Extended interval oil filters

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
May 13, 2003
Messages
179
Location
Newtown Square, PA
I don't know what your application is, but Donaldson and Fleetguard make extended drain filters. Donaldson's is called Endurance, Fleetguard is called Stratapore. Fleetguard seems to have more applications, but Donaldson's specs look better.
 
With good synthetic oils you can easily run to 10,000kms (7000mi) with no problems. However, with the exception of the Fram X2, I don't see other companies promoting that their oil filters can work well thru "exended" periods.

With a good synthetic oil, could a Mobil 1 or K&N filter work well till 10k (7mi)? Could a SuperTech?
 
I think most filters can be on the car for long periods of time without plugging up, as long as the engine is in good shape. The main concern is that over time, the media will become a restriction to oil flow, just due to being saturated in oil for a while. Plus the bypass valves and antidrainback valves might not be able to go the distance either.

I do believe that just about any filter can go 10,000km. I'm going to be running 10,000km intervals in my car (95 Firebird Formula) with the K&N oil filter.
 
Hi,

I use Donaldson ELF 3998 Filters on my 500hp Detroit Diesel 60 Series DDEC4 engines
On Delvac 1 these filters stay in place for the whole of the oil change cycle - about 100000kms ( maximum about 115000kms ) - and on cutting them open the filtration media always looks to be in excellent condition
I use Mann-Hummel Spinner 2 by-pass filters as well
The average measured oil temperature in these engines is about 103C
We do very little light running with these trucks - most is loaded at 42500kg - and about 60% of the engine on time is on cruise control at about 1600rpm. Fuel economy is about 2.15km/ltr

The Mann filters on my Porsche are designed for annual oil change or 20000kms( 12000 miles )

In durability terms, most OEM filters are good for at least twice the makers recommendation

Regards
 
Yes, Amsoil states 6 months or 12,500 miles.

However, I have gone one year on the filter but only 2000 miles with no problem and I am now going with one year at 12,000 miles on the filter as well. This one is a vertical mount though so the drainback valve, if it fails, will not matter. I feel the reason for their 6 month or 12,500 is that the drainback valves may fail after that, not sure. Of course, I am still of the opinion that full flow filters are useless appendages on modern clean engines using a quality lubricant. Bob was doing a test on his engine without a filter but I have not seen the UOA results as yet to compare to the one with a filter.

Anyway, extend use of filters for mileage and time can easily be had.
 
The more useless a filter is the longer it can go between changes. A filter that cleans oil has to be changed more often.

Ralph
burnout.gif
 
quote:

Originally posted by RalphPWood:
The more useless a filter is the longer it can go between changes. A filter that cleans oil has to be changed more often.

Ralph
burnout.gif


Boy aint that the truth.

Look at what I did today to show that.
Here was my dummy filter to set the oil pressure to 40psi.
 -


Now, here I had two filters, both from Neil known here on the board

First one is the new one, fresh out of the box.
 -


Now this one has only 3475 actual miles on it, notice the amount of drop difference. Mind you, there was nothing changed except the filters. All settings are identical.
 -


After seeing this, I do not plan on using a filter for extended drains without first seeing how it does. I do have a 17,000 mile used filter to test, but didn't have the correct adaptor for the rig, so it's on hold till I get one of those.

BTW Ralph, I'm close to takeing my new sample and installing the bypass system. Looking forward to getting that online asap.
 
Bob, how come that new PureONE only had a 4psi drop when you saw well over 10psi drop the last time you tested it? Are you using hot oil now?
 
quote:

Originally posted by Patman:
Bob, how come that new PureONE only had a 4psi drop when you saw well over 10psi drop the last time you tested it? Are you using hot oil now?

No. Let me explain what I am seeing.

First, I did not adjust the input after having it set without a filter.
Second, same oil, same pump, different motor driving the pump. The previous motor coudn't drive the pump more than about 30-45secs before it would over heat and blow the fuse. So, this was a bad test. What I have figured out is that each and every filter needs to stabalize out but running it for at least a min to 2 mins. The pressure will deviate due to the filter media having to "absorb" the oil before it could properly flow. I see the filter "filling" the media while running it for the 2 min warmup. So, now, I believe we are getting a more acurate picture of what the filters are doing.

The motor that I started to use was a 90vdc 1/2? horse motor. The new motor on the drill press was a 3/4 and it wouldn't run it. (remember, the 90 was a direct 1:1 shaft drive to the pump, the 3/4 uses pulleys and belts. It was suppose to be able to turn 3600rpm but had no real power under that load. So, I then went back and bought a 2hp reversible motor and put it on and now it doesnt' break a sweat running that pump. I can take it up to 60psi and hold it no problem.

So, the motor, speed, and time has all affected my first results which now I see as very inacurate and I may need to pull that thread so not to confuse the issue for others.

As for why my wear numbers become lower when I used a fram filter over a m1 filter is simple. Even though it appears(at this moment will verify)that m1 may have simular flow drops as the fram at first, I believe that it having better filtration, that it became more restrictive in a shorter period of time than the fram. The less efficent an filter, the longer it can run. The more efficent, the less as it will clog up sooner thus becoming less effecient(in flow) the more you run it. This is my thoughts on that and will prove this out as I am going to collect some used filters and test them as well against new ones.

Hope that helps explain it.
bob
 
I look forward to this. The flow deal is going to take some time. I started to do that, and will but I was under some time constraints for this. I used this in one of my lubrication seminars for the logging industry with oil analysis as it really gets people to thinking.

The dummy filter allowed 2. 2 and 1/3 gals I think? Can't remember for sure but somewhere around that area in a one minute run. I have a stop watch counter that I start at the same time I turn on the pump after I have purged the filter with oil for 1-2 mins. So, basic gpm flow on this pump with 40lb setting is just a bit over 2gals.

I'll get all the specific when I restart this.
 
Another thing I just picked up on (yes, I’m slow) are the pressure drop figures. 4 psi when new, versus 13 psi after 3.5k miles. So at about 70 F, oil won’t bypass a new Pure One filter. But, on this particular engine, it looks like much, or even most, of the 70F oil will bypass the used (3.5k miles) Pure One filter media (assuming a typical filter bypass setting of less than 13 psi). This suggests shorter oil filter change intervals may be a good idea (at least with some engines and filters). We may learn more than originally anticipated with Bob’s test! (Or, perhaps I should say, more than I anticipated
blush.gif
).
 
Good stuff Bob! Glad to see you’re getting the new set-up running. The data (new and used Pure One) you posted makes sense.

1) Restriction (in this case an oil filter) drives up the “inlet” pressure (assuming the pressure is below the pump bypass pressure setting).
2) Although the “inlet” pressure is greater (42 new/48 used versus 40 dummy), the “outlet” pressure (delivered to the engine bearings etc.) is less than that of the empty (dummy) filter (38 new/35 used versus 40 dummy).
3) Although you posted no flow data, I suspect it would have been essentially the same for dummy, new, and old filters.

Thanks for devoting time and work to this testing. I'm looking forward to more data when you find the time!
 
Wouldn't it be nice if you put a filter on and knew how long it could filter at the advertised micron level. It might be 50 miles or 10,000 miles depending on several things including capacity. One question brings on another.
I sold a big filter to a guy that has a bunch of equipment and a machine shop and welding shop.

Ralph
burnout.gif
 
I wonder why more companies other than Amsoil and FRAM (X2) don't market an extended drain oil filter?
 
Why no specs for auto/light truck filters like an API or ACEA spec for oil? You'd think that auto manufacturers would care what filter you use. Is it because the oil filter is just there to catch bowling balls and bring you in for an oil change once in a while? To keep my warranty up on my new Toyota, I can use an API rated 5w-30 oil and a white box quickie lube special oil filter....strange?
 
Bob..you may want to know that when a filter company uses a SAE test to determine when a filter plugs, they typically terminate the test at a 20 psi drop downstream. There generally is still "life" left in the filter at that point but that's the security built in by the OEM's.

The 20 psi figure is replicable across multiple elements regardless of brand. It's not relative to run an element until it croaks..
wink.gif


The test you are doing is fine. What your not able to do without spending a lot of time doing it, it to run filters X miles on the same engine ( for control purposes) and compare. Say the Fram and Pure 1 both 5,000 miles.

You might find the Fram load up more and the Pure 1 become constant for a while, then increase it's pressure drop later. That would be a function of the different medias in the elements.

I am surprised at your initial Pure 1 reading on a new element. I would have thought the initial pressure drop be near equal the Fram. New elements regardless of brand should have less than a 1% psi drop.
 
Filterguy,

Bob's filter test was very informative, but it had some inherant flaws in it due to limited facilities/resources. You had to take the data FWIW. The fluid was high visc at room temp when compared to operating temps. The oil pump wasn't proven to be run at the same speed in each application. Electric motor load was used as an indicator of sorts. The test was done on a line pressure spec of 40 psi to the engine and the resultant upstream pressure was noted. I think the data would have been much different if something like 10w hydraulic oil were used and the oil pump was assured to be running at a fixed rpm to assure the exact same flow.


But it was a great little homegrown workshop/garage type simulation that yielded some decent comparative data.

One VERY LONG POST
 
I was talking with an OEM supplier last week while we were driving to a plastics molder in MI. He's from the UK and he mentioned that his car specifies 60K miles for oil & filter changes. We got off on another subject so I forgot to ask him what car it was, but that seemed pretty normal to him. He also mentioned that they manufacutre the engines in clean rooms and fill with synthetic oils.

Now 60k seems a little long, especially since there isn't likely much make up oil added along the way, but why are US auto's still pushing 3-5k OCI's. Yes, I likely know the answer, its $$$$.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top