The flow curves between the two will not be the same ..but neither will the cleanliness of the fluid coming out of them.

One could/would also reason that with a 3 in a row (individual units) that you would service the front roll @ 3k ..the second one at (something like) 6k and the last at (something like) 10k. Naturally, most would probably just service all three at once ..and 10k may prove that the system is still processing fluid. In terms of "big boyz" ..the down time is more expensive than 3 rolls of tp and 3 quarts of oil ..so "while you're there" plays a role.

If you see what I mean

I'd offer that PT isn't quite as dense as TP as my thought on the difference in longevity. PT has about 33% more surface area compared to TP (about 20 vs about 15) and over twice the depth (11.5 vs. 4.5)
Again, I like 'em. It's just the frequency of service that's a pain for higher mileage use. I'd say if you need the best filtration, regardless of service interval, then tp is the about as good as it gets. Dirt cheap media.

I haven't gotten around to it ..and my never get around to it, but I wanted to run a MG/Frantz behind an EaBP filter to see just how long a roll would last with pre-filtering to the level that the EaBp could provide. I'd wager that it would last MUCH longer with only dealing with the very fine particles that the EaBp let through.

..but then you're slamming up against initial capital costs for any sense of economy. Now if you've already spent $5-$10K on Banks'ing your truck out to max ..then economics really doesn't come into play

 

[TiredTrucker]

Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Quote:
Where did I say the OEM scheduled oil change is 5K?


You didn't. I just back figured it using your style of reasoning. You're saying that it's cheaper to use the FS2500 at the cost of their filters vs. Amsoil. You also said that you're changing them out every 10k.


Now you're telling us the OEM recommendation ..which is 25k (that's about normal for that size engine).

So ..you're servicing your FS2500 at TWO AND ONE HALF TIMES the OEM schedule for the full flow and the sump.

That's 2.5 filters per OEM scheduled event.



This is opposed to 1/2 that amount of bypass filter service with the Amsoil.

The full flow filter recommendation from Amsoil is simply because it's not their product. Easy enough to reason there.


You've reasoned stuff very carefully to defend your choice ..but you've configured it all wrong.

You're going to do 5 service events beyond just topping up using your FS2500 compared to Amsoil's recommendation.


Again, if it makes you happy ..more power to you. Enjoy the service intervals. I'll attempt to get up to speed with that

The basic difference in terms of filtration is simple. If you're willing to use tp/pt or other cartridge like filters ..there are choices. If you want a spin-on ..you can get the mediocre OEM offerings ..or you can get an Amsoil.

I can configure a 1um cotton wound canister bypass filter for the same costs as Amsoil and a HECK of a lot cheaper than the FS2500. Anyone can. They just need the room to fit it ..which you have. Filters are about $10 each ..and will probably last 2X as long as yours and probably comparable with Amsoil's spin-on.



Yeah, but the cost of filters is far less than Amsoils, so not a problem doing 5 service events in the time of 1 Amsoil event. Especially since Amsoil recommends dual BP110 filters for the unit on an engine this size. At even the preferred customer price, it's almost a wash on cost comparison.

Also, it takes a quart of makeup oil for a FS2500 filter change. Considerably less than a change of Amsoils dual filters. And since oil is usually added by the gallon to a class 8 truck engine, if it is not on the add mark, I won't add any oil just because I changed the bypass. Can't say that about Amsoil's setup.

Regarding 5 more service intervals than Amsoils. Not a problem. Especially since I do a complete under chassis grease job and inspection at the same 10K mile interval as the bypass filter change. And since it only takes a few more minutes to do that, it is really not an issue. Got the coveralls on anyway and all it takes is a 3/4 socket wrench and a few minutes. Hardly a factor compared to greasing the entire under side of the truck, inspecting all components and making sure the brakes are adjusted (even though it has auto slack adjustment... they never seem to come out even all the time).

Sooo.... 5 FS2500 filters at under a 1/4 of the cost each of a dual BP110 set of Amsoil filters and no full flow filter change like Amsoil wants. Also a complete painless install kit that requires no more than an hour (unless you take more than one smoke break like I did) and you don't have to waste time and extra cost having hoses made to specifications somewhere else like I would with an Amsoil setup, and I didn't have to worry about making any brackets for the install, routing issues, or obtaining any extra fittings or if the ones I would have gotten wouldn't be the right size for my engine oil ports.

In the long run.... yes, it is cheaper or at least a breakeven compared to Amsoil's setup, but the time savings in getting it installed and up and running was a real cost saver of my time.

Look... if anyone wants a Gulf Coast, Amsoil BP, or whatever is not my concern. Just about all the bypass filters on the market do a good job and the differences in quality are so minute as to fall into the purvue of the arcane. But for ease of installation, ease of maintenance, Cost of operation, and return on investment, the FS2500 won out. Gulf Coast required too much oil for a change (especially if you are using synthetic) and the price was not that great. Truck came with an OPS-1 on it, but could never get it to operate right, so took it off. Amsoil's setup seemed like a hobby project from Popular Mechanics to get it installed and working and would take up too much of my valuable time. Look... I drop over 145,000 miles a year operating and maintainging this truck and still have to manage the books, be on a bowling league every weekend (yes, even though I truck, I have a life), and have a house and 40 acres to take care of. If someone wants to play around with setting up a bypass on their vehicle as a weekend fun project, that's fine. I didn't. So.... Amsoil didn't get a second look. Even though it is a good product, if they can't cater to the customer.... oh well. But then, I guess they never were really concerned with market share. It shows.

 

[Gary Allan]

Quote:
Also, it takes a quart of makeup oil for a FS2500 filter change. Considerably less than a change of Amsoils dual filters.


Times 5? So ..one quart 5 times is much less than the two EaBp 110 filters worth of oil? I see......


No ..you're right. It's definitely not a product for you.

Good luck and I hope you enjoy your FS2500

 

[TiredTrucker]

Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
Quote:
Also, it takes a quart of makeup oil for a FS2500 filter change. Considerably less than a change of Amsoils dual filters.


Times 5? So ..one quart 5 times is much less than the two EaBp 110 filters worth of oil? I see......


No ..you're right. It's definitely not a product for you.

Good luck and I hope you enjoy your FS2500

I will...

Oh.... who really gives a rip about a quart or two more of oil in 50K miles. Considering it is a 46 quart system and will use approx a gallon in normal usage every 15-20K miles, do you really think this is an issue. Sorry, your digs on my choices have fallen on deaf ears. Don't be stuck on stupid.

 

[Gary Allan]

Quote:
Oh.... who really gives a rip about a quart or two more of oil in 50K miles.


Yeah, exactly ..anyone who would quibble over a quart or two here or there ..really now

Quote:
Also, it takes a quart of makeup oil for a FS2500 filter change. Considerably less than a change of Amsoils dual filters.


Stop!! You keep stepping on yourself! I feel bad enough already turning your own words back around on you. You've throw some gauntlet down with snide remarks from your very first post in this thread.


Enjoy your FS2500 and have a nice day!

 

[TiredTrucker]

Don't feel bad. I never felt the words coming back on me. It is sometimes difficult to discuss the finer points of lubrication in class 8 tractors with those of limited experience with this type of unit. Kinda like telling a novice that my tractor goes through over 20,000 gallons of fuel a year. Even though that is normal for any class 8 tractor, it still raises the eyebrows of a typical car owner.

Because of that limited experience (based on your comments reflected a limited view), it is only in your perception that I stepped on myself. I am not really sure you comprehended the context of any of the statements I made. If you were aware of the typical oil usage of a class 8 engine and what the typical add amount is, you wouldn't have made your last post.

A quart of oil use in an engine that only hold a couple of gallons is one thing, in an engine that holds twelve it is another. It's all relative. So.... in my 15L Cummins that holds twelve gallons in the sump, a quart of oil is not a big deal. Especially when I get my oil by the drum or pail and the cost savings over buying in smaller containers more than offsets any cost a quart or two may cause. And at the add mark on the stick, a full gallon is needed to bring it up to full mark. I don't add by the quart. Guess I could, but what would be the point.

If you can find a semi truck owner that will quibble over a quart of oil, that would be a rare find. You might want to take his name and do a write up for OOIDA's LandLine magazine so that the readers could get a chuckle. We all need a little levity once in a while. I would bet you could also write up that individual in Amsoil's Action rag and get a chuckle or two as well.

Have a good one, yourself.

 

[Gary Allan]

Okay ...here we go again... You countered every one of your objections to the Amsoil bypass system with your own words.

The system cost less and had greater longevity. When that didn't work ..you then said you don't need longevity and like getting working on it every 10k ..in fact it's perfect since you're doing something else. ..then you complain that the Amsoil takes too much oil ..while over the same time/mile frame ..it will use less. Then you say that that doesn't matter either ..and blah-blah-blah.


Here's what YOU said

Quote:
Also, it takes a quart of makeup oil for a FS2500 filter change. Considerably less than a change of Amsoils dual filters.


..and now you say this

Quote:
It's all relative. So.... in my 15L Cummins that holds twelve gallons in the sump, a quart of oil is not a big deal. Especially when I get my oil by the drum or pail and the cost savings over buying in smaller containers more than offsets any cost a quart or two may cause. And at the add mark on the stick, a full gallon is needed to bring it up to full mark. I don't add by the quart. Guess I could, but what would be the point.



Why can't you be happy with just being happy with your choice for no other reason than you chose it? You've lost every point you've made ..and then rescinded each advantage in another post. Please ...let the dog go to sleep.

Have a nice day and enjoy your FS2500.

 

[TiredTrucker]

Ok... concede that I lost the war (discussion) in your mind. I am happy with the FS2500 setup.

Now.... will someone please put the Amsoil BP setup on an '06 International 9400i with an ISX Cummins and show me the installation cost and time advantage and the servicability advantage (location of unit is critical here)over the FS2500 so that Gary can gloat?

This might be a tougher challenge, Gary. Can't just comment, must show the completed install and show actual time and materials used to accomplish it. Then everyone here can make up their own mind and see if I am blowing smoke as you contend.

The only reason I continue to respond is that you have thus far continued to avoid the main reason I decided to go with the FS2500. I allowed you to lead me on a wild ride about quarts of oil and such, but even though I mentioned it several times, you have not shown that the unit cost and install issues are more cost effective than the FS2500.

The engine would still have used the same amount of oil with either unit, but it does take less to service the FS2500. So you have not shown that the Amsoil setup more cost effective in that regard as well. Sorry, just had to take another jab at that topic. With the Amsoil unit, I would have to add a gallon at each BP filter(s) change. With the FS 2500, only after oil usage by the engine eventually brought it down to the add mark. See, there is an adavantage over the Amsoil BP setup.

Frankly, I am confused why you want to spar on this issue. Can't you let it lie as well? Seems we have a lot in common.

 

[Gary Allan]

TT, if you're happy without having to figure out where to hang the thing ..and that ONE element is enough to tip any scale toward the FS2500 ...more power to you.

I don't want to spar. You keep stating stuff and when it doesn't add up ..I ask ..and you turn around and say something else

You somehow had some "blame" thing going on with the Amsoil bypass systems that you couldn't let go. Some "anger" or contempt for them not having a kit just for you. Fine ..no problem ..but that's the limit of the merit of your advantage of the FS2500 ..or the discounting factor of the EaBP setups.


Again, I have no issue with your choice and I hope that you're happy.

So, we have the following settled:

FS2500

Kit (counts very high on the list - more than anything below)
Much higher initial cost (doesn't count from the beginning)
More frequent service intervals (does count ..then it doesn't)
More oil required for routine service intervals (does count = then it doesn't).

That about it??

 

[TiredTrucker]

Ok...

Item 2: No... not much higher initial cost when you factor that the required installation items, custom made for the application, already included in kit. Amsoil does not provide this, so parts and time to locate them or have them custom made increases cost of Amsoil setup to where it is a moot issue.

Item 3: Yes.. more frequent service intervals. But filters far and away cheaper than Amsoil BP110, only a slight increase (maybe) in overall life cost. Amsoil BP filters are spec'd for longer service interval, but only your oil analysis lab can tell you for sure. With considerably lower filter cost, more frequent service intervals not a sizable factor.

Item 4: Partially true. Substantially less oil makeup needed for a filter change of a FS2500 than a change of 2 (required per Amsoil) filters for this application. With the comparible amount of filter changes in the same time period of one complete filter change of an Amsoil BP, there may be some more overall makeup oil increase in using a FS2500. However, with the typical needed makeup oil of this application in normal use (irregardless of using a bypass filter), the amount of difference becomes clouded. If the application never needed any makeup oil thru normal usage (if that were realistic) then you would be correct that the addtitional quart (maybe two) of makeup oil using a FS2500 vs. a Amsoil BP would mean something. However, my comment that this addtional quart is inconsiquental is based on the large volume of oil needed in this application anyway and the purchase of oil in bulk negates the cost difference.

That' about it!

 

[TiredTrucker]

Forgot to also mention:

TIME and LABOR costs must be factored into the cost of unit as well. This I did. It is far and away a time and labor savings in installation of the FS2500 vs. the Amsoil unit. Obtaining stainless steel braided hose of apropriate length and construction requirements for this application and installing proper fittings for the application are a factor. Amsoil doesn't include these, whereas, the FS2500 does... custom fit to the engine/vehicle. So the time and labor of obtaining these items and the additional cost of individual custom cutting of hose and fittings are negated in the FS2500 setup. Add to this the time spent in researching the required fitting sizes needed for the application. Also included was a convenient oil sampling port. (an added cost item for the Amsoil unit). True the FS2500 does require more frequent servicing, but since it conveniently coincides with the normal chassis lube frequency, this labor and time cost is negligible. If there would have been a Amsoil BP setup for this application that came complete so as to have the entire setup installed and running in less than 1 hour total time, then it would have been given more consideration. Where I live, I would burn up a few hours running around getting all the required components to put the unit on. Then the time to install as well. I may have spent a little more on the FS2500 unit kit, but I was paying for convenience and lower time, installation, and labor costs.

I really didn't realize that this was so complicated. I forgot that not many actually deal with class 8 trucks in a trucking operation from the inside and see this clearly. It is clearly different tha fitting a bypass to your pickup when you only work a 40 hr work week and have ample time to play around with projects in your garage. Time management is slightly more critical in trucking operations.

 

[Gary Allan]

Okay ..so you exchanged a self educating experience and equated it to a basic equivalency in costs. While you don't mind a lifetime of more frequent servicing, you do mind a few hours ONCE in enlightenment and exercising personal ingenuity and would rather pay to rely on others doing it for you. No problem. I can see the true value in this. I'm sure that only pickup truck owners have used this setup ..and that it's absolutely the most complicated process to install on a "big rig". Obviously beyond the capability of the average owner operator ..or so it appears.

I'm glad you're pleased with your FS2500. Live long and prosper. Enhance your calm ..and be well

 

[TiredTrucker]

Not all things are better to pay for someone else to do them, but it is also not always practical to do everything yourself. Some like to do little "what if" projects and have all kinds of free time to spend on them. Some of us, while we do some of the maintenance and lube ourselves, at some point, due to time constraints, do not have that luxury. While the intitial install may be a little higher for a pre-cut and assembled unit as opposed to a reinvent the wheel setup, the time spent hauling freight as opposed to having the truck down for a while trying to round up required components can cost more. Amsoil would really be able to capture more of the commercial truck market if they would create custom fit kits for their BP products. This is primarily the reason Gulf Coast, FS, OPS, etc have more market share. They include pre cut high quality steel braided hoses with all required fittings for each individual engine and chassis combination. If one has to custom make and purchase these items themselves, the time involved and cost of custom making the hoses individually makes the Amsoil unit not as cost effective for the intial install. When Amsoil creates a custom kit that makes time from packaging to completed project less than one hour, they will have an eye opening product.

Sure, I may service the unit more frequently than an equivalent amsoil setup, but again, the filter cost per filter is low enough compared to the amsoil filters to make that almost a wash. The time it takes to change the filter on either unit is comparible, and relatively small compared to the grease job being done to the truck at the same time. It can be changed while even waiting at a dock to unload. It's just a few minute job. While Amsoil claims a certain milege life out of their BP units, that can only be confirmed by UOA on each individual engine. Their claim may hold up, but it may not in each situation. FS claim of changing the unit is quite conservative. I have added 5000 miles to their recommendation without any issues. So, now I am actually not changing the filters as frequently. Could that have been done with the Amsoil unit? Maybe. But even their claims of 25,000 / one year OCI on autos using Amsoil oil has shown to not always be appropriate. Again each vehicle will be different. Only UOA sampling will tell.

A project in enlightenment and personal ingenuity is fine, but if it doesn't decrease your operational costs or increase your net, then of what use is it? Commercial trucking operations do not have that kind of luxury as someone who has another job and is spending spare time trying to reinvent the wheel. Federal Motor Safty regulations and hours of service regulations somewhat put a bind on things compared to someone who is just trying to fit something on their personal pickup. Down time is money lost.

Amsoil has a fine product, but they have not really focused on commercial trucking as well as they could have. If some dealer that wanted to invest "personal elightenment and ingenuity" into creating custom made installation kits, they could really steal some market share from the others BP suppliers. You have to consider that MOST commercial OTR truckers do not have the luxury of time or facilities to even do their own oil changes! Let alone spend time on a custom bypass filter project. What free time they do have is pretty darn valuable. Probably why out of every 100 individuals that enter commercial trucking, an average of 3 or less make it thru one year before they get out of it. Those are hard stats.

When you look at the big picture, that is why I chose a FS2500 unit. Looked at the Amsoil unit first, but all factors taken into consideration, it couldn't convince me to choose it.

Gary, I have gotten on your case and you on mine. What should come out of this exchange is, if you want to really capture the market, you need to research and provide what the costomer wants and needs compared to what you think they need. You are quite right when, though sarcastically, you state that doing these things are beyond the capability of the average O/O. A lot of O/O out on the road never turn a wrench or use a grease gun. Either by time constraints or lack of mechanical ability. They know how to get freight from point to point and pay someone else for maintenance work. I have enough mechanical ability, but I have to play a balancing act of time versus cost. I can do my own brakes, but time constraints show that it is more cost effective most times to pull in a shop and have it done for me. While that is being done, I can invest that time in home or bookeeping for the business. You have to keep in mind, that most O/O have to be CEO, CFO, Bookeeper, Driver, Regulation compliance specialist, etc. And they like to also spend their valuable free time with the family. Doing my own lube and oil changes is cost effective in time and money only because I have facilites at home to do them. Any time savings can be as valuable as gold, both emotionally and financially. This is why Amsoil has not taken more market share with their BP units.

Gary, you too live long and prosper.

 

[Gary Allan]

Well, you're happy with your choice. It made sense to you, and that's all that counts.

I cannot change Amsoil. If you were one of my customers I would work with your installer or have an installer available to fit the unit ..or, if so motivated, do it myself. For example, whoever installed your current setup ..can just as easily fit an Amsoil setup to it since there's no learning curve on location. They should have the basic skills (in spades) to figure out the amount of hose they need ..etc..etc.. For the competent service provider, this is not some alien thing. Service centers install auxiliary equipment all the time ..or frequently enough.

I do surely see your point of sensible labors. I too would take the time off instead of servicing my brakes. It's a task more suited for a service center as opposed to a DIY when heavy equipment or OTR is concerned. The grease gun is mandatory ..the wrench is not.

This setup was superior to you for the features that it offered and how it worked into your scheme of things. Our differences were along the lines of differentiating your perceptions and preferences from performance and costs.

Those are subjective values. That's why I tried to tell you to be happy with it because it's what you wanted. There is no answer to that. No counter opinion of merit. None

I'm going to see a turbo charger on my jeep some day. It will take me quite a few years in the research and affording the parts. I'm always confounded with trying to find people to advise me on what I want to do ..in what I want to accomplish. I don't want MAXIMUM BOOST. I merely want to reach full power at a lower rpm. No one knows moderation in this field ..at least no one that's accessible for cheap (free). They're all about "why would anyone want to go to all that trouble for so little gain?" ..actually they say, "Why would you want to do something like that?". I reply, "What's that matter? Do you know or can you do it? If I wanted your opinion on sensibility ..I'll tell you what it is (their opinion)".

That is, I don't have to make sense to other people. I'll concede to the lack of sensibility under their confines ..and I'll still say "So? This is what I want to do (or what I'm going to do) whether it makes sense to you ..or not". I have a goal in mind that never enters their head.


Go in peace

 

[TiredTrucker]

I took an alternate route on my Jeep, Gary. I got the Liberty with the 2.8L diesel so I could already have a turbo on it. Again, my lazy!