Originally Posted By: pjf
Look at the figures in this post
(
http://www.bobistheoilguy.com/forums/ubb...rue#Post2359966):
Originally Posted By: Cyclops
I'm pleased with Microgreen results. I wasn't sure if their integrated bypass system worked or a scam but I liked the idea so I tested particle counts comparing Microgreen with a K&N using identical oil and driving routine. Microgreen did extremely well. My latest run was over 15k miles. If I continue at 15k intervals, cost isn't bad.
Micron particle size and respective counts/ml. Note, first count value represent oem size microgreen filter, second is oem size K&N and third is an oversized mircogreen filters. First and second count had ~12,000miles, whereas, third is with 15,458miles. First two counts is with RedLine 5w20 and third with oversize filter with 0w20 Redline. Car is a 2009 Focus.
>=2: 1085,, 2878,, 833
>=5: 402,, 1066,, 308
>=10: 111,, 295,, 85
>=15: 43,, 114,, 33
>=25: 10,, 27,, 7
>=50: 1,, 2,, 0
>=100: 0,, 0,, 0
Doug
Comparted to the K&N filter, it appears that the microGreen filter reduced the number of particles in the UOA to 40% of its former count (from 2878 to 1085).
For particles that are between 2-microns and 5-microns in size, the reduction is also to 40% of its former count (from 1812 to 683).
Here's how I calculated the number of particles between 2 and 5 microns in size:
microGreen: 1085 - 402 = 683
K&N filter: 2878 - 1066 = 1812
I would be curious as to how he did his particle counts. I would be curious as to when he changed his air filter.
In a lab they count the particles going into a filter and the particles coming out. This ISO test is run over time. And where very few people actually understand how a beta ratio test is noted, the value is "worst case".
So let's say a test is run for 60 minutes with particle counts tested every 5 minutes. And the worst case scenario is not at the 5 minute mark or the first test point. In fact it rarely is. So the question begs, if as a filter plugs and your thought process is that it gets more efficient the dirtier it gets, how can the worst case scenario happen at some point later in the test rather than at the first sample point?